In Re Dustin R.

Alameda Cty. Soc. Serv. Agency v. Catherine R.

Caution
1997 Cal. App. LEXIS 352·54 Cal. App. 4th 1131·63 Cal. Rptr. 2d 269·97 Daily Journal DAR 5731·97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3346
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 5, 1997A074044California4,604 words

Opinion

Opinion

Lambden, J.

Catherine R. (mother) and Gary R. (father) are the parents of three children who were made dependents of the court. Mother is appealing from the juvenile court’s order which terminated family reunification services and established long-term foster care as the permanent plan for the three children pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.22, subdivision (a). (All further unspecified code sections refer to the Welfare and Institutions Code.) Mother contends the court erred in finding the children’s return to the family would create a substantial risk of detriment to the minors’ well-being, because the court disregarded mother’s completion of the reunification plan.

We find the court did evaluate mother’s progress towards meeting the goals of the reunification plan and properly found she had not alleviated the causes requiring placement in out-of-home care. We therefore deny the requested relief.

Background

Mother and father were married on October 2, 1992. They have three children, Nina, Dustin, and Gary; bom, respectively, in May 1991, June 1992, and November 1993. In addition to these three children, mother had six other children from two previous…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.