In re S.A. CA4/2

INTRODUCTION

In these appeals,1 the biological parents of S.A. and his paternal grandmother

challenge various orders of the juvenile court. In case Nos. E061583 and E061906,

father contends the juvenile court abused its discretion by denying father’s petition under

Welfare and Institutions Code2 section 388, without conducting an evidentiary hearing on

father’s request that S.A. be placed in his custody, and both father and paternal

By order dated November 3, 2014, we consolidated the appeals in case Nos. E061583 and E061906. On March 10, 2015, we consolidated the appeal in E062123 with the other two cases. The appeals were consolidated for purposes of briefing, oral argument and decision only. Case No. E061583 is designated the master file.

2Unless otherwise indicated, all undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.

2 grandmother contend the county social worker did not assess paternal grandmother for

placement and the juvenile court erred by not applying the relative placement preference

found in section 361.3. Finally, in case No. E062123, mother (joined by father)

challenges the order terminating her parental rights to S.A. on the…