In re C.S. CA4/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 14, 2021E076571California3,268 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

B.S. (mother) gave birth to C.S. (child) in July 2019. Both tested positive for

methamphetamine. Within days, plaintiff and respondent San Bernardino County

Children and Family Services (CFS) filed a section 300 petition alleging, among other

things, a failure to protect the child due to mother’s substance abuse. (See § 300, subd.

(b)(1).) At the detention hearing, mother identified a man named Joshua as the father,

Undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.

2 and when asked by the court whether anyone else could be a father, she additionally

identified a man named Russell. She did not identify defendant and appellant P.R. as a

father. The child’s birth certificate lists no father. Although the section 300 petition

named Joshua as an alleged father and made allegations against him as well, the juvenile

court later found him to be a nonparty. Neither Joshua nor Russell is part of this appeal.

At a combined jurisdiction and disposition hearing in October 2019, the juvenile

court ordered family reunification services for mother. At the six-month review hearing,

CFS reported that mother never submitted to drug testing or…

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.