Adoption of C.E. CA6
Opinion
Opinion
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
We are acquainted with the litigation history related to the care and custody of C.E., having previously determined in Guardianship of C.E. (2019) 31 Cal.App.5th 1038 that the trial court was required to consolidate guardianship and adoption proceedings to facilitate a full inquiry into available long-term placement options for the child. The appeal before us addresses the orders issued by the trial court subsequent to the issuance of that opinion.
A. The Circumstances Leading up to the Guardianship
C.E. lived with his parents until he was 14 months old.4 While C.E.’s mother was alive, her family (including C.E.’s maternal aunts S.H. and T.W.) and friends (including the Ms) were actively involved in C.E.’s life and often cared for him.
3 We include facts that pre-date our opinion in Guardianship of C.E. where the trial court considered such evidence in its decision to deny the Family Code section 7822 petition. We summarize the facts, viewed in favor of the challenged order as required on appeal. (In re Jasmon O. (1994) 8 Cal.4th 398, 423.) 4 At that time, the mother had custody of her older son from another relationship (T.T.), Father…