In re A.O. CA4/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 13, 2024E082434California5,586 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. INTRODUCTION

K.O. (Mother) is the mother of D.O., G.R., and A.O. K.R. (Father) is the

presumed father of G.R. In April 2021, San Bernardino County Children and Family

Services (CFS) filed petitions on behalf of all three children pursuant to Welfare and

Institutions Code1 section 300 et seq., alleging that Father’s whereabouts were unknown

and that Mother was unable to supervise, protect, or provide for the children as the result

of her history of domestic violence, mental illness, and unresolved substance abuse.

In June 2022, the juvenile court held a 12-month review hearing, terminated

Mother and Father’s reunification services, and set the matter for a selection and

implementation hearing pursuant to section 366.26. In February 2023, the trial court held

a section 366.26 hearing as to D.O.; found that termination of parental rights would be

detrimental to D.O.; and selected an alternative planned permanent living arrangement

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.

2 for D.O. However, the selection and implementation hearings for G.R. and A.O. were

continued to permit CFS to address unresolved issues related to the Indian…

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.