In re Nicholas G

Filed 6/21/06 In re Nicholas G. CA4/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. John J. Ryan, Judge. (Retired Judge of the Orange County Super. Ct. assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to art. VI, § 6 of the Cal. Const.) Affirmed.

Diana W. Prince, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Joe S. Rank, County Counsel, and Anna M. Deckert, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Valerie N. Lankford, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Minors.

INTRODUCTION

In this juvenile dependency proceeding, the mother, Cassandra G., appeals the juvenile court's decisions which denied a continuance and failed to include specific visitation provisions in its exit order. Finding no error, we affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On March 29, 2004, a juvenile dependency petition was filed alleging that Nicholas G., then age 11, and his sister Mariah G., then age 2, came within the provisions of Welfare and Institutions Code^[1] section 300, subdivision (b), failure to protect. It was specifically alleged that the parents, Cassandra and Kenneth G., had engaged in domestic violence in front of the children, that the mother was drug addicted, that the children's living conditions were unsanitary, and that the father had failed to protect the children from the mother. It was also alleged that the parents had criminal records and that they had neglected the needs of the children. The children had been removed from the home and placed with relatives in Union City, California.

Although the parents denied the allegations at the detention hearing, the court found that a prima facie hearing had been made, approved the removal of the children from the home and ordered that reunification services be provided.

The jurisdictional hearing was held on April 20, 2004. The parents admitted the allegations of section B-1 of the petition. That allegation was that they had engaged in domestic violence in front of the children. The mother admitted the B-2 allegation that she had a history of abusing controlled substances. The father admitted the B-4 allegation that he knew of the mother's drug abuse but failed to protect the children by allowing the mother to have contact with them. The children were made dependents of the court and supervised visitation was ordered for the mother prior to her entering a rehabilitation program. A six-month review hearing was scheduled for October 2004.

Interim hearings were held on visitation issues. A section 388 petition was also filed on June 25, 2004, and hearings were held on that petition before it was withdrawn on July 28, 2004. Interim hearings were held in August and September 2004.

In July and August 2004, the children visited their maternal grandmother in Utah. While they were there, Mariah reported that her older brother, Anthony, had touched her vagina. Similar allegations were made by Nicholas against Anthony. The reports were investigated by Child Welfare Services in Utah. The social worker concluded that he did not â€