Original proceedings; petition for a writ of mandate to challenge an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Jane Shade, Temporary Judge. Super. Ct. Nos. DP019127 & DP019128
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Bedsworth, J.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
(Pursuant to Cal. Const., art. VI, § 21.) Petition denied.
Petitioner Sarah S. appeals from the order terminating reunification services with her two pre-school sons and ordering a hearing under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26*fn1 regarding termination of parental rights or establishing a guardianship for the boys. She claims she was not provided with reasonable reunification services. Because substantial evidence supports the juvenile court's ruling to the contrary, we affirm the order and deny the petition.*fn2
On July 1, 2009, police responded to a 911 call from petitioner Sarah S.'s house in San Bernardino County. They found Sarah passed out on the couch. Sarah's friend, who had called the police, reported that Sarah's sons, Timothy and Mathew, aged three and one, were unsupervised and one of them was running around the house with a kitchen knife. The police took the two boys into protective custody and called social services. The boys were placed in foster care, while Sarah went to the hospital in Redlands, where she tested positive for Benzodiazepine and opiates. She claimed her boyfriend had beaten her when she told him she was pregnant.*fn3 She became violent with the nurses and was admitted to the hospital under section 5150. She remained in the hospital's psychiatric ward for 10 days.
During that time, the San Bernardino County Superior Court held a detention hearing for Timothy and Mathew. They were found to come under section 300 and were ordered removed from the home. The court ordered the county to provide reunification services and allow Sarah weekly supervised visits.*fn4 A case plan was filed on July 23, 2009, along with an extensive discussion of the evidence supporting the court's jurisdiction and disposition.
Sarah moved to Orange County in September 2009, and the case was transferred to Orange County Superior Court in December 2009. The Orange County Social Services Agency (SSA) took over, and a social worker was assigned to the case.
In January 2010, the Orange County court adopted the case plan developed in San Bernardino with minor changes. As to reunification services, the case plan specified enrollment in an approved personal empowerment program (PEP), which focused on domestic violence and anger management, among other issues; individual psychological counseling; enrollment in a parenting class; and ...