From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re H.W.

California Court of Appeals, Second District, Fifth Division
Sep 15, 2008
No. B208955 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 15, 2008)

Opinion

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING. Petition for Extraordinary Writ. Valerie Lynn Skeba, Temporary Judge. (Pursuant to Cal. Const., art. VI, § 21.), Super. Ct. No. CK60398

Law Offices of Alex Iglesias, Steven D. Shenfeld and Carolyn Hobson for Petitioner.

Raymond G. Fortner, Jr., Los Angeles County Counsel, James M. Owens, Assistant County Counsel, O. Raquel Ramirez, Deputy County Counsel for Real Parties in Interest.

Children’s Law Center of Los Angeles and Kristen Balelo, for the child.

No appearance on behalf of Respondent.


TURNER, P. J.

E.H., the biological father of H.W., has filed a California Rules of Court, rule 8.452 petition. E.H. seeks review of an order setting a permanent plan hearing under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26. E.H. asserts that the juvenile court erred in issuing an earlier order denying him presumed father status. We deny the petition.

All further statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.

On August 21, 2005, H.W. was born with a positive toxicology screen. H.W.’s mother used amphetamines and methamphetamines. H.W. was detained at the hospital, and 10 days later was released to a maternal cousin. H.W. has lived with the maternal cousin since then. On April 3, 2006, the juvenile court declared H.W. a dependent child of the court. The mother was granted reunification services, but largely failed to comply with her case plan after 12 months of services. On April 2, 2007, the date of the 12-month review hearing, E.H. appeared for the first time and asserted that he might be H.W.’s biological father. A paternity test was ordered, confirming to a probability of 99.99 percent that E.H. was the biological father. The juvenile court thereupon found E.H. to be H.W.’s biological father and granted him monitored visitation.

On February 21, 2008, E.H. filed a section 388 petition seeking to change his status to a presumed father, to have reunification services provided to him, and to have H.W. placed in his custody. A hearing was held on the petition on March 20, 2008, and the referee granted the petition. However, the Department of Children and Family Services filed a rehearing petition. At a rehearing of the matter on June 9, 2008, the juvenile court denied E.H.’s section 388 modification petition. The juvenile court initially suggested that a date already scheduled for a progress hearing should be converted to a 366.26 hearing. But the matter was ultimately returned to the referee for further scheduling. E.H. filed an appeal from the June 9, 2008 order denying his section 388 petition.

On June 20, 2008, the referee then held a trial setting conference in which she set a 366.26 hearing for October 20, 2008. No other orders were entered at that hearing. E.H. then filed a notice of intent to file, pursuant to California Rules of Court rule 8.452, a writ petition challenging the June 20, 2008 order setting a section 366.26 hearing.

However, E.H’s actual writ petition does not challenge the juvenile court’s order of June 20, 2008. Instead, the entire basis of his challenge is his claim that the juvenile court erred in denying his section 388 petition on June 9, 2008. E.H. has an adequate remedy for review of the June 9, 2008 order by way of his pending appeal. (§ 395, subd. (a)(1); see In re Aaron R. (2005) 130 Cal.App.4th 697, 702-703.) No order was made on June 20, 2008, aside from selecting a date for the section 366.26 hearing, that petitioner may challenge in this writ proceeding. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.452.)

The petition for extraordinary relief is denied. This opinion shall become final immediately upon filing. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.264(b)(3).)

We concur: MOSK, J., KRIEGLER, J.


Summaries of

In re H.W.

California Court of Appeals, Second District, Fifth Division
Sep 15, 2008
No. B208955 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 15, 2008)
Case details for

In re H.W.

Case Details

Full title:In re H.W., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. E.H.…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Second District, Fifth Division

Date published: Sep 15, 2008

Citations

No. B208955 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 15, 2008)

Citing Cases

In re H.W.

We denied the extraordinary relief petition on September 15, 2008. (E.H. v. Superior Court (Sept. 15, 2008,…