K.W. v. Superior Court CA1/5

── K.W. v. Superior Court CA1/5 ── Court: California Court of Appeal Date: April 24, 2026 Category: General Filed 4/24/26 K.W. v. Superior Court CA1/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FIVE K.W., Petitioner, v. A175667 THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE CITY AND COUNTY SAN (San Francisco County FRANCISCO, Super. Ct. Nos. JD24-3186, Respondent; JD24-3186A, JD24-3186B) SAN FRANCISCO HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY et al., Real Parties in Interest. Petitioner K.W. (Mother) petitions for writ review (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.452) and requests a stay of a juvenile court order terminating reunification services and scheduling a hearing pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26.1 Mother contends that the court erred in finding that real party in interest San Francisco Human Services Agency (Agency) provided or offered her reasonable reunification services. She further contends that the court abused its discretion by terminating 1 Unless otherwise indicated, all statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code, and all rule references are to the California Rules of Court. reunification services as to her three older children while continuing to place her youngest child with her. We disagree and deny the petition. I. BACKGROUND A. Detention In October 2024, the police responded to a report of domestic violence involving Mother and her partner, M.V., who is the father of her youngest child, then three-month-old T.V. Mother suffered a fractured leg and cuts and bruises to her face. In addition to T.V., Mother’s three other children—D.R., T.R., and A.R. (the boys), who at the time were nine, eight, and six year-old boys, respectively—were present in the home during the assault.2 D.R. and T.R. witnessed the assault. At the hospital, Mother confirmed that all four of her children were home during the assault and disclosed a prior domestic violence incident in which M.V. punched her. After being notified of the incident by the police, the Agency sent a Protective Services Worker (PSW) to visit the children the day after the incident. In a detention report, the PSW noted that D.R. and T.R., the two older boys, appeared guarded and refused to answer questions about the domestic violence they just witnessed. Although he was not in the room when the attack occurred, A.R., the youngest boy, stated that “[M.V.] kicked, punched, kicked and punched” while he made punching and kicking motions. A.R. further stated, “Mom crying. Get a knife and stab her.” Mother told the PSW that she did not want to press charges against M.V. and that she “did not understand why there was a Child Endangerment charge against [M.V.]” Although Mother admitted other domestic violence 2 At the time of this incident, the boys’ biological father was incarcerated and unavailable. He is not a party to this writ petition. 2 incidents, she told the PSW that she accepted M.V.’s apology and “ ‘want[ed] him home.’ ” Mother also stated that the boys had been in their biological father’s custody until he was incarcerated, and she admitted that they had not attended school while in her care for the past year. The Agency detained all four children, placing the boys in foster ca