In re S.B. CA5

── In re S.B. CA5 ── Court: California Court of Appeal Date: May 19, 2026 Category: General Filed 5/19/26 In re S.B. CA5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT In re S.B., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. FRESNO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF F090501 SOCIAL SERVICES, (Super. Ct. No. 25CEJ300050-1) Plaintiff and Respondent, v. OPINION R.B., Defendant and Appellant. THE COURT* APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Kimberly J. Nystrom-Geist, Judge. R.B., in pro. per., for Defendant and Appellant. Douglas T. Sloan, County Counsel, and Lisa R. Flores, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo- * Before Hill, P. J., Franson, J. and DeSantos, J.  PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND On June 2, 2025, R.B. (petitioner) petitioned the juvenile court for access to his granddaughter’s, S.B.’s, case file by filing a Judicial Council form JV-570 (Petition for Access to Juvenile Case File) that requested “Case Information” and all orders and dates of pending hearings (See Welf. & Inst. Code, § 827).1 Petitioner asserted that he has a direct and legitimate interest in the case as S.B.’s grandfather but failed to address the purpose for obtaining the records and cited authority only relevant to attendance at juvenile hearings. He further argued that as a grandparent, the court was required to consider whether to grant him visitation rights. Petitioner also argued that the social worker was required to locate him according to section 309, subdivision (e) and provide him with a copy of Judicial Council form JV-287 (Confidential Information). Petitioner concluded that the failures to place S.B. with relatives and to provide him notice required the court to grant him admission to all subsequent proceedings. Petitioner’s declaration in support of his petition to access the juvenile case file asserted that he has a close and supportive relationship with S.G., he regularly visited her as an infant, and he maintained a close and supportive relationship by phone and in writing when not able to visit.2 The juvenile court denied the petition on June 30, 2025, concluding that access to the juvenile case file, or the records contained therein, was not in the child’s best interests, the need for access did not outweigh the privacy rights of the child and policy considerations favoring confidentiality, and the petition failed to show the requested records were necessary and had substantial relevance to petitioner’s legitimate needs. The juvenile court additionally noted that petitioner’s petition addressed only the rules 1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code. 2 Petitioner is in the custody of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and mailed his documents to the superior court from Corcoran State Prison. 2. pertaining to presence at hearings and not access to the case file, petitioner’s petition was overbroad, and the order denying the petition was without prejudice to petitioner’s submission of a more narrowly tailored petition. Petitioner filed a Judicial Council form JV-180 (Request to Ch