In re A.F. CA2/8
Filed 10/11/24 In re A.F. CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION EIGHT
In re A.F., a Person Coming Under B328560 the Juvenile Court Law. LOS ANGELES COUNTY Los Angeles County DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN Super. Ct. No. 20CCJP01125A AND FAMILY SERVICES, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. C.F., Defendant and Appellant; I.T., Defendant and Respondent.
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Gabriela H. Shapiro, Commissioner. Affirmed. Cristina Gabrielidis, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. Paul A. Swiller, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Respondent. ____________________
Father, C.F., appeals the juvenile court’s order granting him custody over his minor daughter, A.F., on the limited basis that the order may require him to share the costs of a professional monitor for A.F.’s visitation with mother I.T. at the correctional facility where mother is currently incarcerated. Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm. BACKGROUND The facts relevant to the disposition of this appeal are limited. Mother and father were in a dating relationship for a year or two. When mother turned 18, she moved in with father and his family. Shortly thereafter, she became pregnant. About a month into her pregnancy, she ended her relationship with father. During her pregnancy, they had at least one altercation that involved physical violence. She gave birth to A.F. in June 2019. Five months later, mother was arrested for robbery and detained in custody. She has been incarcerated ever since and is first eligible for parole in September 2026. Maternal grandparents became A.F.’s primary caretakers. Maternal grandparents held a dim view of father, and they did not get along. Issues over custody arose. Maternal grandmother commenced guardianship proceedings. The Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (Department) received a referral about A.F. in January 2020. The following month, A.F. was detained from the parents and placed with maternal grandparents. Father’s visitation was ordered monitored. The juvenile court later sustained a petition against parents, ordered A.F. removed, and ordered services for father. Despite initially resisting the Department’s intervention, father came to embrace his services. In September 2022, the
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)