In re G.R.

Filed 10/25/24 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

In re G.R., a Person Coming B332699 Under the Juvenile Court Law. ______________________________ Los Angeles County LOS ANGELES COUNTY Super. Ct. No. DK23174 DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

R.R.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Mary E. Kelly, Judge. Dismissed. Jill Smith, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Dawyn R. Harrison, County Counsel, Kim Nemoy, Assistant County Counsel, and William D. Thetford, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ____________________

R.R., alleged father of G.R., appeals the juvenile court’s exit order requiring his visitation with G.R. be monitored. We dismiss his appeal. Unspecified statutory citations are to the Welfare and Institutions Code. G.R. lived with her mother and had no contact with R.R. In 2017, G.R. was hospitalized and diagnosed with disruptive mood dysregulation disorder. When the mother failed to get G.R. the mental health services she needed, the Los Angeles Department of Child and Family Services became involved. The mother told the Department she did not have contact information for G.R.’s father. On June 5, 2017, the juvenile court found R.R. was G.R.’s alleged father. The minute order from the hearing reflected that the court found R.R. to be the presumed father. However, the juvenile court later amended that minute order to show accurately that it found R.R. to be an alleged father. A later report from the Department stated R.R. was incarcerated for domestic violence. A background investigation revealed R.R. had an extensive criminal history. At an October 2017 hearing, the juvenile court denied services to R.R. because he was only an alleged father and ordered no visits until R.R. contacted the Department. In May 2018, the juvenile court removed G.R. from her mother’s custody and placed her with a maternal aunt. In November 2020, R.R. contacted the Department and stated he wanted to have a relationship with G.R. G.R. said she was willing to have visits with R.R. In March 2021, the Department reported that R.R. had not returned its call to set up visits. In December 2022, R.R. called the Department to ask about placement options for G.R., stating that his wife and her two