In re A.D. CA4/3
Filed 10/15/25 In re A.D. CA4/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
In re A.D., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.
ORANGE COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES AGENCY, G065521 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 23DP0322) v. OPINION H.D.,
Defendant and Appellant.
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, June Jee An, Judge. Affirmed. Patricia K. Saucier, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Leon J. Page, County Counsel, Debbie Torrez and Aurelio Torre, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. No appearance for the Minor.
* * *
H.D. (the father) appeals from a custody order issued at the close of dependency proceedings pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 362.4.1 The juvenile court granted A.Q. (the mother) sole custody over A.D., who was two years old at the time. The father claims this was error. We find no abuse of the court’s discretion and affirm the order. STATEMENT OF FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY A. Detention, Jurisdiction and Disposition We focus on the facts relevant to the limited issue on appeal. A.D., a baby girl, was born in March 2023. The mother was 21 years old at the time and the father was 23. After A.D.’s birth, the Orange County Social Services Agency (SSA) received a referral alleging general neglect after A.D. tested positive for marijuana and “the mother tested positive for fentanyl, cocaine, marijuana, and amphetamines . . . .” SSA filed a section 300 petition alleging failure to protect. The child was detained from the mother and left in the care of the father on March 29. Protective orders were issued under which the father was required to undergo drug testing. In mid-May, A.D. was removed from the father’s care. He had not abided by the protective orders, failing to appear for numerous drug tests. He tested positive in another instance. He was also arrested for assault and battery and failed to inform SSA of the incident until May 16. The child was initially placed with L.D., the paternal grandmother, but soon after, she was moved to the home of E.P., the paternal great-grandmother.
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)