A.R. v. G.G. CA3

Filed 12/2/25 A.R. v. G.G. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Calaveras) ----

A.R., C101567

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 24PA473343)

v.

G.G.,

Defendant and Appellant.

G.G. (father) appeals, in propria persona and on the judgment roll, from an order granting respondent A.R. (mother) sole physical and legal custody of the parties’ children. Finding no error on the face of the present record, we affirm. BACKGROUND At the end of April 2024, mother filed a petition to determine parental relationship, seeking sole legal and physical custody of the parties’ two three-year-old children. The next day, she sought a temporary emergency order granting her full custody of the children on the ground that father had taken the children in the middle of the night and would not tell her where he took them. She also filed an application for an immediate court hearing and order. The trial court denied the request for immediate hearing and set the matter for a June 2024 hearing, ordering the parties to attend child custody mediation beforehand.

1

A few days later, mother filed another application for immediate hearing, requesting emergency custody of the children. Attached to the application was an unsigned statement apparently from mother, asserting that father had taken the children during the night without mother’s knowledge, after she and father had agreed to separate. It further stated that father had severe mental health problems and that, despite multiple requests, father was refusing to let mother see the children or tell her where they were. The statement also expressed concern that the children were in immediate danger and that father might be taking the children to Utah. The trial court granted the application, setting the matter for hearing the next day. Mother appeared at the ex parte hearing the next day, and the trial court issued a temporary emergency order granting her full custody of the children—with no visitation to father— pending further proceedings. The court also issued child abduction prevention orders, including that father was not to move the children outside the county without written permission from mother or a court order. The record contains no transcript of the ex parte hearing, but the minutes reflect that mother was informed that, if needed, she could contact the district attorney’s office for assistance with child abduction prevention. The following month, both mother and father appeared for the regularly noticed hearing on mother’s petition, representing themselves. Again, the record contains no transcript of the hearing, but the minutes reflect that father had not filed a response to the petition and that mother had rejected an oral settlement proposal by father. The court granted permanent sole legal and physical custody of the children to mother, with no visitation for father. Father filed a timely notice of appeal. He elected to proceed on appeal with an agreed statement instead of a reporter’s transcript of the oral proceedings. Father submitted a document that the trial court treated as a proposed settled statement. The court ordered father to modify the proposed statement to make certain corrections by a specified deadline. After that deadline passed, the trial court notified father and this court that father was in