Santa Clara County Dept. of Child Support Services v. Constantine CA6

Filed 12/15/25 Santa Clara County Dept. of Child Support Services v. Constantine CA6

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

H053200 SANTA CLARA COUNTY (Santa Clara County DEPARTMENT OF CHILD Super. Ct. No. 17CS001118) SUPPORT SERVICES,

Respondent;

NATALIA SERGEYEVNA RODIK,

Respondent,

v.

PAUL DEAN CONSTANTINE,

Appellant.

Appellant Paul Dean Constantine, representing himself, appeals from an order issued by the trial court on January 14, 2025 (order). The court ordered Constantine to pay $791 per month in child support and to pay an estimated $17,085.53 in child support arrearages for a minor child he shares with Natalia Sergeyevna Rodik. Constantine argues the trial court erred in calculating the amount of child support because it imputed income to him based on a “typographical

error” in his November 13, 2024 income and expense declaration (November 13 declaration) and failed to consider and acknowledge his unemployment status. For the reasons stated below, we affirm the trial court’s order. I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Constantine and Rodik are father and mother, respectively, to a minor child (child). The record on appeal is sparse. The trial court’s register of actions indicates that, on August 15, 2017, the Santa Clara County Department of Child Support Services filed a complaint against Constantine in connection with a judgment regarding “parental obligations.”1 (Italics omitted.) The register of actions also includes entries for a January 22, 2019 judgment, a February 13, 2019 notice of entry of judgment, and a February 14, 2019 amended judgment pertaining to parental relations and support. The register of actions includes a succession of entries for income and expense declarations filed by Constantine after the amended judgment and prior to the hearing that resulted in the order. These income and expense declarations include one filed by Constantine on November 13, 2024, which we presume to be the November 13 declaration he cites in his appellate briefing (discussed post). None of these documents appears in the record on appeal.