In re Isabella T. CA2/5

Filed 11/7/13 In re Isabella T. CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIVE

In re ISABELLA T., a Person Coming B248146 Under the Juvenile Court Law. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. CK61512)

LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

ARMANDO T.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Anthony Trendacosta, Temporary Judge. (Pursuant to Cal. Const., art. VI, § 21.) Affirmed. Jack A. Love, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. John F. Krattli, County Counsel, James M. Owens, Assistant County Counsel and Navid Nakhjavani, Deputy County Counsel for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Armando T. (father) appeals the juvenile court’s order removing his daughter, Isabella, from his custody. Father was incarcerated at the time of Isabella’s birth in September 2010, has never had physical custody of her, and was not expected to be released from prison until 2023. Nonetheless, he maintains the juvenile court erred by not placing Isabella in his custody so that he could make an appropriate plan for her. Father also challenges the juvenile court’s failure to make a visitation order. We hold the juvenile court’s findings and order were supported by substantial evidence, and affirm the orders.

I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

At the time the dependency proceedings commenced, Isabella lived with her mother, her half-brother N.G. (born in 2003), and N.G.’s paternal grandparents, Mr. and Mrs. G., who have legal custody of N.G. The family came to the attention of the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) in September 2012, when a referral alleged that Malissa T. (mother) abused methamphetamine, marijuana and alcohol, causing her to neglect Isabella and N.G., and that mother and N.G.’s father, L.G., had engaged in domestic violence. Both children were detained and placed with Mr. and Mrs. G. Isabella adjusted well in her placement. Mr. and Mrs. G. ensured Isabella had daily visits with her mother and maternal grandmother, as well as occasional visits with her paternal relatives. Isabella’s placement with the G.’s allowed her to remain in the same home as her brother, with whom she was closely bonded. At the jurisdiction hearing on February 25, 2013, both mother and L.G. waived trial and entered no contest pleas to the allegations of the petition as amended. The court continued the matter to March 1, 2013, for a contested disposition hearing. In advance of that hearing, father filed a motion to grant him a home-of-parent– father order and to allow him to make an appropriate plan for Isabella Father also requested the court terminate jurisdiction over Isabella and issue an order giving him sole