In re Miguel G. CA2/4
Filed 2/26/14 In re Miguel G. CA2/4
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOUR
In re MIGUEL G., a Person Coming Under B248578 the Juvenile Court Law. LOS ANGELES COUNTY (Los Angeles County DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND Super. Ct. No. CK97254) FAMILY SERVICES,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
P. G.,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Marguerite Downing, Judge. Affirmed. Grace Clark, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the County Counsel, John F. Krattli, County Counsel, James M. Owens, Assistant County Counsel, and Jeanette Cauble, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Father P.G. argues the dependency court erred by failing to set a status review hearing under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.21, subdivision (e)1 because it ordered reunification services for him. Respondent Department of Children and Family Services (the department) contends that the court ordered enhancement services for father rather than reunification services and therefore did not err in setting a future status review hearing pursuant to section 364. We agree with the department and find no error.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY Father and mother, Martina V., have a child, Miguel, born in 2006. Mother has an older child, Eduardo, born in 1995. They shared a home with other family members. In early January 2013, an immediate response referral was received by the department, stating that father had knives and was trying to hurt himself with them, and that he had a history of suicide attempts. The previous week, father had put Miguel over his shoulder and held a knife to his back. Father was talking to himself and to an imaginary friend, not sleeping, and abusing both crystal methamphetamine and alcohol. Mother confirmed these facts. In the most recent incident, father grabbed two knives and warned the family to ‘“be prepared.’” A niece telephoned police because of this threat. The family locked themselves inside a bedroom while father attempted to break in. Mother reported that father had been hospitalized previously for mental illness and narcotics intoxication. Father’s symptoms had begun about a year before when he was laid off and became depressed. He was extremely jealous. Police officers and the department responded to the house. Mother left the home immediately, with the children, and obtained a restraining order against father. The family had no prior history with the department. Miguel told the social worker that he believed his father was going to cut his neck when father held him over his shoulder. He cried when describing his father’s behavior and said he felt scared. Eduardo also said he was afraid of his stepfather, who had been hospitalized for a drug overdose and had attempted suicide. He described the incident in
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)