In re N.A. CA2/2
Filed 3/24/14 In re N.A. CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO
In re N.A. et al., Persons Coming Under the B250743 Juvenile Court Law. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. CK99240)
LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
Y.H. et al.,
Defendants and Appellants.
APPEALS from orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Jacqueline Lewis, Juvenile Court Referee. Affirmed. Julie E. Braden, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant Y.H. Joseph D. MacKenzie, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant R.A. John F. Krattli, County Counsel, James M. Owens, Assistant County Counsel, Stephen D. Watson, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ___________________________________________________
Y.H. (Mother) and R.A. (Father) appeal from the dependency court’s jurisdictional and dispositional orders. As we find that substantial evidence supports the orders, we affirm. BACKGROUND Mother and Father are the parents of N.A. (born in August 2003), M.A. (born in September 2004), R.A. (born in December 2005), S.A. (born in November 2007), L.A. (born in June 2010), H.A. (born in May 2012), and A.A. (born in April 2013). Additionally, Mother has another child, C.B. (born in December 2001), with a different father. Between the two of them, Mother and Father had four prior referrals for child abuse/neglect. Three referrals were deemed inconclusive or unfounded. A 2003 referral relating to C.B. was deemed substantiated, and Mother refused to participate in services. This matter came to the attention of the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) on April 19, 2013. On that day, it was reported that A.A. was born two days earlier testing positive for methamphetamine, and Mother also tested positive. During Mother’s initial contact with the hospital social worker she lied about her name and the number of children she had. She later explained that she was afraid. Mother denied any drug use. She said that Father told her if she put crystal meth on her private parts it would increase the pleasure of sexual contact, and that could explain why she tested positive. Mother told the social worker that Father uses crystal meth and would leave for days at a time. He had previously completed a year-long inpatient drug program but had recently started using again. Eventually, after being told that A.A.’s positive test could not be explained by her story, Mother admitted that the day before she gave birth she “snorted a line of crystal meth.” She said that she had used crystal meth only twice before, never when she was pregnant. The social worker talked with Father, who said that four years prior, he was convicted of possession of drugs and completed and inpatient drug program. He denied using any drugs since that time. He said that on April 15, 2013, he was celebrating his
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)