In re Malik J. CA2/5

Filed 5/23/14 In re Malik J. CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 Malik J., et al., Persons Coming B250568 Under the Juvenile Court Law. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. CK37189)

LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

DARLA J.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEALS from orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Jacqueline H. Lewis, Juvenile Court Referee. Affirmed in part and reversed in part with directions. Deborah Dentler, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. _____________________

Darla J. (mother) appeals from the dependency court’s orders terminating jurisdiction and granting custody of two of her sons to their respective fathers under Welfare and Institutions Code section 362.4.1 Mother’s sole contention on appeal is that the court’s family law exit orders2 fail to specify that the court granted mother supervised visitation twice a month. We reverse the portion of the court’s exit orders that do not conform to the February 14, 2013 oral order regarding mother’s visitation, and we direct the court to enter amended orders granting mother twice-monthly visitation rights.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Mother filed her opening brief in this appeal on November 22, 2013. On January 16, 2014, the Department of Children and Family Services (Department) filed a letter brief stating it would not be filing a respondent’s brief and identifying the fathers of two of mother’s children as more appropriate respondents. The two children are Malik J. and Matthew J. On March 17, 2014, mother filed with this court a stipulation for partial reversal of the court’s order terminating jurisdiction, for the sole purpose of permitting the dependency court to correct its custody orders to conform with the oral orders regarding mother’s visitation. The stipulation was signed by the four attorneys representing mother, the Department, and both fathers, respectively. We briefly review the relevant procedural facts, cognizant that the scope of mother’s appeal is narrowly focused and the parties have stipulated to partial reversal. The dependency proceeding that is the subject of this appeal commenced in May 2011, and the court ultimately exercised jurisdiction over Malik and Matthew. On February 14, 2013, the dependency court terminated jurisdiction as to both children, granting full legal