In re Javon N.-M. CA2/2

Filed 12/18/14 In re Javon N.-M. CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 JAVON N.-M., a Person Coming B255614 Under the Juvenile Court Law. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. CK94372)

LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

ANTHONY M.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Teresa Sullivan, Judge. Affirmed. Anne E. Fragasso, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Richard D. Weiss, Acting County Counsel, Dawyn R. Harrison, Assistant County Counsel, and Sarah Vesecky, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

******

Anthony M. (father) appeals the juvenile court’s order terminating jurisdiction, awarding T.N. (mother) full custody of their son Javon N.-M. (Javon), and requiring father’s visits with Javon to be monitored. Father contends that this order is defective because it rests upon the court’s simultaneous denial of his petition for modification and his request for a continuance of the hearing on his petition. We disagree, and affirm the order. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The juvenile court asserted jurisdiction over Javon (born 2009) after finding that his parents, father and mother, had an “extremely conflicted and toxic relationship” in which they took “their frustration and anger out on each other.” The court ordered father to complete a case plan consisting of (1) a drug and alcohol program, including drug testing, (2) a domestic violence program, (3) a parenting program, and (4) individual counseling to address relationship, anger management, and substance abuse issues. We affirmed the jurisdictional order when father appealed. (In re Javon N.-M. (Nov. 7, 2013, B245939) [nonpub. opn.].) Although father completed a 26-session anger management program, he did not complete the remainder of his case plan. Indeed, the plan was twice modified in ways that ostensibly lessened father’s burden: (1) the individual counseling requirement was deemed completed upon completion of the anger management program; and (2) father was permitted to enroll in, attend and schedule followup individual counseling sessions on issues of cooperative parenting in lieu of completing the 23 domestic violence classes he had yet to complete in his 52-class program. However, father (1) never completed any drug and alcohol program, tested positive for marijuana several times and missed several tests, (2) completed between one and three individual counseling sessions regarding cooperative parenting, and (3) testified that he completed a 12-week parenting program, but said he did it in four weeks and could not recall any details of the name of the program, its location, or any of his instructors.