In re Gilbert R. CA2/5

Filed 3/9/15 In re Gilbert R. CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 GILBERT R., et al., Persons Coming B258683 Under the Juvenile Court Law. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. CK88014)

LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

GILBERTO R.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Steven Klaif, Juvenile Court Referee. Affirmed. Suzanne Davidson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. ________________________

Gilberto R., father of 10-year-old twins Gilbert and Edward, appeals from the dependency court’s disposition order placing the twins in the home of parent-mother. Father contends the court abused its discretion when it declined his request that custody be placed with both parents.1 We affirm.

BACKGROUND

The facts in this case are relatively straightforward and generally undisputed. An April 2014 police raid of mother’s home lead to discovery of 22 marijuana plants in the twins’ bedroom. The plants belonged to one of the twins’ half-brothers,2 who was a suspected gang member. Mother was not home at the time of the seizure of the marijuana plants, as she frequently spent the night at her boyfriend’s residence. Father is the biological parent of the twins, but is not the father of mother’s other children. Father lives in Oregon and had no contact with the twins since they were three years old. Father shares a two bedroom apartment with a woman described as his “partner.” Father is employed and has no criminal history. Father called the twins regularly during the course of the dependency proceedings, and had unmonitored visits. The twins stated that they enjoyed talking to father. A Welfare and Institutions Code section 3003 petition was sustained under subdivision (b) (failure to protect) based on findings that (1) the twins (and mother’s other children) had access to 22 marijuana plants in the home, mother knew of the plants,