In re I. B. CA2/2

Filed 9/3/15 In re I. B. CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 I. B. et. al., Persons Coming Under B259287 the Juvenile Court Law. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. CK26905)

LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

E. B.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Teresa T. Sullivan, Judge. Reversed in part, and affirmed in part. Mark J. Saladino, County Counsel, Dawyn R. Harrison, Assistant County Counsel, Tracey F. Dodds, Principal Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. Merrill Lee Toole, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Minors. ******

1

E.B. (father) challenges the juvenile court’s finding of dependency jurisdiction pertaining to him as well as the court’s refusal to place his two teenage children with him as a noncustodial parent. Specifically, he argues that there was insufficient evidence to support the court’s findings that (1) he has an alcohol abuse problem that places the children at substantial risk of serious physical harm (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 300, subd. 1 (b)(1)), and (2) placing the children with him would be detrimental to their “safety, protection, or physical or emotional well-being” (§ 361.2, subd. (a)). We agree with father that there was insufficient evidence to support the jurisdictional finding against him, but conclude that his challenges to the placement order are moot as to his son and forfeited as to his daughter. Accordingly, we affirm in part and reverse in part. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Father and I.R. (mother) have two children together—17-year old I.B. (daughter) and 16-year old M.B. (son). Father and mother divorced years ago; the kids have since lived with mother, while father lives in New York. In April 2014, mother punched and kicked daughter and son, and ordered both children out of the home. The Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (Department) received a referral after mother reported the children missing. The Department eventually filed an amended petition asking the juvenile court to assert dependency jurisdiction over both children on the grounds that (1) mother had, in April 2014 and before, engaged in disciplinary acts that placed both children at substantial risk of physical abuse (§ 300, subd. (a)), (2) father had a history of engaging in domestic violence against mother that placed both children at substantial risk of serious physical harm (§ 300, subd. (b)(1)), and (3) father had a history of alcohol abuse that placed both children at substantial risk of serious physical harm (ibid.). At the jurisdictional hearing, mother pled “no contest” to the allegation against her. Father contested the allegations against him. The juvenile court dismissed the