G.M. v. V.M. CA2/8

Filed 4/22/16 G.M. v. V.M. CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 EIGHT

G.M., B261921

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BH009797) v.

V.M.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from the judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Scott M. Gordon, Judge. Affirmed.

Law Offices of Andrew J. Stern and Andrew J. Stern for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance by Plaintiff and Respondent.

**********

This action arises under the International Child Abduction Remedies Act (ICARA; 22 U.S.C. § 9001 et seq.). ICARA implements the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (Convention), a treaty to which the United States and Ukraine are contracting states. Appellant V.M. (mother) and G.M. (father) are Ukrainian citizens, and the unmarried parents of D.M. Mother left Ukraine with D.M., with father’s permission, but failed to return to Ukraine within the time contemplated by mother’s and father’s agreement. Father sought the return of D.M. under ICARA, and the trial court ordered D.M. to be returned to father in Ukraine. Mother appeals, contending the trial court erred when it overruled her objections to a declaration in support of the Hague petition filed on father’s behalf, in finding that father had custody rights to D.M., and in failing to consider the history of domestic violence between mother and father. We affirm, finding that mother has provided an inadequate record to permit appellate review. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On September 24, 2014, the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office filed a petition under the Convention and ICARA seeking the return of D.M. to Ukraine, alleging that father gave mother written permission to travel with D.M. from April 20, 2013, until April 20, 2014, but that mother and D.M. did not return to Ukraine by April 20, 2014. Deputy District Attorney Deanne Castorena provided a declaration in support of the petition, averring that her office received a Convention application from Ukraine to locate and return D.M. following mother’s “wrongful retention” of D.M. The declaration was signed under penalty of perjury, “that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.” Mother lodged objections to the declaration, asserting that it was not based on personal knowledge, and contained hearsay statements. The trial took place over three days. The trial court overruled mother’s objections, and heard testimony from mother and father. The court granted the petition, and ordered D.M. to be returned immediately to father’s care in Ukraine. Mother timely appealed.