In re Jade J. CA2/1
Filed 5/19/16 In re Jade J. CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 ONE
In re JADE J., a Person Coming Under the B267188 Juvenile Court Law. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. CK71349)
LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
Y.B.,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Debra L. Losnick, Commissioner. Affirmed. Jamie A. Moran, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Mary C. Wickham, County Counsel, R. Keith Davis, Acting Assistant County Counsel, and Tyson B. Nelson, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. _________________________________________
Y.B. (Mother) appeals from dispositional orders the juvenile court issued after finding she had beaten her daughter, Jade J. (Daughter), now age 6. She argues the court erred because there was insufficient evidence to support the jurisdictional findings and the attendant dispositional orders were unnecessary and potentially prejudicial. We disagree and affirm. BACKGROUND In 2011, the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) filed a dependency petition on behalf of Daughter and one of her half brothers (Son), alleging abuse by Mother. Later that year, the court terminated the case with a family law order, awarding Daughter’s father, David J. (Father), and Mother joint custody.1 According to a DCFS report, immediately after the final court date, Father absconded with Daughter and concealed her from Mother. Mother claims she tried to force Father to comply with the order, but the family court would not assign her a hearing date because she had no address to serve Father. She told DCFS that she filed kidnapping reports with the police and Find The Children (an organization dedicated to helping families locate missing children), but both failed because she had no address for Father. Mother had no contact with Daughter for four years.2 In January 2015, Father’s girlfriend filed a domestic violence report, alleging Father had violently beaten her while Daughter and one of Daughter’s half sisters were in the residence. During DCFS’s subsequent investigation into the children’s well-being, DCFS learned that although Daughter called Father’s girlfriend “mommy,” Mother was Daughter’s biological mother. Although Father told DCFS Mother’s whereabouts were unknown, DCFS quickly found Mother, who had been living at the same residence for
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)