In re A.L. CA2/2

Filed 10/22/21 In re A.L. CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 A.L. et al., Persons B309128 Coming Under the Juvenile (Los Angeles County Court Law. Super. Ct. No. 20CCJP02311A-C)

LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

K.L. et al.,

Defendants and Appellants.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Julie Fox Blackshaw, Judge. Affirmed.

Christine E. Johnson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant K.L. Landon C. Villavaso, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant D.G. Rodrigo A. Castro-Silva, County Counsel, Kim Nemoy, Assistant County Counsel, and Stephanie Jo Reagan, Principal Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

____________________________________________

Appellants K.L. (Mother) and D.G. (Father) contest the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the juvenile court’s exercise of dependency jurisdiction. The court found that the children are at risk of serious harm from domestic violence. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 300, subd. (b).)1 Substantial evidence supports the finding. After an altercation in the home led to Father’s arrest, Mother told police there were three prior violent incidents. Appellants later denied everything, minimize their behavior, do not acknowledge the deleterious effect domestic violence has on children, and allowed Father to violate a criminal protective order barring him from the home. Appellants’ refusal to take responsibility for their conduct demonstrates a risk for future violence and supports jurisdiction. We affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Mother has three children: A. (born in 2004), M. (2007), and D. (2017). Father is the presumed father of D. Father lives in Mother’s home with A. and D. M. resides mostly with his father, G.O., who is not a party to this appeal.