In re L.A. CA2/1
Filed 11/1/21 In re L.A. CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 L.A., et al., Persons Coming B310329 Under the Juvenile Court Law, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 20CCJP04574)
LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,
Plaintiff and Respondent
v.
R.A.,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Emma Castro, Judge Pro Tempore. Affirmed. Jacob I. Olson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rodrigo A. Castro-Silva, County Counsel, Kim Nemoy, Assistant County Counsel, and David Michael Miller, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
R.A. (Mother) challenges the case plan the juvenile court ordered for her in dependency proceedings regarding her three adopted children. We conclude the court did not abuse its discretion by requiring R.A. to participate in both individual and anger management counseling. Accordingly, we affirm.
BACKGROUND In 2014, Mother and her husband1 adopted L.A. (born 2004), J.A. (born 2005), and A.A. (born 2009) following dependency proceedings and failed reunification efforts with the children’s biological parents. Mother is the children’s biological great aunt. In August 2020, the Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) received two referrals regarding then-16-year-old L.A. The first referral alleged that Mother searched for a cell phone Mother believed L.A. was hiding by putting her hands in L.A.’s underwear and putting her fingers in L.A.’s vagina. It further alleged that when Mother eventually found the phone, she grabbed L.A.’s hair, threw her to the floor, and permitted Mother’s adult son to kick L.A. in the back. Following the incident, L.A. ran away to her uncle’s home in San Diego. The second referral alleged that L.A. feared for her safety after returning to Mother’s home and was contemplating running away again. It further alleged that Mother had been coaching L.A. and her siblings not to tell anyone, especially social workers and police, about what was going on in the home.
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)