In re A.M. CA4/1

Filed 12/13/21 In re A.M. CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

In re A.M., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. D079109 IMPERIAL COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, (Super. Ct. No. JJP000747)

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

D.M.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Imperial County, William D. Lehman, Judge. Affirmed. Jamie A. Moran, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kelly Ranasinghe, Office of County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

D.M. (Father) appeals from the juvenile court’s orders denying his

Welfare and Institutions Code1 section 388 modification petition and terminating parental rights as to his son A.M. (§ 366.26.)2 He contends that the juvenile court abused its discretion by denying his petition seeking to change the order terminating his reunification services and setting the matter for hearing under section 366.26. Father asserts that he showed a sufficient change of circumstances and that the modification request was in A.M.’s best interests. Because the juvenile court erred in denying his section 388 petition, he argues that the subsequent order terminating his parental rights must be reversed. We affirm the orders. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In October 2019, after accusing Father of infidelity, Mother yelled at him, threw things, and struck him several times with a floor fan. Thirteen- month-old A.M. witnessed the entire event and the incident resulted in Mother’s arrest. A social worker from the Imperial County Department of Social Services (the Department) advised Father that A.M. may be placed in protective custody if he is exposed to further violence and Father did not show protective capacities. After the incident, Father agreed that he and A.M. would live with the paternal grandparents. During the subsequent investigation, Father admitted having a long and “extensive substance use history” including marijuana, alcohol, and methamphetamine. He agreed to toxicology screenings for himself and A.M. Both tested positive for methamphetamine and amphetamine. The social worker considered A.M.’s toxicology screening to be “high.” Father stated