In re Kevin H. CA2/3

California Court of Appeal May 3, 2022 No. B314292Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in ordering monitored visitation of one hour per week for the father, given his history of domestic violence, lack of engagement in court-ordered services, and failure to visit the child for over a year.

Issues

Did the juvenile court abuse its discretion by ordering monitored visitation of one hour per week instead of three times per week?
Did the father forfeit his right to challenge the visitation order by failing to object at the initial hearing?

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm the order.”

“The juvenile court was within its discretion to believe that father was still in denial about his history of domestic violence with mother.”

“Because Kevin had not seen his father for over a year and was doing well in mother’s sole care, the juvenile court could reasonably have determined that more than once weekly visits were not in Kevin’s best interest.”

Filed 5/3/22 In re Kevin H. CA2/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THREE

In re Kevin H., a Person Coming Under B314292 the Juvenile Court Law. _____________________________________ LOS ANGELES COUNTY (Los Angeles County DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND Super. Ct. No. 20CCJP00440) FAMILY SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

KEVIN H.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Steff R. Padilla, Commissioner. Affirmed. Richard L. Knight, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rodrigo A. Castro-Silva, County Counsel, Kim Nemoy, Assistant County Counsel and Melania Vartanian, Deputy County Counsel for Plaintiff and Respondent. _________________________

Kevin H. (father) appeals from a juvenile court’s custody order giving him monitored visits once a week with his son, Kevin Jr. (Kevin), contending that the juvenile court should have ordered monitored visits three times a week. Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm the order. BACKGROUND I. The family’s history of domestic violence, detention, and petition The family consists of mother, father, and their son, Kevin (born February 2017). Mother and father have a history of domestic violence. In April 2018, father hit mother during an argument about his infidelity. Mother reported to the police that father had a gun and hit her. In October 2018, father was driving with mother and Kevin. Father and mother argued, and father began pulling mother’s hair and punching her face. Father slowed the car while on a freeway on-ramp, and when mother opened the door to get out, father pushed her, causing her to fall. Father sped off with Kevin. An officer saw swelling and bruises on mother’s face and scrapes on her knees and elbows. An investigation was opened as a result of the incident and closed as substantiated for general neglect as to father. In February 2019, mother hit father, causing a one-inch laceration to his lip. In November 2019, the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) received a report that mother had hit father on the head with a dog leash in Kevin’s presence. A few days later, father went to mother’s home, broke down the door, threw mother to the ground, and hit her. Mother

In re Kevin H. CA2/3

AI Brief

KEVIN H.,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

EDMON, P. J.

EGERTON, J.

AI Brief