In re Isaiah E. CA2/7

Filed 2/5/24 In re Isaiah E. CA2/7 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SEVEN

In re ISAIAH E., a Person Coming B325548 Under the Juvenile Court Law. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 22CCJP00874)

LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

F.E.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Mary E. Kelly, Judge. Reversed.

Benjamin Ekenes, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Dawyn R. Harrison, County Counsel, Kim Nemoy, Assistant County Counsel, and William D. Thetford, Principal Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ________________________

In this dependency appeal, mother F.E. appeals from the juvenile court’s November 2022 custody and visitation exit orders granting her sole physical and legal custody of her son Isaiah E. (born November 2021) and giving Isaiah’s father, Marc G., certain visitation rights. On November 7, 2023, in a prior appeal brought by F.E., we reversed the juvenile court’s jurisdiction finding. Accordingly, we now reverse the juvenile court’s November 2022 exit orders in this case and direct the court to vacate the orders. As explained in our prior opinion, the juvenile court sustained a dependency petition pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code1 section 300, section (b)(1) (failure to protect), in March 2022 on behalf of Isaiah based on two incidents of domestic violence inflicted on F.E. by Marc. F.E. appealed the jurisdiction finding and disposition order, contending there was insufficient evidence to support a finding Isaiah was at substantial risk of serious physical harm by the time of the jurisdiction hearing. We agreed and reversed. (In re Isaiah E. (Nov. 7, 2023, B320238) [nonpub. opn.].)