People v. L.People CA2/8

Filed 2/7/24 P. v. L.P. CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 EIGHT

In re L.P. et al., Persons Coming B324736 Under the Juvenile Court Law. ______________________________ (Los Angeles County LOS ANGELES COUNTY Super. Ct. No. 22CCJP02180A, B) DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. BILL E., Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from findings and order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Linda Sun, Judge. Affirmed.

Gina Zaragoza, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Dawyn R. Harrison, County Counsel, Kim Nemoy, Assistant County Counsel, and Sarah Vesecky, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

_______________________

INTRODUCTION The juvenile court found that Bill E. (Father) committed sexual abuse on his step-daughter L.P. Father does not challenge these findings as to his step-daughter; he appeals from the juvenile court’s jurisdictional findings only as to his minor son, L.E. Father argues the juvenile court erred in exercising dependency jurisdiction over L.E. because he was not at risk of sexual abuse or other harm by the time the jurisdictional hearing was held. Conversely, the Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) contends Father forfeited his challenge to jurisdiction when he asked the court to sustain the sexual abuse count and dismiss a second count alleging alcohol abuse. DCFS also contends Father’s appeal is moot because the juvenile court has terminated jurisdiction and issued a custody order granting physical custody of L.E. to his mother, legal custody of L.E. to both parents, and unsupervised visitation of L.E. to Father. We affirm on the merits. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Before the petition was filed, L.E. (born May 2013) lived with Father, his mother, and his half-sister L.P. (born June 2008). In April 2022, L.E. came to the attention of the DCFS after L.P. disclosed that six months earlier in September 2021, Father, while drunk, had inappropriately touched her. Both children were detained from Father on June 1, 2022. On June 6, 2022, DCFS filed a petition pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code1 section 300. The petition alleged that in