In re T.H. CA2/5

Filed 5/13/24 In re T.H. CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIVE

In re T.H. et al., Persons B333192 Coming Under the Juvenile (Los Angeles County Court Law. Super. Ct. No. 22CCJP01591C–F)

LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

Y.H. et al.,

Defendants and Appellants.

APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Jean M. Nelson, Judge. Conditionally affirmed and remanded. Konrad S. Lee, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant Y.H. Suzanne M. Nicholson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant T.S. Dawyn R. Harrison, County Counsel, and Peter Ferrera, Principal Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

______________________

Y.H. (father) and T.S. (mother) appeal from the juvenile court’s orders terminating parental rights to T.H., C.H., A.H., and L.H. (the children) pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26.1 We conditionally affirm and remand. The parties are familiar with the facts and procedural history, and our opinion does not meet the criteria for publication. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.1105(c).) We therefore resolve this appeal by memorandum opinion pursuant to Standard 8.1 of the Standards of Judicial Administration and consistent with constitutional principles (Cal. Const., art. VI, § 14 [“Decisions of the Supreme Court and courts of appeal that determine causes shall be in writing with reasons stated”]; Lewis v. Superior Court (1999) 19 Cal.4th 1232, 1263, fn. omitted [three-paragraph discussion of issue on appeal satisfies constitutional requirement because “an opinion is not a brief in reply to counsel’s arguments. [Citation.] In order to state the