SECOND DIVISION MILLER, P. J., ANDREWS and BROWN, JJ. NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk’s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed. http://www.gaappeals.us/rules July 30, 2018 In the Court of Appeals of Georgia A18A1002. HUFF v. VALLEJO. BROWN, Judge. Latrelle Huff (“the mother”) appeals from the trial court’s contempt order which also modified Ignacio Vallejo’s (“the father”) visitation with their three-year- old twins from supervised to unsupervised. She contends that it was “a gross abuse of discretion” for the trial court to change the visitation to unsupervised based upon a pending misdemeanor case against the father and his “current status as an illegal alien with an active Immigration and Customs Enforcement case.”1 For the reasons explained below, we disagree and affirm. With regard to visitation decisions, 1 The mother does not dispute the trial court’s authority to modify a temporary visitation order in a contempt proceeding. See Weeks v. Weeks, 324 Ga. App. 785, 787 (2) (751 SE2d 575) (2013). the trial court has very broad discretion, looking always to the best interest of the child. When the trial court has exercised that discretion, this court will not interfere unless the evidence shows a clear abuse of discretion, and where there is any evidence to support the trial court’s finding, this court will not find there was an abuse of discretion. (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Williams v. Williams, 301 Ga. 218, 220 (1) (800 SE2d 282) (2017). The record shows that when the twins were born in 2014, the father’s name was placed on the birth certificates. In April 2015, the father filed a complaint for legitimation and sought custodial and visitation rights for the twins. Following a hearing in which the trial court heard testimony and considered evidence from the parties, it issued a temporary order declaring the father “to be the legitimated father of the minor children.” It also found that it was in the best interest of the minor children to commence visitation with the father “based upon the totality of the evidence presented, including evidence received in the form of testimony and affidavits from members of the Mother’s immediate family supporting the Father’s position.” It granted temporary joint legal custody to both parents, primary physical custody with the mother, and supervised visitation every other weekend to the father. The trial court did not explain the reasoning behind its decision to require supervised visitation. In the fact-finding portion of its order, the trial court stated: 2 The Court further finds that, despite allegations made by the [mother] against the [father], including an allegation of rape, no competent evidence was presented supporting such allegation. Moreover, the Court notes that a grand jury sitting in Chatham County returned a “no bill” on the matter. . . . The Court further finds that misdemeanor allegations are currently pending against the Defendant, but that said matter is not set for arraignment in State Court until August 26, 2016. On ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals