Filed 11/25/20 In re N.T. CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA In re N.T., a Minor. D077580 TANYA B., Petitioner and Appellant, (San Diego County Super. Ct. No. A63298) v. STEVEN T. Objector and Respondent. APPEAL from order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Marian F. Gaston, Judge. Dismissed. Marcus Family Law Center, PLC, Ethan Marcus, Moriel Cohen, and Erin K. Tomlinson, for Petitioner and Appellant. Steven T. in pro. per., for Objector and Respondent. Tanya B. (Mother) appeals from an order dismissing her petition under Family Code section 7822 to free her minor son, N.T., from the parental custody or control of his father, Steven T. (Father).1 We requested supplemental briefing regarding the timeliness of the appeal. Mother concedes her notice of appeal was filed after the deadline, but contends we should deem it timely. Father argues for dismissal. We conclude the appeal is untimely and we lack jurisdiction to consider it. The appeal is dismissed. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Mother and Father were married in 2004, and had N.T. in 2013. Mother filed for divorce in 2015, which proceeded in the family court division of San Diego County Superior Court and resulted in a status-only dissolution judgment in December 2016.2 Pertinent here, following proceedings in June and August 2016, the family court granted joint legal custody, allowed Mother to move to Michigan with N.T., and gave Father visitation. He was out of contact with N.T. from December 2016 through April 2018, and spent much of this time in immigration detention. Father then sought ex parte relief to see N.T., and litigation on issues including custody, visitation, child support, and reunification therapy followed. Mother received sole legal custody. In July 2019, Mother filed a petition in the juvenile court division to free N.T. from Father’s parental custody and control under section 7822, and the family court case was stayed.3 At the March 6, 2020 hearing on the 1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Family Code. 2 All subsequent superior court references are to the San Diego County Superior Court. 3 Section 7822 applies when a parent leaves a child for the statutory period without support or communication, and with intent to abandon the child. (See Adoption of Allison C. (2008) 164 Cal.App.4th 1004, 1009-1010.) These proceedings usually occur in the context of an adoption, but it is not a prerequisite. (See In re Marcel N. (1991) 235 Cal.App.3d 1007, 1013.) 2 petition, the juvenile court began by describing the record. The court noted the family court’s move-away findings, which indicated N.T. had a good relationship with Father, and Father’s efforts to pursue contact and reunification in 2018 and ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals