Filed 9/17/20 In re Genesis S. CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO In re GENESIS S., a Person B303489 (c/w B305174) Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. DK17503B) LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. RIGOBERTO S., Defendant and Appellant. APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Marguerite D. Downing, Judge. Affirmed. Jesse McGowan, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Mary C. Wickham, County Counsel, Kim Nemoy, Acting Assistant County Counsel, and Jessica S. Mitchell, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent, Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services. ****** In these consolidated juvenile dependency appeals, Rigoberto S. (father) appeals the juvenile court’s denial of his 2019 motion to vacate its 2016 dispositional order as well as the court’s order terminating his parental rights over his now-10- year-old daughter, Genesis S. We conclude that father’s challenges on appeal lack merit, and affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In November 2009, father and Lilian A. (mother) had Genesis. During the first few years of Genesis’s life, father engaged in domestic violence with mother. In 2011, he was arrested and subsequently deported. Father returned to the United States in 2011, and moved to New York in 2012. In May 2016, the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (the Department) filed a petition asking the juvenile court to exert dependency jurisdiction over Genesis and her half siblings (then, nine-year-old Christopher and infant Mia) on the basis of (1) domestic violence between mother and Mia’s father, (2) mother’s physical abuse of Christopher, (3) mother’s alcohol abuse, and (4) the parents’ neglect of Mia’s medical needs. The allegations did not accuse father of any misconduct. At the initial hearing in the dependency case, the juvenile court declared father to be Genesis’s “presumed father.” Because mother and father had stopped their weekly calls between father and Genesis earlier that year, mother provided no contact 2 information for father beyond the fact he was somewhere in New York. The juvenile court ordered the Department to conduct a due diligence search to locate father so that he could participate in the ongoing dependency proceedings involving Genesis. The Department conducted two such searches—the first in June 2016, and the second in October 2017. The June 2016 search turned up no leads; the October 2017 search turned up a few leads, which the Department pursued. The juvenile court exerted dependency jurisdiction over all three children, removed them from the custody of mother and Mia’s father, and ordered the Department to provide them ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals