Opinion
B327964
11-01-2023
In re A.L., et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. v. F.C., Defendant and Appellant. LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, Plaintiff and Respondent,
Liana Serobian, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, No. 21CCJP05443C-D Hernan D. Vera, Judge. Dismissed.
Liana Serobian, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
WILEY, J.
The juvenile court removed A.L. and V.L. from their mother's custody after sustaining allegations of emotional abuse. The court placed the children in their father's care.
The mother appealed the jurisdictional findings and disposition. On April 25, 2023, in case No. B318480, we dismissed the mother's appeal as to other children not at issue here and as to the issue of visitation. We affirmed as to the remainder of the appeal.
Our opinion noted the juvenile court had terminated jurisdiction with custody and visitation orders granting physical custody to the father, joint legal custody, and overnight visitation to the mother. The mother now appeals these orders, which followed a mediated agreement between the mother and father. Abuse of discretion is the governing standard of review. (In re M.R. (2017) 7 Cal.App.5th 886, 902 (M.R.).)
The mother's court-appointed attorney filed a brief raising no colorable argument pursuant to In re Phoenix H. (2009) 47 Cal.4th 835 (Phoenix H.). Counsel informed the mother of this fact and of our discretion to allow her to file a pro per brief. Counsel also made the record available to the mother.
The mother filed a two-page letter asking us to "open" her case because her children are experiencing problems with their father and have expressed that they want to come home, and because "the courts are failing [her] children." The letter details some of her and the children's problems with the father, others, and the juvenile court's orders. The letter does not cite the record or state when these problems arose. The mother appears to be arguing for a modification of the juvenile court's custody and visitation orders based on changed circumstances, something appropriately addressed to the family court. (See M.R., supra, 7 Cal.App.5th at p. 903; Welf &Inst. Code, §§ 302, subd. (d) &362.4.)
We presume an appealed judgment is correct. (In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952, 994.) Appellants bear the burden of establishing error. Where they do not do so, we may dismiss the appeal. (Ibid.) Unlike in a criminal case, we have no duty to conduct an independent review of the record. (Phoenix H., supra, 47 Cal.4th at pp. 841-843.) Because the mother has not established an arguable issue exists, we dismiss her appeal. (See id. at p. 846.)
DISPOSITION
We dismiss the appeal.
We concur: STRATTON, P. J., GRIMES, J.