CA Unpub Decisions

A modification decision.

The petition alleged, in essence, that both fathers were incarcerated, and mother had abandoned the children at a motel without providing for care or support.Mother did not appear at any of the hearingsand had minimal contact with the Department. It does not appear mother visited the children during the pendency of the proceedings. Eventually, the juvenile court terminated her parental rights.We focus on the facts related to father and the children since he filed the appeal.

B.Q. (father)[1] appeals the termination of his parental rights over his children. He contends the juvenile court’s finding that the children are adoptable is error. He further contends that he satisfied the beneficial parent-child relationship exception to terminationof parental rights. We disagree and affirm.

This appeal arises out of a juvenile dependency action. The subject of the action below is A.S.,[1] currently 15 years old. The appellant is J.S., A.S.’s father (father).[2]Father appeals from the dispositional order following a hearing pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 361,[3] in which the juvenile court ordered father to participate in a mental health evaluation and recommended treatment. Father contends the order was an unnecessary intrusion into his privacy and was, therefore, an abuse of discretion.
We find no abuse of discretion with respect to the dispositional orders and affirm.

This appeal arises out of a juvenile dependency action. The subject of the action below is A.S.,[1] currently 15 years old. The appellant is J.S., A.S.’s father (father).[2]Father appeals from the dispositional order following a hearing pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 361,[3] in which the juvenile court ordered father to participate in a mental health evaluation and recommended treatment. Father contends the order was an unnecessary intrusion into his privacy and was, therefore, an abuse of discretion.
We find no abuse of discretion with respect to the dispositional orders and affirm.

Appellant Gloria Koelewyn (Gloria or the grandmother) appeals from the trial court’s denial of her petition for court-ordered visitation with her minor grandchildren. The children’s mother, respondent Jennifer Koelewyn (Jennifer or the mother), opposed the request for reasons we explain below. The trial court found that the mother’s decision on this issue should prevail. We find no abuse of discretion and affirm the order of the trial court.

Appointed counsel for defendant James Barboza Solis has filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and asks this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm the judgment.

Minor V.P. entered admissions to felony illegal possession of a concealed firearm by a minor (Pen. Code, § 29610),[1] misdemeanor possession of live ammunition by a minor (§ 29650), felony carrying a loaded unregistered firearm (§ 25850, subd. (c)(6)), and felony carrying a loaded concealed firearm on his person (§ 25400, subd. (c)(6)).In lieu of adjudging the minor a ward of the court, the juvenile court deferred entry of judgment(DEJ).The minor purports to appeal.
Counsel was appointed to represent the minoron appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and requesting this court to review the record and determine whether there were any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Counsel advised the minorof his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days have elapsed, and we have received no communication from the minor. We shall dismiss the a

Minor V.P. entered admissions to felony illegal possession of a concealed firearm by a minor (Pen. Code, § 29610),[1] misdemeanor possession of live ammunition by a minor (§ 29650), felony carrying a loaded unregistered firearm (§ 25850, subd. (c)(6)), and felony carrying a loaded concealed firearm on his person (§ 25400, subd. (c)(6)).In lieu of adjudging the minor a ward of the court, the juvenile court deferred entry of judgment(DEJ).The minor purports to appeal.
Counsel was appointed to represent the minoron appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and requesting this court to review the record and determine whether there were any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Counsel advised the minorof his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days have elapsed, and we have received no communication from the minor. We shall dismiss the a

Minor V.P. entered admissions to felony illegal possession of a concealed firearm by a minor (Pen. Code, § 29610),[1] misdemeanor possession of live ammunition by a minor (§ 29650), felony carrying a loaded unregistered firearm (§ 25850, subd. (c)(6)), and felony carrying a loaded concealed firearm on his person (§ 25400, subd. (c)(6)).In lieu of adjudging the minor a ward of the court, the juvenile court deferred entry of judgment(DEJ).The minor purports to appeal.
Counsel was appointed to represent the minoron appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and requesting this court to review the record and determine whether there were any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Counsel advised the minorof his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days have elapsed, and we have received no communication from the minor. We shall dismiss the a

Minor V.P. entered admissions to felony illegal possession of a concealed firearm by a minor (Pen. Code, § 29610),[1] misdemeanor possession of live ammunition by a minor (§ 29650), felony carrying a loaded unregistered firearm (§ 25850, subd. (c)(6)), and felony carrying a loaded concealed firearm on his person (§ 25400, subd. (c)(6)).In lieu of adjudging the minor a ward of the court, the juvenile court deferred entry of judgment(DEJ).The minor purports to appeal.
Counsel was appointed to represent the minoron appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and requesting this court to review the record and determine whether there were any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Counsel advised the minorof his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days have elapsed, and we have received no communication from the minor. We shall dismiss the a

Appointed counsel for defendant Jonathan Nelce Lancaster has filed an opening brief in these consolidated cases, setting forth the facts of the case and asking this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm.

In a previous nonpublished opinion, we reversed the juvenile court’s 2015 order terminating visitation for defendant and appellant Gordon E. (Father). We reasoned it was not proper to terminate visitation without Father and his then-14-year-old daughter (Daughter) participating in at least one monitored visit. We made clear, however, that our ruling did “not prohibit the court from reevaluating visitation, based in part on Daughter’s input, after the monitored therapeutic visitation occurs.” (In re Candice E. (Jan. 7, 2016, B265130, p. 7).)
A monitored therapeutic visitation has now occurred. Following the visit, the juvenile court terminated jurisdiction and determined it would not be in Daughter’s best interest to continue visitation with Father. Nonetheless, the juvenile court ordered monthly monitored visitation in a therapeutic setting, with the caveat that Daughter did not have to go to the visits. Father appealed the orders, arguing visitation was only “illuso

Maxwell Lee Coulson pled guilty to possession of heroin for sale. (Health & Saf. Code, §§ 11351, 11378.) He also admitted he suffered two prior convictions for drug related offenses. (Heath & Saf. Code, § 11370.2, subd. (c).) He further admitted that he suffered three prior felony convictions for which prison sentences were imposed. (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b).)
The trial court sentenced Coulson to the three year middle term for possession of heroin for sale. The court imposed a consecutive one year sentence for one of the prior prison term enhancements. The court struck the remaining enhancements.
Coulson obtained a certificate of probable cause to appeal from his plea. He stated that his attorney failed to provide him with discovery prior to his plea, and that he was under duress to plead when he was not guilty of the charge.