In re Larry O.
Filed 9/14/10 In re Larry O. CA2/8
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 This opinion has not been certified for
publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115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
EIGHT
In re LARRY O., a Person Coming
Under the Juvenile Court Law.
B221615
LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT
OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
LARRY O.,
Defendant and Appellant.
(Los Angeles
County
Super. Ct.
No. J989888)
APPEAL from
an order of the Superior Court
of Los Angeles
County. Patricia Spear,
Judge. Affirmed.
Jack A.
Love, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Andrea
Sheridan Ordin, County Counsel, James M. Owens, Assistant County Counsel, and
Tracey F. Dodds, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
________________________
Appellant Larry O. (father) appeals
from the October 20, 2009 order denying his Welfare and Institutions Code
section 388 petition seeking permanent custody of his son, Larry, Jr. (the
child).[1] Father contends the juvenile court erred in denying him an
opportunity to present evidence at the hearing on the motion. We affirm.
FACTUAL AND
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Born in
March 1998, the child was three years old in 2001, when he and his maternal
half-siblings were found to be dependent children under section 300,
subdivision (b) as a result of their mother's depression and drug use,
which rendered her incapable of caring for them. After several months in foster care, in
August 2001, the children were placed with a maternal aunt. Father, who had a 1986 conviction for lewd
and lascivious acts with a child under the age of 14 years, was given monitored
visits. But after alleging that during
one such visit father â€
| Description | Appellant Larry O. (father) appeals from the October 20, 2009 order denying his Welfare and Institutions Code section 388 petition seeking permanent custody of his son, Larry, Jr. (the child). Father contends the juvenile court erred in denying him an opportunity to present evidence at the hearing on the motion. Court affirm. |
| Rating |
