Michael D. v. Sup. Ct.

Filed 1/18/07  Michael D. v. Sup. Ct. CA2/4

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b).  This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

          ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS in mandate.  Marilyn Mackel, Commissioner.  Petition denied.

          Roland Koncan, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Petitioner.

          No appearance for Respondent.         

          Raymond G. Fortner, Jr., County Counsel, Larry Cory, Assistant County Counsel, and Owen L. Gallagher, Principal Deputy County Counsel, for Real Party in Interest.

          Petitioner Michael D. is the presumed father of N.D., a dependent of the juvenile court.  By a petition for writ of mandate under California Rules of Court, rule 38.1 (rule 38.1),^[1] Michael challenges the juvenile court's order setting a hearing under section 366.26 of the Welfare and Institutions Code to consider termination of his parental rights concerning N.D.^[2]  We deny the petition on its merits. 

RELEVANT FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

          N.D. was born to T.D. (Mother) in 1997.^[3]  In August 2005, Mother signed a notarized document authorizing Anna D., Mother's aunt, to care for N.D., and then moved to Las Vegas.  On July 1, 2006, Michael took N.D. from Anna's home, and Anna filed a missing persons report regarding her.  Real party in interest Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) received a referral regarding N.D. on July 7, 2006, when it learned that N.D. was in the custody of the Inglewood Police Department. 

          On July 12, 2006, DCFS filed a petition under section 300 on N.D.'s behalf, alleging that Michael, who had been convicted of lewd acts with a child, had taken N.D. into his custody in violation of the conditions of his parole, which prohibited contact with any child.  In a supporting report, DCFS provided

Anna's account of the events on July 1, 2006.  According to Anna, Michael had banged on her door â€