In re April R.
Filed 5/18/06 In re April R. CA2/5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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 FIVE
In re APRIL R., et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. | B187056 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. J948021) |
LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, Petitioner and Respondent, v. DAVID R., et al., Objectors and Appellants. |
APPEAL from an order of the Los Angeles County Superior Court, D. Zeke Zeidler, Judge. Affirmed.
John L. Dodd & Associates, Lisa A. DiGrazia, and David R., Sr., in propria persona, for Objector and Appellant David R., Sr.
Law Office of Jill Regal, Jill Regal for Objectors and Appellants David R., Jr. and Anthony R.
Raymond G. Fortner, Jr., County Counsel, Larry Cory, Assistant County Counsel, and Deborah L. Hale, Deputy County Counsel, for Petitioner and Respondent.
David R., Sr. (father), presumed father of April R.; and David R., Jr. and Anthony R., brothers of April R., (collectively appellants) appeal from the order of the juvenile court terminating parental rights over April R. under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26.[1] We affirm the order.
We appointed counsel to represent appellants in this appeal. After examination of the record, counsel filed letters pursuant to In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952, 959, indicating an inability to find any arguable issues. On January 24, 2006, we advised father that he had 30 days within which to submit any contentions or arguments he wished us to consider. On January 25, 2006, we notified David R., Jr. and Anthony R. that their trial counsel or appropriate representative had 30 days within which to submit any contentions or arguments which they wished us to consider.
In a letter filed with permission on March 10, 2006, appellant father states that if granted an â€