In re Jeremiah D.
The father, T.D., appeals from the jurisdictional and dispositional orders of the juvenile court. At the time the jurisdictional and dispositional orders were entered as to the father, they were likewise entered as to the mother. The mother has not appealed. The judgment is final as to the mother. (Code Civ. Proc., § 906; In re Matthew C. (1993) 6 Cal.4th 386, 393; Wanda B. v. Superior Court (1996) 41 Cal.App.4th 1391, 1395.) Thus the juvenile court has jurisdiction over the father based upon the findings as to the mother. (In re I.A. (2011) 201 Cal.App.4th 1484, 1491; In re Alexis E. (2009) 171 Cal.App.4th 438, 451.) Finally, the father’s challenge to dispositional order has no merit. No objection was interposed to the dispositional order. In fact, the father consented in writing to the dispositional order and its drug related conditions. (In re Ethan C. (2012) 54 Cal.4th 610, 640-641; Hasson v. Ford Motor Company (1982) 32 Cal.3d 388, 420-421; In re John M. (2013) 217 Cal.App.4th 410, 419; In re N.M. (2011) 197 Cal.App.4th 159, 167; Kevin R. v. Superior Court (2010) 191 Cal.App.4th 676, 686.)
Comments on In re Jeremiah D.