In re D.G. CA2/5

I. INTRODUCTION

One of two presumed fathers, F.G., appeals from the August 7, 2014 dispositional order. The juvenile court declared the child, D.G., a dependent under Welfare and Institutions Code section 360, subdivision (a) and ordered jurisdiction to continue. The juvenile court found that both F.G. and Noel T. are the child’s presumed father under Family Code, section 7612, subdivision (c). F.G. is the child’s biological father. F.G. argues the juvenile court’s presumed father finding is not supported by substantial evidence. Further, the juvenile court placed the child in F.G.’s custody and continued jurisdiction. F.G. argues substantial evidence does not support the order maintaining juvenile court supervision in light of the custody order. We affirm.

II. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On April 3, 2014, the child, who was four years old, was detained by the Department of Children and Family Services (the department). The child’s half-brother is N.T., Jr. A Welfare and Institutions Code section 300 petition was filed in part because N.T., Jr. was born with drugs in his system due to amphetamine use by C.V. (the mother). The petition identifies the child, N.T., Jr. and D.T. as…