In re Ro.H. CA4/3

── In re Ro.H. CA4/3 ── Court: California Court of Appeal Date: June 08, 2026 Category: General Filed 6/8/26 In re Ro.H. CA4/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE In re Ro.H., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. ORANGE COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES AGENCY, G066295 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 25DP0042) v. OPINION Re.H., Defendant and Appellant. Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, June Jee An, Judge. Affirmed.  Michelle D. Peña, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Leon J. Page, County Counsel, Debbie Torrez and Aurelio Torre, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. No appearance for the Minor. * * * Re.H. (mother) appeals from a custody order concerning her nine- year-old daughter Ro.H. (minor)1 issued at the close of dependency proceedings pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 362.4.2 The juvenile court granted N.H. (father) sole physical custody and tiebreaking authority within the parents’ joint legal custody, and ordered mother to have supervised visitation. Mother claims this was error. We find no abuse of the court’s discretion and affirm the order. FACTUAL BACKGROUND3 I. DETENTION Orange County Social Services Agency (SSA) removed minor and her siblings from their parents in January 2025 after receiving substantiated allegations of general neglect, emotional abuse, and risk to the siblings. The parents were allegedly aware minor’s siblings had been experiencing mental 1 While this appeal concerns only minor, we reference her two siblings, L.H. and J.H., throughout the opinion. 2 All further statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code. 3 Our factual summary is limited to those facts relevant to the issues presented in this appeal. 2 health issues, including suicidal ideation, past suicide attempts, and self- harming, but had neglected to follow up with medications and therapist appointments. At the time of detention, the parents shared custody of the children. Per the custody order, mother had 40 percent custody, and father had the children every other weekend and every other Wednesday. The parents, however, would alternate custody with the children weekly. Overall, the custody situation was contentious. In its detention report, SSA noted father seemingly had issues with alcohol use. Additionally, mother had mental health issues and had attempted suicide. According to father, mother repeatedly spoke negatively about him to the children, even though the courts and mental health professionals had warned the parents about the negative effect this could have on children. Mother also told the children they could legally refuse to go with father without getting into trouble. SSA interviewed both of minor’s sibling’s therapists about the family. Both siblings had expressed concerns about father’s drinking, although one sibling did not bring up any concerning behavior father exhibited while drinking. Both therapists e