Is a father's claim that the court's order granting mother sole legal and physical custody of their children violates his right to see his children?

Father also claims the trial court's order granting mother sole legal and physical custody of their children violates his First Amendment Right to associate with his children. Further, father "does not agree" the trial court can order him to "participate in 'reconnection therapy' as a condition of seeing his children." Father fails to support either claim with any citation to relevant legal authority. Accordingly, these claims also are forfeited. (Lewis v. County of Sacramento (2001) 93 Cal.App.4th 107, 113; Badie, supra, 67 Cal.App.4th at pp. 784-785.)

Finally, father contends the court's order is not supported by evidence. In support of his contention, father argues he is not an "unfit parent," that there is "no evidence that he needs therapy, no evidence that he has abused, used, or treated his children badly." Without a reporter's transcript of the relevant hearing, however, we must presume the court made sufficient findings to support its decision. That is, we must presume the court found that giving mother sole legal and physical custody of the minors was in the minors' best interest. Furthermore, we must conclusively presume the evidence was sufficient to sustain the court's findings. (Ehrler v. Ehrler (1981) 126 Cal.App.3d 147, 154.) On the face of this record, we find no error; we must affirm the trial court's decision.

Page 4

The judgment is affirmed.