Interestingly, the mother remarried shortly after she divorced Elizondo in 2007. She could have had the step-father adopt.

The pleadings state that he started having visitation in 2012 supervised by either his adult daughter or adult son. The visitation became unsupervised in early 2013. The mother refused to cooperate in getting the minor child there for visits, facilitating the internet visitation that was ordered, that the mother had been living in the home with relatives, who she later accused of threatening her when they filed for guardianship of the minor child after she ended up in a homeless shelter with the child. Child Welfare has apparently been involved in the case, so there has been at least one if not more investigations of the parties. Their findings would have played a part in the judge's decision. Additionally, she had accused him of using drugs, he passed a drug test, at which time she was to reimburse him for the costs of the test which she has not done. So, were her accusations considered perjorative by the court and did it affect the court's perception of her credibility? Perhaps. Additionally she has recently been approved for social security disability. One wonders about the nature of her disability, perhaps she has a mental health diagnosis or a seriously physically debilitating condition that precludes her from being able to effectively care for the child.

As some posters here have said we were not there, did not hear the testimony and don't have all the facts. However, the mother has the option of appealing the judge's decision to a higher court who could then reverse the lower court's decision and return custody to the mother. The case is not necessarily over.

I am rather surprised given the facts regarding both parents and those relatives didn't refile their petition for guardianship and request custody of the little girl.