Does the changed circumstance rule apply in this case?

3. In his reply brief, the father argues that the changed circumstance rule does not apply in this case because there has not been "a final judicial custody determination." We do not agree. The court's December 23, 1996 "Order After Hearing," granting joint legal custody to the parties and sole primary physical custody to the mother, constituted a final judicial custody determination that the court need not reconsider in the absence of changed circumstances. Our holding in Montenegro v. Diaz (2001) 26 Cal.4th 249, 109 Cal.Rptr.2d 575, 27 P.3d 289, cited by the father, involved a stipulated custody order, rather than an order following a hearing as in the present case, and does not alter our conclusion.