In re L.G.
Magnolia G. appeals from a March 2007 superior court order terminating her parental rights (Welf. & Inst. Code, 366.26) to three of her five children.[1] On the figurative eve of the section 366.26 hearing, which the court had twice continued, appellant retained counsel to substitute in place of her court-appointed attorney. In this appeal, she criticizes the court for its handling of continuance motions brought by her new counsel. She also contends he was ineffective. According to appellant, retained counsel should have pursued an order returning the childrens custody to her. In addition, she claims, he should have argued termination was detrimental based on sibling relationship ( 366.26, subd. (c)(1)(E)). On review, Court disagree and affirm.
Comments on In re L.G.