legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re T.M.
T.M. was detained by the juvenile courtbecauseher parents were unable to safely care for her and their drug abuse put her at risk of serious harm. Following 12 months of reunification services, T.M.’s father, B.M. (Father), continued to use drugs and was unable to show he could properly care for her, despite his desire to reunify with his daughter. The juvenile court terminated reunification services and set a Welfare and Institutions Code Section 366.26[1]permanency planning hearing. Prior to the hearing, Father filed a section 388 modification petition requesting reinstatement of reunification services. The court denied the modification request and terminated Father’s parental rights, finding the permanent plan of adoption appropriate. Father appeals the termination of his parental rights and the denial of his section 388 petition. Because neither order was erroneous, we affirm.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale