In re Chase M. CA2/1
T.M. (mother) contends that substantial evidence did not support the juvenile court’s finding that jurisdiction over then four-year-old Chase was necessary because mother left Chase with his maternal great aunt (MGA), with whom he had been living since birth, without making a plan for his ongoing care. We agree that there was no substantial evidence that mother’s placement of Chase in MGA’s care placed Chase at substantial risk of serious past or future harm, and thus reverse.
Comments on In re Chase M. CA2/1