legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re Xavier M. CA2/3
Brittany H. (mother) appeals from a juvenile court order denying her Welfare and Institutions Code section 388 petition seeking the return of her son, Xavier M., to her care or, alternatively, the reinstatement of her reunification services. Mother contends the juvenile court abused its discretion by denying her petition; she further contends the court erred by denying her requests for a contested section 366.26 hearing and for a bonding study.
We conclude the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion by denying the section 388 petition because the evidence before the juvenile court did not compel a finding that mother’s circumstances had changed materially or that granting the petition was in Xavier’s best interests. We further conclude that even if the juvenile court erred by denying mother’s request for a contested hearing and a bonding study, any error was not prejudicial. We therefore will affirm the juvenile court’s order.

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