In re E.H. CA2/8
Father E.H. (Father) appeals the termination of his parental rights to now three-year-old E.H. Father contends that the social worker’s Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 report was inadequate as to his history of visitation, bond, and current relationship with E.H., such that the juvenile court could not make an informed decision to terminate his parental rights, citing new authority in In re Caden C. (2021) 11 Cal.5th 614 (Caden C.). Father also claims that the juvenile court erroneously relied on his ability to reunify when terminating his parental rights. Father requests that we reverse and remand for a new hearing under section 366.26, so that the juvenile court can make its decision with the guidance of Caden C. and a new section 366.26 report.
Comments on In re E.H. CA2/8