In re M.V

Filed 12/14/06; pub. order 1/16/07 (see end of opn.)

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

M.V., who was born in February 2004, was removed from his home pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivisions (a) and (e),^[1] on July 7, 2004.  He was placed with foster parents, Tina F. and B.F. (collectively, foster parents).  Tina was declared the de facto parent of M.V. on July 11, 2005.  Subsequently, M.V. was either scratched or bitten^[2] by the family dog on his face and the juvenile court granted the section 388 petition filed by San Mateo County Human Services Agency (agency) to modify the placement of M.V. 

On appeal, foster parents argue that we should reverse the granting of the section 388 petition because the juvenile court never specified either in open court or in its written findings the standard of proof it applied.  Foster parents contend the court should have used the clear and convincing evidence standard, while agency maintains the proper standard of proof was preponderance of the evidence.  Further, foster parents argue, under any standard of proof, the juvenile court abused its discretion in granting the motion for modification.  We conclude that reversal is required because the lower court's findings are inadequate and it is unclear whether the court considered the best interests of the child.  We therefore reverse and remand with directions to the juvenile court to make findings and to conduct further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

BACKGROUND

            M.V. was born in February 2004.  On July 7, 2004, a petition pursuant to section 300, subdivisions (a) and (e) was filed and, subsequently, M.V. was made a dependent of the court.^[3]  M.V. was placed with foster parents, and Tina was declared a de facto parent on July 11, 2005.

            On October 26, 2005, agency filed a petition pursuant to section 388 to modify the out-of-home placement of M.V. with Tina to another licensed foster home.  The petition alleged that on October 20, 2005, M.V. received multiple facial injuries from the foster family's dog.  The petition specified that â€