In re D.H.
In this dependency case (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 300 et seq.),[1]Pamela S., the mother of the subject dependent minor child D. H. (Mother and the minor, respectively), has appealed from a section 366.26 order that terminated her parental rights to the child. The minor's father, Richard H. (Father), has appealed from that order as well because his parental rights were also terminated. Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 8.200 (a)(5), Mother incorporates into her appellate presentation the argument made by Father in his opening appellate brief, to wit, that Father and the minor have a parent‑child relationship that is so strong and beneficial to the child that it the warrants not terminating Father's parental rights and thus their father-son relationship meets the statutory exception to termination of parental rights found in section 366.26, subdivision (c)(1)(B)(i). Additionally, Mother asserts that if Father's parental rights are restored by this court then her parental rights must also be restored. However Father's appeal has already been decided by this court in case B227523 and we affirmed the order terminating his parental rights.[2]
Comments on In re D.H.