In re D.R.
Robert R. (father) appeals from the juvenile court's order continuing dependency jurisdiction over his three sons. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 364; all further statutory references are to this code unless otherwise noted.) Father contends the juvenile court erred in continuing jurisdiction because he resolved the domestic violence issue that prompted the initial assumption of jurisdiction. Substantial evidence supports the juvenile court's finding that jurisdictional conditions still existed, and were likely to exist if the court terminated jurisdiction. Accordingly, we affirm the court's order.
Comments on In re D.R.