Robert P. v. Superior Court
Robert P.[1] and N.T. (together the parents) contend the juvenile court erred when it set a hearing under Welfare and Institutions Code[2] section 366.26 to select and implement a permanency plan for their son, R.P. The parents contend the evidence is insufficient to support the finding that return to N.T.'s custody would be detrimental to R.P.'s safety, protection, or physical or emotional well-being. We deny the petition.
Comments on Robert P. v. Superior Court