legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re M.H.
This court previously denied a petition for extraordinary writ relief filed by appellant Marcus H. (father) after the juvenile court set a permanency planning hearing as to his daughter, M.H. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26). (Marcus H. v. Superior Court (May 13, 2011, A131461) [nonpub. opn.].) The juvenile court thereafter terminated father’s parental rights, concluding that father had not established that an exception to the termination of parental rights applied. This timely appeal followed.
On June 7, 2012, father’s appointed appellate counsel filed a no issues statement in accordance with In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952 and In re Phoenix H. (2009) 47 Cal.4th 835, stating that she had reviewed the record and concluded that there were no arguable issues to raise on appeal. Father wrote to this court on July 3, acknowledging that he made mistakes early in the proceedings, but stating that he wants to maintain a relationship with the minor.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale