In re P.M.
Mother M.T. (mother) and presumed father D.M. (father) (collectively parents) appeal from the juvenile court's order terminating their parental rights and selecting adoption as the permanent plan in dependency proceedings on behalf of P.M. (hereinafter P.). (See Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 366.26; 395.)[1] Mother maintains that the court improperly terminated her parental rights because the parent-child relationship exception applies in this case. Father argues that the court's denial of his counsel's request for a continuance of the section 366.26 hearing constitutes prejudicial error. He also joins in mother's argument. We find no merit to these contentions.
Comments on In re P.M.