M.G. v. Super.Ct.
M.G. is the father of M., the child at issue in this juvenile dependency case. He has filed a petition for extraordinary writ seeking review of the juvenile court’s orders terminating his reunification services and setting a Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26[1] permanency planning hearing. A self-represented litigant, father states in his writ petition that he believes that he has done everything he has been asked to do and requests further reunification services.
For the reasons stated below, we find that father has not shown that the juvenile court’s findings and orders are not supported by substantial evidence and we will therefore deny the writ petition.
Comments on M.G. v. Super.Ct.