legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re D.W.
Defendant and appellant, D.W. (Father), is the father of D., a boy born in September 2012. D was taken into protective custody as an infant after his mother admitted she physically abused him by yanking his arm, causing it to fracture. It was then discovered that D. had four more fractures—two in each leg. The court found D. was a child described in Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivision (e)[1] (severe physical abuse) and refused to offer reunification or family maintenance services to either parent. (§ 361.5, subd. (b).) The court ultimately terminated parental rights and placed D. for adoption.
Father appeals, claiming the court erroneously refused to conduct a hearing on his section 388 petition seeking reunification or family maintenance services for D. (§ 388.) Father seeks reversal of the orders denying his petition and terminating parental rights. We conclude no evidentiary hearing was required on the section 388 petition because it did not state a prima facie case of changed circumstances or best interests. We therefore affirm the challenged orders.

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