In re L.V.
A.H. is the mother of L.V., who turned three years old in November 2013. The juvenile court entered judgment after it terminated parental rights; found that the exception to termination of parental rights under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26, subdivision (c)(1)(B)(i)[1] (the "continuing benefit exception"), did not apply; and ordered adoption as L.V.'s permanent plan.
The mother appeals, first arguing that the court erred when it summarily denied her section 388 petition when it found she had not met her burden to make a prima facie showing of changed circumstances. We conclude the court did not err because the mother did not present evidence of changed circumstances. She next argues that substantial evidence does not support the court's finding that the continuing benefit exception did not apply. We conclude that substantial evidence supports the court's findings and affirm the judgment.
Comments on In re L.V.