In re P.M. CA4/2
C.D. is the maternal grandmother (MGM) of P.M., who was five months old on the date of the challenged order, February 7, 2017. MGM argues the court erred when it: (1) denied her petition under Welfare and Institutions Code section 388 asking the court to reverse its disposition order placing P.M. with the prospective adoptive parents and instead place her with MGM; and (2) failed to apply the section 361.3 relative placement preference to her when she requested placement after disposition. We affirm.
Comments on In re P.M. CA4/2