In re Raul B. CA4/1

DISCUSSION

Jose contends substantial evidence was not presented to show continued court

jurisdiction was necessary. He argues the court impermissibly considered his

immigration status in retaining jurisdiction, and the services the court ordered have no

relation to the reasons it articulated for continued jurisdiction.

3 Section 361.2, subdivision (a) provides that when a court orders removal of a child

from a custodial parent under section 361, if the noncustodial parent requests custody, the

court must place the child with the noncustodial parent unless it finds such placement

would be detrimental to the child.

Under section 361.2, subdivision (b), the court then decides whether there is a

need for ongoing supervision. If there is no need for ongoing supervision, the court

terminates jurisdiction and grants the parent sole legal and physical custody. If there is a

need for ongoing supervision, the court continues jurisdiction.2 (In re Austin P. (2004)

118 Cal.App.4th 1124, 1131.) Under section 361.2, subdivision (b)(3), "the court may

order that services be provided solely to the parent who is assuming physical custody in

order to allow that parent to retain later…