In re Romeo C. CA5

DISCUSSION

An appealed-from judgment or order is presumed correct. (Denham v. Superior Court (1970) 2 Cal.3d 557, 564.) It is appellant’s burden to raise claims of reversible error or other defect and present argument and authority on each point made. If appellant fails to do so, the appeal should be dismissed. (In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952, 994.) As mentioned above, father did not raise any claim of error or other defect against the termination orders from which he appealed. Thus, we have no reason to reverse or even modify the orders in question. (Ibid.) At a section 366.26, permanency planning hearing, the court must determine whether it is likely the children will be adopted and, if so, order termination of parental rights. (§ 366.26, subd. (c)(1).) This is because, once reunification efforts have ceased, the focus shifts from family reunification to the children’s needs for permanency and stability. (In re Marilyn H. (1993) 5 Cal.4th 295, 309.) If, as in this case, the children are likely to be adopted, adoption is the norm. Indeed, the court must order adoption and its

All statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code unless otherwise…