In Re Mv

John Carcione, Carcione, Cattermole, Dolinski, et al, for Minor.

Kevin Thurber, San Francisco, for De Facto Parents.

LAMBDEN, J.

M.V., who was born in February 2004, was removed from his home pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivisions (a) and (e), [1] on July 7, 2004. He was placed with foster parents, Tina F. and B.F. (collectively, foster parents). Tina was declared the de facto parent of M.V. on July 11, 2005. Subsequently, M.V. was either scratched or bitten [2] by the family dog on his face and the juvenile court granted the section 388 petition filed by San Mateo County Human Services Agency (agency) to modify the placement of M.V.

On appeal, foster parents argue that we should reverse the granting of the section 388 petition because the juvenile court never specified either in open court or in its written findings the standard of proof it applied. Foster parents contend the court should have used the clear and convincing evidence standard, while agency maintains the proper standard of proof was preponderance of the evidence. Further, foster parents argue, under any standard of proof, the juvenile court abused its discretion in granting the…