David C. v. Superior Court CA5

DISCUSSION

David contends his mother, Irene, Catalina’s paternal grandmother, did not receive notice from the agency that she could request custody of Catalina and claims she is willing to accept guardianship and custody. Consequently, David asks this court to remand the case for a hearing on the issue of relative placement. We decline to do so and dismiss the petition as facially inadequate. A petition for extraordinary writ may be brought in the Court of Appeal to challenge a juvenile court’s decision to set a permanency planning hearing pursuant to section 366.26. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rules 8.450-8.452.) The writ procedure, as outlined in the statute and implemented in the rules, enables a party to obtain expeditious review of the juvenile court’s decision. (Steve J. v. Superior Court (1995) 35 Cal.App.4th 798, 811.)

2 The mother did not file a writ petition.

3 In this case, David does not contend the juvenile court erred in rendering any of its decisions as to him at the setting hearing. Rather, he merely asserts his mother was not notified she could seek custody of Catalina. This court will not independently review the appellate record for possible errors (In re…