In re A.H. CA4/2

I. INTRODUCTION

The parents of two boys born in May 2008 (A1) and September 2010 (A2) appeal

the August 22, 2013, orders terminating parental rights and selecting adoption as the

boys’ permanent plan. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26.)1 Defendant and appellant, A.H.

(Mother), claims the court erred in summarily denying her petition for further

reunification services and liberalized visitation. (§ 388.) Defendant and appellant, A.H.

(Father), claims insufficient evidence supports the court’s finding that the boys were

likely to be adopted (§ 366.26, subd. (c)(1)), and Mother joins this claim without

additional argument. Finally, both parents claim the court abused its discretion in finding

the parental benefit exception to adoption did not apply. (§ 366.26, subd. (c)(1)(B)(i).)

We find each of these claims without merit and affirm.

II. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

A. Background

The boys were taken into protective custody in September 2011, when A1 was

three years old and A2 was 11 months old. The parents were arrested and briefly

incarcerated for child endangerment for keeping the boys in a filthy home. At that time,

1 All further statutory references are to the…