Kendra K. v. Superior Court CA5

DISCUSSION

The purpose of writ proceedings, such as this, is to facilitate a prompt review of a juvenile court’s order setting a section 366.26 hearing to select and implement a permanent plan for a dependent child. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.450(a).) A court’s decision is presumed correct. (Denham v. Superior Court (1970) 2 Cal.3d 557, 564.) It is up to a petitioner to raise specific issues and substantively address them. (§ 366.26, subd. (l).) A petitioner must also include, inter alia, a memorandum summarizing the significant facts, limited to matters in the record and with citations to the record. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.452(a) & (b).) This court will not independently review the record for possible error. (In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952, 994.) In her petition for extraordinary writ, mother contends that Julian was falsely detained because she believes he was never in harm’s way. She also argues that she completed one of the court-ordered services and is currently continuing in services. She promises to do whatever it takes to regain custody of Julian. Mother, however, makes no specific claim of error regarding the court’s June 2014 decision to terminate services…