In re K.C. CA6

DISCUSSION

In this appeal, father argues that the December 12, 2012 order that was the subject of K.C. III3 should be reversed, and as a result, the subsequent orders of the juvenile court following the December 12, 2012 order must also be reversed. Father asserts: “the subsequent orders challenged herein will be invalid in the event this court reverses the jurisdictional findings on the subsequent petition challenged in Father’s pending appeal.” “Perhaps the most fundamental rule of appellate law is that the judgment challenged on appeal is presumed correct, and it is the appellant's burden to affirmatively

3 The opening brief in the present appeal was filed while K.C. III was pending in this court. 3 demonstrate error. [Citation.]” (People v. Sanghera (2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 1567, 1573.)” “ ‘Such error . . . must be affirmatively shown, and the burden is upon the appellant to present a record showing it, any uncertainty in the record in that respect being resolved against him.’ ” (People v. Clifton (1969) 270 Cal.App.2d 860, 862.) Here, father’s only basis for “error” on the part of the juvenile court is that the challenged orders are subsequent to and based on an invalid…