Julio
Julio v. v. Superior Court CA5
Opinion
Opinion
DISCUSSION
The purpose of writ proceedings is to “provide for immediate writ review of meritorious issues subsumed within the order setting a section 366.26 hearing to ensure that the hearing is not infected with reversible error even before it commences.” (Joyce G. v. Superior Court (1995) 38 Cal.App.4th 1501, 1512.) Our review is limited to “issues competently raised in a timely writ petition.” (Ibid.) Thus, it is incumbent upon petitioner to raise specific issues and substantively address them. (§ 366.26, subd. (l).) While we will liberally construe a petition in favor of finding it adequate for review, we will not independently review the record for possible error. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.452(a)(1); In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952, 994.) Julio does not argue that the juvenile court erred in setting the section 366.26 hearing. He merely states that he would like the opportunity to gain custody of his children. Since Julio has not raised any claims of juvenile court error, we dismiss his writ petition as inadequate for our review.
DISPOSITION
The petition for extraordinary writ is dismissed. This opinion is final forthwith as to this court.