In re G.F. CA4/1

INTRODUCTION

M.H. (Father) appeals from the juvenile court’s order denying his

petition under Welfare and Institutions Code1 section 388 to modify placement of his four-year-old child, G.F., from relative caregivers to him. Father contends he made a prima facie showing entitling him to a full hearing on the section 388 petition and the court abused its discretion by summarily denying it. Father also appeals from the juvenile court’s order terminating his parental rights. Father contends this order must be reversed in light of the California Supreme Court’s subsequent decision in In re Caden C. (2021) 11 Cal.5th 614 (Caden C.), which disapproves of certain factors relied on by the juvenile court to find the parental-benefit exception to adoption did not apply. L.F. (Mother) joins Father’s arguments and further contends that if his rights are reinstated, hers should be reinstated as well. We agree with both of Father’s contentions and, accordingly, we reverse. On remand, the juvenile court shall first conduct an evidentiary hearing on Father’s section 388 petition to modify G.F.’s placement. If his section 388 petition is denied⎯and we express no view on how the court should…