J.H.

*148 *533 In People v. Sanchez (2016) 63 Cal.4th 665 , 204 Cal.Rptr.3d 102 , 374 P.3d 320 ( Sanchez ), our Supreme Court clarified the test for admitting expert opinion testimony. Although Sanchez was a criminal case, its limitations extend beyond the scope of criminal law: to proceedings under the Sexually Violent Predator Act ( People v. Burroughs (2016) 6 Cal.App.5th 378 , 211 Cal.Rptr.3d 656 ), to conservatorship proceedings ( Conservatorship of K.W. (2017) 13 Cal.App.5th 1274 , 221 Cal.Rptr.3d 622 ), to the commitment of mentally disordered offenders ( People v. Bona (2017) 15 Cal.App.5th 511 , 223 Cal.Rptr.3d 649 ( Bona ) ), and to public nuisance actions ( People v. Conagra Grocery Products Co. (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 51 , 227 Cal.Rptr.3d 499 ). Here, we hold that Sanchez's limitations do not render social service reports inadmissible in status review hearings held pursuant to the Welfare and Institutions Code. 1

J.H. petitions for extraordinary writ review of the juvenile court's order terminating reunification services and setting the matter for a permanency plan hearing. (§ 366.26, subd. ( l )(1).) He contends the court erred when it considered a social services report in…