In re A.G. CA2/5

INTRODUCTION

Father appeals from an order under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 terminating his parental rights to his son and daughter.1 Father contends the juvenile court erred when it used the clear and convincing standard of proof in rejecting the parent-child beneficial relationship exception. We conclude the error was harmless: even if the trial court had employed the correct preponderance of the evidence standard, the court necessarily would have found father failed to demonstrate that terminating the parental relationship would be detrimental to the children.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

1. Dependency History The parents have two children together: daughter born in 2013, and son born in 2014. In 2015, the juvenile court took dependency jurisdiction over the children, finding that mother left them with maternal grandmother without making an appropriate plan for their ongoing care, mother’s unmedicated bipolar disorder endangered the children, and father failed to protect the children from mother’s known mental health and emotional problems. During the pendency of the case, father failed to complete court-ordered programs. In December 2015, the…