In re A.G. CA2/4
Filed 1/14/25 In re A.G. CA2/4 Opinion following transfer from Supreme Court NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FOUR
In re A.G., B331398
a Person Coming Under the Juvenile (Los Angeles County Court Law. Super. Ct. No. 22CCJP02589)
LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
J.G.,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Philip L. Soto, Judge. Conditionally reversed and remanded with directions. Patricia K. Saucier, by appointment of the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Amir Pichvai for Plaintiff and Respondent.
INTRODUCTION J.G. (mother) appeals from the juvenile court’s order terminating parental rights (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26)1 over her child, A.G. Her sole contention on appeal is that the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) failed to comply with the “initial duty to inquire” under the Indian Child Welfare Act (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) (ICWA) and related California statutes (§ 224 et seq.). We previously affirmed the order. Subsequently, our Supreme Court granted mother’s petition for review and ultimately transferred the case back to us with directions to vacate our prior decision and reconsider the cause in light of In re Dezi C. (2024) 16 Cal.5th 1112 (Dezi C.). After reconsideration, we conditionally reverse the juvenile court’s order and remand for further compliance with ICWA.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Our summary of the facts is limited to those needed for resolution of the ICWA issue raised on appeal and to provide relevant context. On July 6, 2022, DCFS filed a dependency petition on behalf of A.G. (born in July 2022), which was sustained on August 10, 2022. Attached to the petition was the ICWA-010 form, stating that on July 3, 2022, mother and maternal aunt Ingrid G. (Ingrid) gave the social worker no reason to believe A.G. was an Indian child. Ingrid later told the social worker that she lived in Nevada with maternal grandmother and maternal uncle Morris G. (Morris). Mother reported she had a “good” relationship with maternal grandparents and that she spoke to them on a weekly basis.
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)