In re E.R. CA3

Filed 1/31/25 In re E.R. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Shasta) ----

In re E.R., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court C101563 Law.

SHASTA COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN (Super. Ct. No. 24JV-32766- SERVICES AGENCY, 01)

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

A.R.,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appellant A.R., mother of the minor, appeals from the juvenile court’s orders terminating parental rights and freeing the minor for adoption. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 366.26, 395; statutory section citations that follow are to the Welfare and Institutions Code unless otherwise stated.) She contends the Shasta County Health and Human

1

Services Agency (Agency) and the juvenile court failed to comply with the inquiry requirements of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.). We agree that, despite the significant efforts undertaken to comply with the ICWA, we must conditionally reverse the orders of the juvenile court and remand for further ICWA compliance.

FACTS AND HISTORY OF THE PROCEEDINGS Because the issue on appeal is limited to ICWA compliance, we do not need to provide a detailed recitation of the underlying facts and procedure. On January 9, 2024, the Agency filed a section 300 petition on behalf of then one- year-old E.R., based on the parents’ domestic violence, and the parents’ admission that they were guilty of severe physical abuse, torture, neglect and starvation of the minor’s older sibling which, collectively, had resulted in the sibling’s death. The Agency reported that mother might be affiliated with the Saginaw Chippewa tribe and father, although adopted, may be affiliated with the Paiute-Shoshone tribe. On January 10, 2024, father completed a Notification of Indian Status ICWA-020 form (ICWA-020 form) that reported he or his relatives could be affiliated with the Wintu or Paiute-Shoshone tribes. Mother’s ICWA-020 form reflected no known Indian ancestry. The detention hearing was held on January 10, 2024. Various maternal and paternal relatives attended the hearing. At the hearing, mother said she may have Indian ancestry, but that it was a small percentage and not enough to qualify for anything. She said her aunt would have more information, but she was not sure of her aunt’s legal name. She only knew her by her nickname “Chita.” A maternal relative in the courtroom provided the aunt’s legal name – M.B. Father said he was 1/16th Wintu, which he said was not enough to qualify for any benefits. He noted he had been adopted under a different name and gave both his birth and adoptive names (J.F. and R.R., respectively).