In re K.H. CA5

Filed 7/29/13 In re K.H. CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

In re K.H. et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

KERN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF F066682 HUMAN SERVICES, (Super. Ct. Nos. JD127047 & Plaintiff and Respondent, JD127048) v. D.M., OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Kern County. Louie L. Vega, Judge. Lori A. Fields, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Theresa A. Goldner, County Counsel, Jennifer E. Feige, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Levy, Acting P.J., Gomes, J., and Detjen, J.

D.M., mother, appeals from the juvenile court’s orders pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 terminating her parental rights to K.H. and S.B.1 Mother argues that the Kern County Department of Human Services (department) failed to make a proper inquiry of her children’s Indian ancestry pursuant to the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA; 25 U.S.C.S. § 1901 et seq.). The department conceded the error by letter. We find the department’s concession to be improvident, reject mother’s contention, and affirm the juvenile court’s orders. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY Initial Detention and Jurisdiction Hearings On July 27, 2011, K.H. (age three) and S.B. (age two) were detained on allegations that mother abused alcohol and drugs and was the victim of domestic violence by the children’s presumed father, D.B. The parents were not present at the detention hearing. Mother filed a parental notice of Indian status indicating she had no Indian ancestry as far as she knew. Father filed a parental notification of Indian status indicating he may have Indian ancestry through the Navajo Tribe. Mother executed a waiver of rights, submitting the matter on the basis of the social worker’s report. At the combined jurisdictional/dispositional hearing on September 14, 2011, the court found the petition to be true as amended. The court found the ICWA did not apply as to mother. The court ordered the department to give ICWA notice because of father’s indication that he may have Navajo ancestry. The dispositional hearing was continued to give ICWA notice to the tribes.