In re T.J. CA3

Filed 10/13/25 In re T.J. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

(Amador) ----

In re T.J., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

AMADOR COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL C103112 SERVICES, (Super. Ct. No. 23DP00882) Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

M.J.,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appellant M.J., father of the minor T.J., appeals from the juvenile court’s orders terminating parental rights and freeing the minor for adoption. (Welf. & Inst. Code,1 §§ 366.26, 396.) Father claims the Amador County Department of Social Services (Department) and the juvenile court failed to fulfill their respective duties of inquiry as required by the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 (ICWA) (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.), and the juvenile court abused its discretion when it found the ICWA did not apply. The

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.

1

Department concedes the error. We agree that remand is appropriate. Accordingly, we will conditionally reverse the orders of the juvenile court and remand for further compliance with the ICWA. BACKGROUND Because the issues on appeal are limited to compliance with the ICWA, we dispense with a detailed recitation of the underlying facts and procedural history. Prior Family Maintenance Proceedings In early 2023, the minor was in an open family maintenance case in the home of his mother, A.P. (mother). Father was incarcerated. According to the disposition report from those prior proceedings, mother informed the Department she had no known Indian ancestry. The social worker had been unable to obtain information from father but paternal grandfather and paternal stepgrandmother both stated there was no known Indian heritage on father’s side of the family. On January 26, 2023, the juvenile court found there was no reason to believe the minor was an Indian child and therefore the ICWA did not apply. The juvenile court exercised dependency jurisdiction over the minor in February 2023. Mother and maternal grandmother were present at the disposition hearing on March 23, 2023, and the continued disposition hearing on April 13, 2023. Father was not present. The juvenile court reiterated its previous ICWA findings and ordered that the minor remain in mother’s custody with family maintenance services. Current Proceedings Pursuant to Section 342 Petition On July 31, 2023, the juvenile court ordered the then one-year-old minor detained from mother’s custody pursuant to a section 342 (subsequent) dependency petition alleging serious physical harm (§ 300, subd. (a)) and failure to protect (§ 300, subd. (b))