In re J.S. CA2/4

Filed 3/23/26 In re J.S. CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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(a). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115(a).

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR

In re J.S., A Person Coming B346004 Under the Juvenile Court Law.

LOS ANGELES COUNTY Los Angeles County DEPARTMENT OF Super. Ct. No. CHILDREN AND FAMILY 22CCJP00635 SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

J.R.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Gabriela H. Shapiro, Judge Pro Tempore. Affirmed. Anne E. Fragaso, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Dawyn R. Harrison, County Counsel, Kim Nemoy, Assistant County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Appellant J.R. (mother) raises one argument: the case must be remanded to the juvenile court for a compliance hearing under the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA). In response to an inquiry by the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS), the Cherokee Nation stated in an email that mother’s child was not an Indian child.1 Mother contends that the juvenile court erred by not waiting for a formal letter from that tribe before concluding ICWA did not apply. As DCFS points out, however, the Cherokee Nation eventually sent DCFS a formal letter confirming that the contents of its email were accurate. That letter is fatal to mother’s sole argument. We therefore affirm the juvenile court’s order terminating parental rights.

BACKGROUND2 I. Mother’s first appeal This is mother’s second appeal. In her first appeal, mother likewise solely argued that remand for an ICWA compliance hearing was warranted. (In re J.S. (Jul. 9, 2024, B330027)

1 An “Indian child” is a child who is either a member of an Indian tribe or is eligible for membership in an Indian tribe and is the biological child of a member of an Indian tribe. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 224.1, subds. (a), (b); 25 U.S.C. § 1903(4).) Apart from ICWA, future statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code. 2 The parties are familiar with the facts and procedural background that gave rise to the termination of parental rights, so we do not restate those details. We simply provide context for our resolution of the narrow ICWA issue presented. (People v. Garcia (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th 847, 851.)