In re A.S. CA2/2

Filed 3/23/26 In re A.S. CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO

In re A.S., a Person Coming B350333 Under the Juvenile Court Law. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 18CCJP07966B)

LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

C.B. et al.,

Defendants and Appellants.

APPEALS from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Tara L. Newman, Judge. Affirmed. Johanna R. Shargel, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant C.B. Megan Turkat Schirn, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant M.S.

Dawyn R. Harrison, County Counsel, Kim Nemoy, Assistant County Counsel, and Aileen Wong, Principal Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

_________________________________________

C.B. (Mother) and M.S. (Father) appeal the termination of parental rights to their child A.S. They argue that the juvenile court and Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) failed to comply with the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA). (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 224 et seq.)1 They seek remand for further inquiry into A.S.’s Indian ancestry. We conclude that the court had sufficient information to find that ICWA does not apply. Appellants and their extended families denied Indian ancestry. The maternal grandmother denied Indian heritage in a concurrent proceeding for A.S.’s baby brother. Appellants have not identified anyone who was not interviewed. We affirm the order terminating parental rights. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Appellants do not challenge the merits of the order terminating parental rights, only the court’s ICWA findings. Consequently, we need only briefly summarize the facts. BACKGROUND A.S. was born in December 2023 and detained by police eight months later. A dependency petition alleged parental substance abuse, violence, and mental illness. A.S.’s older half siblings were juvenile dependents, and Mother’s parental rights to one child were terminated in 2018. Father is schizophrenic, hears voices, and threatened to kill his brother in August 2024. Appellants frequently abandon A.S. and are unable to regularly care for her. Mother said she is a “ ‘drug addict’ ” who uses methamphetamine. Father’s whereabouts were unknown when the court sustained the petition in October 2024. (§ 300, subds. (a), (b), (j).) Appellants were denied custody of A.S. at disposition in December 2024. Mother’s reunification