In re J.F. CA3

Filed 3/12/15 In re J.F. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (San Joaquin) ----

In re J. F. et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile C077305 Court Law.

SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES (Super. Ct. No. J06381) AGENCY,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

Mariah B.,

Defendant and Appellant.

Mariah B., mother of the minors, appeals from orders of the juvenile court terminating her parental rights. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 366.26, 395 [further undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code].) Mother contends it was error to terminate parental rights where there was inadequate notice pursuant to the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA). (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) We reverse.

1

FACTS The minors, two-year-old J. F. and three-month-old I. F., were detained in May 2013 as a result of severe physical injury inflicted on I. F. while in his parents’ care. The detention/jurisdiction report stated father claimed Indian heritage through the paternal great-grandmother but he did not know if she belonged to a tribe. Mother also claimed Indian ancestry but did not have any information about it. At the outset of the case, the social worker became aware of the names of the maternal grandmother and the maternal great-grandmother. Both parents provided names of relatives for assessment for placement of the minors. The jurisdiction report filed in August 2013 reflected father’s claim, his limited information, and that the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) had been contacted. The report also included contact information for the maternal grandmother, the maternal great-grandmother, the maternal great-aunt, and the paternal grandmother. The San Joaquin County Human Services Agency (Agency) sent notice of the proceedings to the BIA in July 2013. The notice included the names, birth dates, and address of the parents and the name of the maternal grandfather but no other information about any other relatives and no tribal identification. An Agency declaration said that the BIA responded to the notice. The response stated that the BIA did not determine tribal eligibility and did not maintain a list of persons possessing Indian blood. The response further stated that the notice contained insufficient information to determine “Tribal Affiliation” and to forward notice to the appropriate tribe when further information was available. At the contested jurisdiction hearing in October 2013 the court found that the ICWA was not an issue in the case. In February 2014 the court bypassed services for both parents. Parental rights were terminated in July 2014.