In re M.G. CA2/6

Filed 6/17/15 In re M.G. CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SIX

In re M.G., a Person Coming Under the 2d Juv. No. B259988 Juvenile Court Law. (Super. Ct. No. 1436375) (Santa Barbara County)

SANTA BARBARA COUNTY CHILD WELFARE SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

T.R. et al.,

Defendants and Appellants.

T.R. (Mother) and M.G. (Father) appeal orders of the juvenile court terminating their parental rights to their child M.G. (hereafter "the child" or "M.G."). (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26.)1 We conclude, among other things, that: 1) the Santa Barbara County Child Welfare Services (CWS) gave sufficient notice to three Indian tribes regarding the child's family ancestry under the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.), and 2) the juvenile court did not err by ruling that ICWA did not apply. We affirm.

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

FACTS In 2013, Mother and the child "tested positive for opiates at the time of the child's birth." Mother admitted using methamphetamine, marijuana, "and Norco which was not prescribed to her during her pregnancy." CWS filed a juvenile dependency petition (§ 300) alleging Mother's "continued drug use during her pregnancy" and "refusal to seek drug treatment" place the child at "substantial risk of physical harm." CWS alleged that Father's "engagement in criminal activity, including aggressive behaviors and substance abuse," places the child at a substantial risk of abuse and neglect. CWS removed the child from the home. The juvenile court declared M.G. to be "a person described by Welfare & Institutions Code § 300." CWS recommended that Mother receive family reunification services and participate in a case plan including drug treatment. The juvenile court terminated Father's family reunification services at the six-month prepermanency hearing. After 12 months of services, the court terminated Mother's family reunification services. On September 29, 2014, the court terminated Mother's and Father's parental rights to the child. ICWA At the February 21, 2013, detention hearing, the juvenile court said, "I have to find out from you if you have any Native American Indian heritage and, if so, what tribe." Mother responded: "No, I'm not sure." Father's counsel responded that, "as far as [Father] knows, [Father] has no Native American Indian heritage." Mother subsequently claimed she had "Cherokee [Indian] heritage through her [mother]." CWS interviewed family members to obtain information about the family's ancestral history. It then mailed completed ICWA-030 notice forms to the three Cherokee Indian tribes and the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians determined that M.G. "is neither registered nor eligible to register as a member of this tribe."