In re Z.A. CA2/1
Filed 1/27/21 In re Z.A. CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 ONE
In re Z.A., a Person Coming B306872 Under the Juvenile Court Law. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 18CCJP06150)
LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
K.A.,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from the supplemental jurisdictional and dispositional orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Lisa A. Brackelmanns, Commissioner. Conditionally affirmed with directions.
Robert McLaughlin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rodrigo A. Castro-Silva, Acting County Counsel and Jessica S. Mitchell, Deputy County Counsel for Plaintiff and Respondent. ____________________
K.A. (mother) appeals from the juvenile court’s supplemental jurisdictional and dispositional orders regarding her son, Z.A. Mother contends the juvenile court and respondent Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) failed to investigate adequately Z.A.’s father’s claim of possible Indian heritage, as required under the Indian Child Welfare Act (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) (ICWA) and its corresponding provisions under California law (see Welf. & Inst. Code,1 § 224 et seq.). DCFS concedes further investigation is warranted. Accordingly, we conditionally affirm the juvenile court’s orders and remand for the purpose of ICWA compliance.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY We limit our summary to the information relevant to resolution of the single issue in this appeal. On September 25, 2018, DCFS filed a section 300 petition seeking to detain 10-year-old Z.A. based on allegations of mother’s physical abuse of Z.A., mother’s mental and emotional problems, and mother’s history of substance abuse and current abuse of marijuana.
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)