In re A.K. CA3
Filed 5/18/21 In re A.K. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Sutter) ----
In re A.K. et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile C092718 Court Law.
SUTTER COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN (Super. Ct. Nos. SERVICES DEPARTMENT, DPSQ190000009, DPSQ190000010) Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
P.R.,
Defendant and Appellant.
P.R., father of the minors, challenges the juvenile court’s order terminating parental rights and freeing the minors for adoption. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 366.26,
1
395.)1 He contends the juvenile court and the Sutter County Health and Human Services Department (Department) failed to comply with the requirements of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.). We will reverse and remand for limited ICWA proceedings. BACKGROUND Because the sole issue on appeal is ICWA compliance, a detailed recitation of the non-ICWA related facts and procedural history is unnecessary to our resolution of this appeal. On January 29, 2019, the Department filed a dependency petition on behalf of the minors A.K. (13 years old) and C.R. (11 years old) pursuant to section 300, subdivision (b). The identical petitions alleged failure to protect the minors due to the parents’ inability to provide adequate food, clothing, shelter, supervision, and medical treatment for the minors. The February 2019 jurisdiction report noted the parents filled out and filed parental notifications of Indian status, with father indicating no known Indian ancestry, and mother indicating possible Indian ancestry with the Cherokee Tribe of Oklahoma. On February 21, 2019, the Department informed the juvenile court that the social worker was working with mother to obtain information regarding her family background. Mother said there might be Cherokee ancestry out of Oklahoma through the maternal great-great-grandparents. Mother provided the juvenile court with the maternal grandfather’s name and birthdate and the maternal great-grandparents’ names, and noted the maternal great-grandmother and the maternal great-great-grandmother were both deceased but the maternal great-grandfather was still living. She also provided the maternal great-great-grandfather’s first name. The juvenile court asked mother to obtain
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)