In re J.H. CA2/8

Filed 5/13/22 In re J.H. CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 EIGHT

In re J.H. et al., Persons Coming B315480 Under the Juvenile Court Law. LOS ANGELES COUNTY (Los Angeles County DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN Super. Ct. No. 19CCJP01201E & F) AND FAMILY SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

J.P.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Robin R. Kesler, Juvenile Court Referee. Affirmed.

Christine E. Johnson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Rodrigo A. Castro-Silva, County Counsel, Kim Nemoy, Assistant County Counsel, and Kelly Emling, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. **********

Mother J.P. appeals the juvenile court’s order terminating her parental rights to children J.H. and A.H., raising only one claim of error, that the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (Department) made an inadequate inquiry under the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA; 25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.). We affirm. BACKGROUND Mother’s six children were detained after concerns of neglect were reported by the children’s school, and the Department’s investigation revealed domestic violence between mother and father, and other serious safety issues. The petition states the children have no known Indian ancestry, and that mother and father denied any Indian ancestry during an interview on January 10, 2019. The detention report confirms that both mother and father denied that they or the children have any Indian heritage. At the February 25, 2019 detention hearing, mother and father filed parental notification of Indian status forms (ICWA–020) indicating “I have no Indian ancestry as far as I know.” Paternal relatives were present at the detention hearing, including paternal grandmother, paternal grandfather, and paternal great-aunt. The juvenile court stated on the record “there is no reason to know this is a case involving the Indian Child Welfare Act as to either parent,” and no relative present at the hearing spoke up to say anything to the contrary. The minute order from the hearing recites that the “[p]arents are to keep the Department, their Attorney and the Court aware of any new information relating to possible ICWA status.” A similar admonition is recited on the ICWA–020 forms. At no time did any of the children’s relatives notify the Department or the court of any possible Indian heritage. The Department’s reports refer to numerous relatives whom the parents mentioned during interviews with the Department, including maternal grandmother, maternal grandfather, and eight maternal