In re A.R. CA2/6

Filed 5/27/22 In re A.R. 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 A.R., a Person Coming 2d Juv. No. B315182 Under the Juvenile Court Law. (Super. Ct. No. J072274) (Ventura County)

VENTURA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

A.R.,

Defendant and Appellant.

A.R. (father) appeals the juvenile court’s orders terminating parental rights to his two-year-old daughter, A.R.1

1 All further references to A.R. are to the child.

(Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26.)2 He contends the juvenile court and Ventura County Human Services Agency (HSA) failed to comply with their duties of inquiry under the Indian Child Welfare Act (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.; ICWA) and related California law. The juvenile court found ICWA did not apply based solely on the parents’ denials of Indian ancestry. Neither HSA nor the court asked any of A.R.’s extended family members whether she is or may be an Indian child, as required by section 224.2, subdivision (b). HSA concedes that “because certain relatives were readily accessible in this case . . . father is probably correct that HSA and the court could have asked those relatives about Indian ancestry and that the court may have erred by accepting just mother’s and father’s denial of any Indian ancestry.” HSA argues, however, that any error was nonprejudicial or harmless under the facts of this case. We agree that HSA was required to expand its ICWA inquiry to A.R.’s extended family members and that the juvenile court erred by making its ICWA determination based on an insufficient inquiry. Further, the error was prejudicial because it is not known what information the relatives would have provided had a proper inquiry been made. We conditionally affirm and remand for the juvenile court and HSA to comply with the inquiry provisions of ICWA and California law.