In re E.O. CA4/3

California Court of Appeal Oct 6, 2022 No. G061285Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court conditionally reversed the termination of parental rights and remanded the case because the Social Services Agency failed to conduct an adequate initial inquiry into the child's potential American Indian heritage as required by the Indian Child Welfare Act. The court held that it is not the appropriate venue to assess the adequacy of post-judgment investigations and that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to rule on such matters while the appeal was pending.

Issues

Whether the Social Services Agency failed to conduct an adequate inquiry into the child's potential American Indian heritage under the Indian Child Welfare Act.
Whether the Court of Appeal should admit evidence of a post-judgment ICWA investigation and dismiss the appeal as moot.
Whether the trial court had jurisdiction to conduct an ICWA inquiry while the judgment was on appeal.

Disposition. Reversed and remanded

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“It is undisputed that SSA never inquired of minor’s extended family members, and thus the investigation was inadequate to support a finding that ICWA does not apply.”

“The Court of Appeal is not the appropriate venue for determining if SSA’s postjudgment investigation was adequate.”

Filed 10/6/22 In re E.O. CA4/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

In re E.O., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

ORANGE COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES AGENCY, G061285 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 20DP0726) v. OPINION CARLOS O.,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Dennis J. Keough, Judge. Reversed and remanded with directions. Motions to take additional evidence, augment the record, and dismiss the appeal. Denied. Megan Turkat Schirn, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Leon J. Page, County Counsel, and Karen L. Christensen, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. No appearance for the Minor. * * *

In this juvenile dependency case, the father appeals from an order terminating his parental rights. He contends the court erred by failing to make an adequate inquiry under the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), 25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq. Specifically, he contends SSA failed to interview extended family members regarding minor’s potential American Indian heritage. Social Services Agency (SSA) concedes the error. After the present appeal was filed, SSA allegedly conducted the investigation that was initially lacking, returned to the trial court, and the trial court found, once again, that ICWA did not apply based on the additional evidence. SSA has filed a motion to receive additional evidence on appeal: the evidence revealed in the postappeal investigation and the court’s subsequent order.1 SSA contends the evidence reveals that the minor has no American Indian heritage and thus moves to dismiss the appeal as moot in light of the evidence they proffered. As this court has consistently held, the Court of Appeal is not the appropriate venue for assessing the adequacy of SSA’s investigation in the first instance. Accordingly, we deny the motion and conditionally reverse the judgment.

In re E.O. CA4/3

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

DISPOSITION

BEDSWORTH, ACTING P. J.

MOORE, J.

AI Brief