In re L.L. CA2/6

California Court of Appeal Mar 28, 2023 No. B322402MUnpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The appellate court held that the failure of the child welfare agency and the juvenile court to conduct an initial inquiry into the children's Indian ancestry was harmless error because the record was augmented on appeal to include evidence that the agency subsequently interviewed extended family members, all of whom denied Indian ancestry.

Issues

Whether the child welfare agency and juvenile court failed to comply with the duty of initial inquiry under ICWA.
Whether the failure to conduct an initial inquiry of extended family members constitutes harmless error when the record is augmented on appeal to show subsequent compliance.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“We conclude the error was harmless in view of the recent augmentation of the appellate record, which reflects CWS has complied with its duty of initial inquiry and no known Indian ancestry has been revealed.”

“We conclude the failure of CWS and the juvenile court to comply with their duty of initial inquiry has subsequently been cured as evidenced by the augmented record on appeal, and therefore the error is harmless.”

Filed 3/28/23 In re L.L. CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 L.L., et al., Persons 2d Juv. No. B322402 Coming Under the Juvenile (Super. Ct. Nos. 20JV00283, Court Law. 20JV00284) (Santa Barbara County)

SANTA BARBARA COUNTY ORDER MODIFYING DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL OPINION AND DENYING SERVICES, REHEARING

Plaintiff and Respondent, [NO CHANGE IN THE JUDGMENT] v.

L.P.,

Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT: It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on March 14, 2023, be modified as follows:

1. On page 6, at the top of the page, after the sentence beginning with “The duty to inquire” and ending with “an Indian child” the citation is modified to read as follows:

(§ 224.2, subds. (a)-(c); In re E.L. (2022) 82 Cal.App.5th 597, 607, review granted Nov. 30, 2022, S276508.)

2. On page 6, the third full paragraph, after the sentence beginning with, “Currently, there is a split of authority” and ending with “pursuant to ICWA,” insert a new sentence as follows:

This issue is pending review before our state Supreme Court. (In re Kenneth D. (2022) 82 Cal.App.5th 1027, review granted Nov. 30, 2022, S276649.)

There is no change in judgment. Appellant’s petition for rehearing is denied.

GILBERT, P. J. YEGAN, J. BALTODANO, J.

Filed 3/14/23 In re L.L. CA2/6 (unmodified opinion) 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 re L.L. CA2/6

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

GILBERT, P. J. YEGAN, J. BALTODANO, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

SANTA BARBARA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES,

YEGAN, J.

GILBERT, P. J.

BALTODANO, J.

AI Brief