In re N.W. CA3
Filed 5/3/23 In re N.W. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (San Joaquin) ----
In re N.W. et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile C096840 Court Law.
SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES (Super. Ct. No. STK-JD-DP- AGENCY, 2020-0000425)
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
F.W.,
Defendant and Appellant.
Appellant F.W., father of the minors, appeals from juvenile court orders terminating parental rights and freeing the minors for adoption. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 366.26, 395.)1 Father contends the orders should be reversed because the juvenile court and the San Joaquin County Human Services Agency (Agency) failed to comply
1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.
1
with the notice and inquiry requirements of the Indian Child Welfare Act (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) (ICWA). Because the juvenile court did not make ICWA findings, we will conditionally reverse and remand the matter for ICWA compliance. BACKGROUND A section 300 petition was filed on behalf of the minors in November 2020 following a failed safety plan. The detention report reflected that mother indicated she did not have any Indian ancestry and father indicated he had “Oklahoma Cherokee” heritage through his maternal grandmother. The social worker completed an ICWA-10 form and stated that ICWA notices would be sent. Neither parent appeared at the November 2020 detention hearing. The minors were ordered detained from parental custody and were placed in the home of T., a paternal relative. The parents attended the jurisdiction hearing on December 1, 2020, and were appointed counsel. The juvenile court inquired about possible Indian ancestry. Mother stated she did not have any Indian ancestry and father stated that, on his maternal side, his grandmother’s mother was “Cherokee Indian out of Oklahoma, but she passed away” and her husband had remarried. The juvenile court directed father to provide that information to the Agency and the jurisdiction hearing was continued. On December 8, 2020, the Agency filed ICWA-20 forms that had been completed and signed by the parents on October 16, 2020. On the forms, mother indicated she had no Native American ancestry; father indicated he had Cherokee Indian ancestry with a tribe in Oklahoma through his maternal grandmother. On January 5, 2021, the Agency filed ICWA notice documentation. The notice contained identifying information for mother and the maternal grandparents who were born in Vietnam. The notice also contained names, addresses, birth/death dates, and tribal affiliations (Apache, Cherokee, Choctaw, and Navajo) for father and his maternal line, which included the minors’ grandmother, great-grandmother (deceased), great-
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)