In re C.H. CA4/3
Filed 5/12/23 In re C.H. 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 C.H., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.
ORANGE COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES AGENCY, G062135 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 22DP1549) v. OPINION A.M.,
Defendant and Appellant.
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Daphne G. Sykes, Judge. Conditionally reversed and remanded with directions. Clare M. Lemon, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Leon J. Page, County Counsel, Karen L. Christensen and Jeannie Su, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. No appearance for the Minor.
A.M. (Mother) appeals from the jurisdiction findings and disposition order in which her minor son, C.H. (Minor), was declared a dependent of the court and removed from Mother’s custody. Mother’s sole contention on appeal is that the juvenile court and Orange County Social Services Agency (the Agency) failed to sufficiently inquire into claims that Minor may have Native American ancestry, as mandated by the Indian Child Welfare Act (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) (ICWA) and related California law (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 224 et seq.).1 The Agency concedes remand is proper because it hadn’t presented enough details of its properly conducted ICWA inquiry to the court below. We accept the Agency’s partial concession, conditionally reverse the judgment, and remand this matter for further proceedings. FACTS We set forth only those facts needed to resolve the ICWA issue and to provide relevant context. Minor is twelve years old. Minor’s father is deceased. In November 2022, Minor and Mother were staying at the maternal grandmother’s home. The Agency received a report that Mother was using drugs, was experiencing delusions and paranoia, and had stolen the grandmother’s car in the middle of the night to drive Minor to his maternal grandfather’s home. When asked about the driving incident, Minor reported that at some point during the trip Mother pushed in Minor’s eyes because she wanted to take the “magnets” out of them. Around five in the morning, Mother parked the car on a hill to watch the sunrise, but left the engine on. When the car began rolling backwards, Minor woke up Mother, who had fallen asleep at the wheel, so she could stop the car. The Agency applied for and obtained a protective custody warrant. Minor was removed from Mother’s custody and placed with the maternal grandmother. As
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)