In re T.L. CA3

Filed 5/17/23 In re T.L. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Amador) ----

In re T.L., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court C097010 Law.

AMADOR COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL (Super. Ct. No. 21-DP-00827) SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

M.L.,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appellant M.L. (father), father of the minor, appeals from the juvenile court’s order terminating parental rights and freeing the minor for adoption. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 366.26, 395.)1 Father contends the juvenile court and the Amador County Department of Social Services (Department) failed to comply with the requirements of the Indian

1 Further undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.

1

Child Welfare Act of 1978 (ICWA) (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.). The Department concedes error in its initial inquiry. We will conditionally affirm and remand for limited ICWA proceedings. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND A detailed recitation of the facts and non-ICWA related procedural history is unnecessary to our resolution of this appeal. Father is the biological father of the minor. On August 17, 2021, the Department filed a dependency petition on behalf of the minor pursuant to section 300, subdivision (g), alleging the minor was left without provision or support after mother was killed in a single car accident and father was incarcerated in state prison. The detention report stated the ICWA may or does apply based on the following information: The social worker spoke with maternal uncle K.F., who advised that the family had Miwok and Washoe ancestry and, although they “did not have a tribal contact,” the family was “active in the Native culture.” The social worker contacted paternal great-grandmother C.F., who also stated the family had Miwok and Washoe heritage. The paternal great-grandmother stated that the family was still grieving the loss of their granddaughter and would find additional information and contact the social worker. The Department had not been able to inquire of father regarding possible Indian heritage. The detention report noted the family’s previous dependency action in Amador County involving two of mother’s siblings. In that 2004 case, it was reported that the maternal grandfather, C.F., Sr., was a descendent of a Miwok Indian and a Washoe Indian. At that time, a representative of the Washoe Tribe of Nevada and California informed the social worker that C.F., Sr., was registered as 7/16ths Washoe but had removed himself from the rolls of that tribe and registered with another tribe. The Washoe tribe stated C.F., Sr.’s, children would therefore not be eligible for services through the Washoe tribe. Notwithstanding that information, the agency in that