In re S.R. CA5

Filed 5/31/23 In re S.R. CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

In re S.R. et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

KERN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN F085626 SERVICES, (Super. Ct. Nos. JD141980-00, Plaintiff and Respondent, JD141981-00, JD141982-00)

v. OPINION S.R. et al.,

Defendants and Appellants.

THE COURT* APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Kern County. Christie Canales Norris, Judge. Jacob I. Olson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant, S.R. Shaylah Padgett-Weibel, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant, Jeremy C. Margo A. Raison, County Counsel, and Jennifer E. Feige, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Peña, Acting P. J., Smith, J. and DeSantos, J.

Jeremy C. (father), joined by S.R. (mother), appeal from the juvenile court’s order terminating parental rights as to their three minor children (Welf. & Inst. Code,1 § 366.26). Their sole contention on appeal is that the court erred by finding that the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) (ICWA) did not apply to the proceedings because the Kern County Department of Human Services (department) failed to conduct adequate inquiry into whether the children were potentially Indian children with regard to father’s side of the family.2 The department concedes error and agrees that remand is appropriate. We accept the department’s concession, conditionally reverse the finding that ICWA does not apply, and remand for proceedings to ensure ICWA inquiry compliance. In all other respects, we affirm the order terminating parental rights. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In April 2021, the department filed juvenile dependency petitions on behalf of then four-month-old R.C., then one-year-old S.C., and then four-year-old S.R., alleging each child came within the juvenile court’s jurisdiction under section 300, subdivision (b).3 The parents completed “PARENTAL NOTIFICATION OF INDIAN STATUS” (ICWA-020) forms. Mother’s form indicated she is or may be a member of or eligible for membership in a federally recognized Indian tribe, but did not specify a tribe. Father’s form indicated that none of the indicia giving reason to know the children were Indian children applied.