In re N.Y. CA2/6

Filed 6/21/23 In re N.Y. CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 N.Y., a Person Coming 2d Juv. No. B322194 Under the Juvenile Court (Super. Ct. No. 22JV00197) Law. (Santa Barbara County)

SANTA BARBARA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

L.Y.,

Defendant and Appellant.

L.Y. (mother) appeals the juvenile court’s jurisdiction and disposition findings and orders made pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivisions (a) & (b).1 Mother’s

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

sole contention on appeal is that the Santa Barbara County Child Welfare Services (CWS) and the juvenile court did not comply with the initial inquiry requirements pursuant to the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 (ICWA) (25 U.S.C., § 1901 et seq.) and related California law.2 We affirm. Facts and Procedural History In June 2022, CWS petitioned the juvenile court to detain 13-year-old N.Y. after mother took him out of Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital against medical advice. Hospital staff alerted authorities and mother was subsequently stopped by highway patrol as she drove with N.Y. to Redding where maternal grandmother lived. The detention report indicated that mother met with a CWS social worker and reported she did not have any Indian ancestry. At the detention hearing, mother again denied having any Indian ancestry when asked by the juvenile court. In July 2022, at the initial contested jurisdiction and disposition hearing, father denied having any Indian ancestry. At CWS’s request, the juvenile court found there was no reason to believe ICWA applies. No party objected to the juvenile court’s ICWA finding. Mother subsequently completed an ICWA-020 form, “Parental Notification of Indian Status,” and declared, under penalty of perjury, that none of the criteria indicating Indian ancestry applied to her or N.Y. The disposition report indicated that CWS was unable to complete the family social study assessment with mother because