In re R.W. CA3

Filed 9/25/23 In re R.W. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Placer) ----

In re R.W., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile C098398 Court Law.

PLACER COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH (Super. Ct. No. 53005303) AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

J.W.,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appellant J.W., mother of the minor, appeals from the juvenile court’s orders terminating parental rights and freeing the minor for adoption. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 366.26, 395; statutory section citations that follow are found in the Welfare and Institutions Code unless otherwise stated.) Mother contends the Placer County

1

Department of Health and Human Services (Department) and the juvenile court failed to comply with the initial inquiry requirements of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) (ICWA) and related California law. The Department does not dispute the inquiry in this case was inadequate and does not oppose a conditional affirmance with instructions for compliance with the ICWA. We conditionally affirm the juvenile court’s order, subject to ICWA compliance. We note that, under these circumstances, a joint application for a conditional affirmance and limited remand from the parties also would have been appropriate and would have permitted this court to issue the remittitur forthwith. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.272(c)(1).) We will incorporate the relevant facts into our discussion of the issue.

DISCUSSION Mother argues that, although parents, the paternal grandparents, and the maternal great-grandmother were asked about and denied Native American ancestry, the Department and the juvenile court nonetheless failed to fully comply with the initial inquiry requirements of the ICWA because the Department did not establish it tried to contact the maternal grandparents about possible Native American ancestry. We accept the Department’s concession that conditional affirmance and remand for further ICWA compliance is appropriate. “The ICWA protects the interests of Indian children and promotes the stability and security of Indian tribes by establishing minimum standards for removal of Indian children from their families, and by permitting tribal participation in dependency proceedings. [Citations.] A major purpose of the ICWA is to protect ‘Indian children who are members of or are eligible for membership in an Indian tribe.’ ” (In re A.W. (2019) 38 Cal.App.5th 655, 662.) The ICWA defines an “ ‘Indian child’ ” as a child who “is either (a) a member of an Indian tribe or (b) is eligible for membership in an Indian