In re N.R. CA3
Filed 12/6/23 In re N.R. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Yolo) ----
In re N.R. et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile C097369 Court Law.
YOLO COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN (Super. Ct. Nos. JV20221201, SERVICES AGENCY, JV20221202)
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
D.R.,
Defendant and Appellant.
Appellant D.R. (father), father of the minors, M.R. and N.R., appeals from the juvenile court’s jurisdictional and dispositional orders. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 300, 361, 395.)1 Father contends the juvenile court and the Yolo County Health and Human
1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.
1
Services Agency (Agency) failed to comply with the notice and inquiry requirements of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 (ICWA) (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.). We will vacate the juvenile court’s ICWA finding and remand for limited ICWA proceedings. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Because the sole issue on appeal is ICWA compliance, a detailed recitation of the non-ICWA related facts and procedural history is unnecessary to our resolution of this appeal. The Agency filed a petition in August 2022, pursuant to section 300, subdivisions (b) and (c), alleging the minors, M.R. (then age 16) and N.R. (then age 13), were at substantial risk of harm. Both allegations stated father had failed to provide adequate support, care, or supervision by causing persistent and pervasive parental alienation of the mother, J.R. (mother), undermining mother’s parental authority, and encouraging the minors to leave mother’s home “at great physical peril.” The petition alleged the minors had displayed significant emotional damage in mother’s home. The petition further alleged that mother was unable or unwilling to provide adequate care, support, and/or supervision of the minors. The juvenile court held an initial hearing on August 9, 2022, and the court found father was the presumed father of the minors. The court detained M.R. from father only and detained N.R. in foster care. On August 19, 2022, M.R. was also detained from mother by the Yolo County Sheriff’s Office. The Agency filed an amended petition on August 23, 2022, to reflect M.R.’s detention, alleging that mother failed to adhere to the safety plan. The court held a further detention hearing and ordered M.R. detained from mother. Pursuant to the ICWA, the Agency inquired of the parents at the outset of the proceedings, and indicated there was reason to believe the children were or may be Indian children. Mother reported the maternal grandmother was a member of the Wiyot Tribe. The maternal grandmother confirmed she is an enrolled member. In its detention
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)