P.L. v. Superior Court CA3

Filed 1/30/24 P.L. v. Superior Court CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (San Joaquin) ----

P.L.,

Petitioner, C099195

v. (Super. Ct. No. STK-JV-DP- 2018-0000097) THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY,

Respondent;

SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY et al.,

Real Parties in Interest.

P.L. (mother), the mother of F.L. (son) and P.H. (daughter), petitions for an extraordinary writ (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.452) to vacate the juvenile court’s August 8, 2023 review hearing orders terminating her reunification services and setting a hearing pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26.1 Mother contends respondent juvenile court and the San Joaquin County Human Services Agency (Agency)

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.

1

failed to adequately comply with the inquiry requirements of the Indian Child Welfare Act (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) (ICWA).2 Because the circumstances of this case are unique and further ICWA inquiry is appropriate, we will issue a peremptory writ of mandate directing respondent juvenile court to do the following: to vacate its finding that the ICWA inquiry and notice provisions were satisfied and that ICWA does not apply, to order the Agency to conduct further inquiry of available relatives and provide any new information to the relevant tribes, as necessary, and to enter updated ICWA findings prior to proceeding with a section 366.26 hearing. We will vacate the stay previously issued by this court. BACKGROUND In January 2018, son and daughter were removed from mother’s care after the Santa Clara County juvenile court sustained a dependency petition filed by the Santa Clara County Social Services Agency (SSA) pursuant to section 300. Mother indicated she had “Cherokee and Blackfoot” ancestry through the minors’ maternal grandmother D.R. Daughter’s paternal grandmother B.L. stated she and her son D.H. (daughter’s father) did not have any Native American heritage. Daughter’s father subsequently filed an ICWA-020 form indicating he did not have any Native American heritage. The Santa Clara juvenile court found ICWA may apply and instructed the SSA to provide notice to the relevant tribes.