History
  • No items yet
midpage
216 Cal. App. 4th 1391
Cal. Ct. App.
2013
Read the full case

Background

  • G.C., Sr. appeals a 2011 order terminating parental rights to the minor, arising from dependency proceedings started in 2004
  • The Tribe (Tyme Maidu/Berry Creek) intervened and placement followed tribal preferences under ICWA
  • Tribal customary adoption became operative July 1, 2010; the statute and court rules require tribal consultation for this option
  • By December 2011 the social/ICWA expert reports and Tribe involvement addressed adoption, but father did not object to tribal-adoption procedures at the hearing
  • Mother relinquished parental rights; Tribe withdrew its intervention after relinquishment; the juvenile court ordered adoption by the foster family
  • This appeal centers on whether failure to address tribal customary adoption procedures is forfeited and whether any error was harmless

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether lack of objection forfeits tribal-adoption procedures G.C. argues failure to object forfeits the issue Department contends forfeiture applies; errors harmless Forfeiture applies; issues waived on appeal
If not forfeited, were the procedural errors harmless Errors affected tribal-consultation findings and plan for tribal customary adoption Harmless under ICWA policy and record shows tribe supported adoption by Cynthia N. Harmless error; adoption upheld

Key Cases Cited

  • In re Casey D., 70 Cal.App.4th 38 (Cal. App. 1999) (forfeiture of procedural objections in dependency cases when not timely raised)
  • In re Celine R., 31 Cal.4th 45 (Cal. 2003) (ICWA-related permanency planning considerations)
  • In re Dennis H., 88 Cal.App.4th 94 (Cal. App. 2001) (general forfeiture doctrine in dependency proceedings)
  • In re Riva M., 235 Cal.App.3d 403 (Cal. App. 1991) (forfeiture and procedural defects in dependency matters; impact on jurisdiction)
  • In re Urayna L., 75 Cal.App.4th 883 (Cal. App. 1999) (forfeiture rule for inadequate adoption assessments)
  • In re Lorenzo C., 54 Cal.App.4th 1330 (Cal. App. 1997) (twice-discussed forfeiture and findings in dependency cases)
  • In re W.B., Jr., 55 Cal.4th 30 (Cal. 2012) (ICWA considerations; tribal ties and permanence)
  • In re H.R., 208 Cal.App.4th 751 (Cal. App. 2012) (tribal customary adoption serves to preserve tribal ties without terminating parental rights)
  • In re S.B., 130 Cal.App.4th 1148 (Cal. App. 2005) (state standards supplemental to ICWA; harmless-error standard)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: Butte County Department of Employment & Social Services v. G.C.
Court Name: California Court of Appeal
Date Published: Jun 7, 2013
Citations: 216 Cal. App. 4th 1391; 157 Cal. Rptr. 3d 826; 2013 WL 2456484; 2013 Cal. App. LEXIS 448; C070086
Docket Number: C070086
Court Abbreviation: Cal. Ct. App.
Log In
    Butte County Department of Employment & Social Services v. G.C., 216 Cal. App. 4th 1391