Los Angeles County Department of Children & Family Services v. Jennifer C.
6 Cal. App. 5th 51
| Cal. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Charlotte (b. 2011) was placed in dependency after an incident in 2013 in which Mother allegedly rammed Father’s car with Charlotte inside and brandished a loaded handgun; both parents arrested.
- Juvenile court detained Charlotte, initially placed with maternal uncle, later with foster parents; reunification services were provided but later terminated for both parents.
- DCFS filed notices to the Blackfeet Tribe and federal agencies in Aug–Sept 2013 stating Mother’s claimed Blackfeet affiliation and including Mother’s tribal ID card and limited family information.
- The Blackfeet Tribe responded it found none of the listed individuals on its rolls and concluded Charlotte was not an Indian child based on information provided; tribe invited further information if available.
- At the six‑month review the juvenile court found Charlotte was not an Indian child and ICWA did not apply; at the section 366.26 hearing the court found Charlotte adoptable and terminated parental rights.
Issues
| Issue | Mother’s Argument | DCFS/Respondent’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DCFS’s ICWA notice to the Blackfeet Tribe was legally sufficient | Notices omitted identifying details for maternal grandmother, great‑grandparents, and a cousin who allegedly had Indian ancestry; thus tribe could not meaningfully determine Charlotte’s status and ICWA notice was defective | Notices contained Mother’s tribal ID, membership number, dates/places connected to reservation and clinic, and available family info; additional ancestral details were not known or required; tribe could request more if needed | Court held DCFS provided substantial evidence of adequate ICWA notice and any omission was not prejudicial; judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Kahlen W., 233 Cal.App.3d 1414 (California Ct. App.) (notice under ICWA ensures tribe can assert rights)
- In re Cheyanne F., 164 Cal.App.4th 571 (California Ct. App.) (ICWA notice must permit meaningful review of tribal records)
- In re S.B., 130 Cal.App.4th 1148 (California Ct. App.) (deficiencies in ICWA notice reviewed for harmless error)
- In re Francisco W., 139 Cal.App.4th 695 (California Ct. App.) (tribe’s determination of Indian status is conclusive)
- In re A.G., 204 Cal.App.4th 1390 (California Ct. App.) (agency’s admitted failure to inquire and notice under ICWA can require reversal)
- Tina L. v. Superior Court, 163 Cal.App.4th 262 (California Ct. App.) (California law tracks federal ICWA requirements)