People v. W.B.
55 Cal. 4th 30
| Cal. | 2012Background
- W.B., Jr. faced multiple section 602 delinquency petitions; he was ordered placed outside the home after disposition but later returned to his mother with Wraparound services.
- ICWA applicability in California delinquency cases had been unsettled; federal ICWA generally excludes delinquency placements based on acts that would be crimes if committed by an adult.
- Probation and social services considered ICWA may apply if Cherokee/Indian ancestry is asserted; in practice, many delinquency placements were not treated as ICWA proceedings.
- This case centers on whether ICWA notice and procedures were required for a foster-care placement arising from a section 602 delinquency disposition.
- California statutes (notably 224.2, 224.3, and 727.4) and Senate Bill 678 were analyzed to determine the scope of ICWA in delinquency versus dependency proceedings.
- The Supreme Court held that ICWA applies in the narrow subset where a delinquency disposition involves removal from home based on conditions in the home unrelated to the ward’s delinquent conduct, and generally not in straightforward delinquency placements based on criminal conduct.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ICWA applies to delinquency placements based on criminal conduct | W.B. argues ICWA should apply broadly to delinquency placements. | State argues ICWA exclusions apply to most delinquency placements. | ICWA does not apply to standard delinquency placements based on criminal conduct. |
| Duty of inquiry and notice for Indian status in delinquency proceedings | Inquiry is required in all cases involving potential foster care. | Notice is limited to Indian child custody proceedings. | Duty to inquire exists; notice only required if case qualifies as an Indian child custody proceeding. |
| Scope of California ICWA statutes (§§ 224.2, 224.3) | California law expands ICWA to delinquency. | California law aligns with federal intent to exclude most delinquency cases. | Statutes implement ICWA narrowly; notice/enforcement apply only in the defined custody contexts. |
| Application to the present case (602, no termination of parental rights contemplated) | Placement outside home presumed under ICWA when not based on delinquency. | Placement here was based on delinquent conduct; ICWA not triggered. | ICWA not required for this 602 placement; no termination contemplated. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Santos Y., 92 Cal.App.4th 1274 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001) (ICWA notice and applicability addressed in California context)
- In re Enrique O., 137 Cal.App.4th 728 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006) (Delinquency placement based on criminal acts generally excluded from ICWA; narrow exceptions when abuse/neglect drive placement)
- In re S.B., 130 Cal.App.4th 1148 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005) (ICWA notice and standards in Indian child custody proceedings)