In re Bailey B. CA4/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 3, 2025E085477California1,658 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

In April 2023, DPSS took newborn Bailey into protective custody after Mother

and the baby tested positive for amphetamines at Bailey’s birth. Mother disclosed that

she had been using methamphetamine daily for the past five years. Father disclosed that

he had recently used methamphetamine with Mother.

Mother lived with the maternal great-aunt. Mother identified the maternal aunt as

someone willing to care for Bailey; the maternal aunt and the maternal grandmother lived

in Oregon.

Both parents denied any Indian ancestry when interviewed by the social worker,

and they filed Judicial Council ICWA-020 forms indicating the same.

DPSS filed a petition under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivision

(b), alleging that both parents abused controlled substances. (Unlabeled statutory

Because ICWA uses the term “Indian,” we use it as well “to reflect the statutory language.” (In re Dezi C. (2024) 16 Cal.5th 1112, 1125, fn. 1 (Dezi C.).) No disrespect is intended.

2 references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.) The court detained Bailey from

both parents. It found that “ICWA likely does not apply” but directed DPSS to continue

its ICWA…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.