In re O.P. CA5

DISCUSSION

Father B.’s notice of appeal states that he is appealing the order denying reunification services. However, the only issue raised in his brief is the juvenile court’s failure to comply with the ICWA. The only relief sought is remand to permit the juvenile court to comply with the statutory requirements.

2. The relevant facts are not in dispute. The juvenile dependency petition was filed on April 23, 2015, and states that an Indian child inquiry was made of mother and neither child has known Indian ancestry. On April 29, 2015, Father J. filed a “Parental Notification of Indian Status” (Form ICWA-020) wherein he indicated he may have Indian ancestry. On the same date, mother filed the same form which indicated she may have Indian ancestry. Mother indicated on the form her maternal grandmother may have been a Blackfoot Indian. Father B. also filed this form on the same date and indicated he may have Indian ancestry. Neither father provided any information on the form to indicate to which tribe their Indian ancestry related, or through what relative such ancestry may have been passed through to the father. The detention report indicated that the ICWA did not apply. The…