In re A.R. CA2/8

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 30, 2022B314282California589 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION

On May 27, 2021, A.R. was detained from mother and father and placed with maternal uncle and his wife. The record does not show that maternal uncle was asked whether his family had Indian ancestry. At the detention hearing on June 2, 2021, mother and father filed parental notification of Indian status forms (ICWA–020) denying that they, A.R., or any lineal ancestor “is” or “may” be eligible for tribal membership. The court did not ask mother and father, who were present at the hearing, whether there was any reason to know A.R. was an Indian child. A Department report shows that mother and father again denied any Indian ancestry on June 30, 2021. At the combined jurisdictional and dispositional hearing, the court declared A.R. a dependent and removed him from mother and father. While this appeal was pending, the court returned A.R. to his parents’ custody. (We take judicial notice of the January 19, 2022 order on our own motion, and grant father’s request that we take judicial notice of another order that A.R. remained a dependent of the court.) Congress enacted ICWA “ ‘to protect the best interests of Indian children and to promote the stability and…

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.