In re Y.D. CA4/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 5, 2022D080004California1,673 words

Opinion

Opinion

Do, J.

INTRODUCTION

The San Diego County Health and Human Services Agency (Agency) concedes it did not comply with its inquiry duties under the federal Indian Child Welfare Act (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) (ICWA) and Welfare and

Institutions Code1 section 224.2. And thus it agrees, the juvenile court erred in finding that reasonable inquiry had been made into the possible Indian ancestry of Y.D. and G.D. (the Children) and that ICWA did not apply, allowing the court to declare them dependents and removing them from their father, R.D. (Father). On the record before us, we agree with the Agency’s concession. The parties have submitted a joint stipulation for issuance of an immediate remittitur pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 8.272(c)(1). We will reverse the jurisdictional and dispositional orders and remand the matter with directions for the limited purpose of compliance with ICWA and section 224.2.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

In December 2021, the Agency filed dependency petitions for then one- year-old Y.D. and then one-month-old G.D.. At the detention hearing, Father’s counsel informed the juvenile court that Father claimed Cherokee ancestry. Father had no specific…

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.