In re M.L. CA4/2

INTRODUCTION

E. S. appeals an order terminating her parental rights to M. L. She contends that

her due process rights were violated by lack of notice that at the selection and

implementation hearing, pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26, the

San Bernardino County Children and Family Services department (CFS) would

recommend adoption as the child‟s permanent plan.1 She also contends that the order

must be reversed for failure to comply with the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA).

(25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.)

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

When M. L. was 21 months old, E. S. and her boyfriend (who is not M. L.‟s

father) were arrested on charges involving possession of heroin. Mother admitted to the

arresting officer that she was under the influence of heroin when she was arrested. M. L.

was detained and placed with his maternal grandmother, L. S. M. L.‟s father, who had an

extensive criminal record and an extensive history of drug abuse, was in prison at the

time of M. L.‟s detention.

A petition pursuant to section 300 was filed on August 27, 2010. It alleged that

E. S. had a drug problem which impeded her ability to care for M. L. and that she…