In re Aurora C. CA2/7

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 28, 2024B326310California6,996 words

Opinion

Opinion

INTRODUCTION

Presumed father Hector O. appeals from the juvenile court’s order denying his request at the Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.3 permanency plan review hearing that minor Aurora C. be returned to his custody.1 We conclude the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion by denying Hector’s request while continuing family reunification services and conjoint counseling for him and Aurora. Hector also contends the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (Department) failed to comply with the inquiry requirements of the Indian Child Welfare Act (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) (ICWA) and related California law. The Department concedes the issue. Therefore, we conditionally affirm the juvenile court’s order and remand for full compliance with ICWA’s inquiry and notice provisions.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Minor Aurora (born 2012) is the daughter of Jacqueline C., and has two presumed fathers: (1) her biological father Jonathan S., and (2) appellant Hector O., the biological father of Aurora’s

All undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.

2 half-sisters I.O. (born 2013), L.C. (born 2018), and infant…

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.