Fear Not Law Articles: In re K.B.

In re K

In re K.B.

Filed 2/22/07 In re K.B. CA4/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

In re K.B., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN'S SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

K.S. et al.,

Defendants and Appellants.

E041045

(Super.Ct.No. J204074)

OPINION

APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Robert G. Fowler, Temporary Judge (Pursuant to Cal. Const., art. VI, § 21) and David S. Cohn, Judge. Reversed.

Jennifer Mack, under appointment by the Court of Appeal for Defendant and Appellant, K.S.

Kate M. Chandler and Richard Pfeiffer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal for Defendant and Appellant D.B.

Dennis E. Wagner, Interim County Counsel, and Danielle E. Wuchenich, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Michael D. Randall, under appointment by the Court of Appeal for Minor.

On appeal from an order terminating their parental rights to K.B., K.S. (Mother) and D.B. (Father, collectively â€

Description	On appeal from an order terminating their parental rights to K.B., K.S. (Mother) and D.B. (Father, collectively "Parents") claim that the juvenile court erred when it found that the San Bernardino County Department of Children's Services (DCS) complied with the notice requirements of the Indian Child Welfare Act , 25 United States Code, section 1901 et seq. (ICWA). They claim that the notice sent to the tribes did not contain all of the information that was readily available to DCS and therefore did not constitute meaningful notice. In addition, father claims that he was not provided with proper notice of his right to file a writ petition from the orders made at the hearing setting a hearing under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26. He therefore challenges the juvenile court's failure to provide him with six months of reunification services in order to determine whether a suitable relative placement existed for K.B. Finding that there is insufficient evidence in the record to establish that proper notice was given under the ICWA, court reverse.
Rating	0/5 1 2 3 4 5 0/5 based on 0 votes.