Filed 12/27/17 In re S.L. CA3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(El Dorado)
----




In re S.L., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. C085390


EL DORADO COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

P.L.,

Defendant and Appellant.

(Super. Ct. No. SDP20160044)



Appellant P.L., father of minor S.L., appeals from the juvenile court’s orders terminating parental rights. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 366.26, 395.) He contends the El Dorado County Health and Human Services Agency (Agency) failed to comply with the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) by failing to notify the Blackfeet Tribe of the dependency proceedings.
The Agency filed a letter in response stating it agreed the Blackfeet Tribe was not noticed and conditional reversal was required.
We agree with the parties and shall conditionally reverse.
DISCUSSION
The ICWA protects the interests of Indian children and promotes the stability and security of Indian tribes by establishing minimum standards for, and permitting tribal participation in, dependency actions. (25 U.S.C. §§ 1901, 1902, 1903(1), 1911(c), 1912; In re Levi U. (2000) 78 Cal.App.4th 191, 195-196.) When the juvenile court knows or has reason to know that a child involved in a dependency proceeding is an Indian child, the ICWA requires that notice of the proceedings be given to any federally recognized Indian tribe of which the child might be a member or eligible for membership. (25 U.S.C. §§ 1903(8), 1912(a); In re Robert A. (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 982, 989.) A mere suggestion of Indian ancestry is sufficient to trigger the notice requirement. (In re Robert A., at p. 989.) “Notice shall be sent to all tribes of which the child may be a member or eligible for membership” until such time as the child’s tribe has been determined. (§ 224.2, subd. (a)(3).) Failure to comply with the notice provisions and determine whether ICWA applies is prejudicial error. (In re Kahlen W. (1991) 233 Cal.App.3d. 1414, 1424; In re Desiree F. (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 460, 472.)
Here, the mother reported that she had some Indian ancestry, but did not know with what tribe. She said her uncle in Oklahoma “receives a native check,” but she did not know his phone number. The social worker obtained additional family ancestry information from mother. The minor’s legal guardian reported that the minor had Cherokee ancestry through his maternal grandfather. The social worker also obtained additional family ancestry information from the legal guardian.
The Agency then prepared the ICWA notice, presumably relying at least in part on the additional family ancestry information later provided. The mother’s affiliations were listed as the Blackfeet Tribe, Cherokee Nation, Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, and United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee.
The ICWA notice was sent to the three Cherokee tribes, each of which responded that S.L. was not a member or eligible for membership. Although the social worker’s report stated that the ICWA notice was sent to the Blackfeet Tribe, the Blackfeet Tribe was not listed on the proof of service, nor was any other evidence provided that the notice was sent.
The paternal grandmother subsequently reported that father had Apache ancestry. Another ICWA notice was prepared, containing additional identifying information regarding father and the paternal grandfather’s Apache heritage. This updated ICWA notice was sent to multiple tribes, and multiple tribes responded that S.L. was neither a tribe member nor eligible for membership. The updated notice was not sent to the Blackfeet Tribe.
Because the Agency had reason to know the minor may be eligible for membership or services with the Blackfeet Tribe, notice to that tribe was required.
DISPOSITION
The orders of the juvenile court terminating parental rights are conditionally reversed, and the matter is remanded to the juvenile court with directions to order the Agency to provide the Blackfeet Tribe with proper notice of the proceedings under the ICWA. If, after proper notice to the tribe, the minor is determined to be an Indian child as defined by the ICWA, the juvenile court must conduct a new section 366.26 hearing in conformity with all provisions of the ICWA. If no response is received or the tribe determines the minor is not an Indian child, the juvenile court shall reinstate all previous findings and orders.




/s/
Duarte, J.



We concur:



/s/
Raye, P. J.




/s/
Renner, J.