Filed 8/4/17 In re T.T. CA4/1
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA



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

SAN DIEGO COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

TARA T.,

Defendant and Appellant.
D072020


(Super. Ct. No. EJ3119B)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Gary M. Bubis, Judge. Reversed and remanded with directions.
Pamela R. Tripp for Defendant and Appellant.
Thomas E. Montgomery, County Counsel, and Eliza Molk, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Tara T. (Mother) appeals from the juvenile court's jurisdiction and disposition hearing over her daughter, T.T. Mother contends the court and San Diego County Health and Human Services Agency (Agency) did not make appropriate inquiries under the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA, 25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.), and thus, there is not substantial evidence to support the court's finding that ICWA did not apply. The record shows that T.T. might be eligible for enrollment in the Campo Band of Mission Indians. The Agency concedes the evidence in the record does not support the court's ICWA finding and the case should be remanded for the receipt of further evidence on the enrollment eligibility issue. We conditionally reverse and remand for compliance with ICWA.
BACKGROUND
T.T.'s Dependency
In December 2016, the Agency filed a dependency petition under section 300, subdivision (g) on behalf of newborn baby T.T. based on Mother's incarceration and her inability to provide care or support for the child. Mother's older son, W.T., had previously been adjudicated a juvenile dependent and adopted. The Agency's detention report also noted Mother's use of illicit drugs during her pregnancy and after giving birth.
Hospital records and drug tests confirmed that T.T. was born with drugs in her system as a result of Mother's drug use. Mother had no plan to care or provide for T.T. The Agency filed an amended petition, adding allegations that T.T. was a dependent child under section 300, subdivision (b). The court made a true finding on the petition under section 300, subdivision (b), and removed T.T. from parental care.
ICWA Compliance
From case inception, Mother reported American Indian ancestry with the Campo Band of Kumeyaay Indians. The Agency noted that ICWA was previously found to apply in sibling W.T.'s dependency case. At the detention hearing, the court indicated that ICWA may apply and ordered the Agency to notify appropriate tribes. Subsequently, an Indian expert witness opined, based on her tribal associations and conferences with the Agency's social worker, that T.T. was eligible for enrollment or membership in the Campo Band of Kumeyaay Indians and the Barona Band of Mission Indians (Barona). In December 2016, the Agency formally notified various Indian tribes of the dependency proceedings.
The evidence before the court regarding ICWA was as follows: The Agency had received a letter from Barona, stating that T.T. was not enrolled in the tribe and did not have a parent enrolled with the tribe to satisfy the "direct lineage" requirement. The Agency had also received two letters from the Campo Band of Mission Indians (Campo), a federally recognized Indian tribe; one letter stated that Mother was a lineal descendant of an enrolled Campo tribal member (her mother) and the second letter stated that T.T. was not "at this time" an enrolled member of Campo. At a settlement conference, the Agency's counsel stated that there was "information . . . through . . . Campo [that] neither the mother nor the child would qualify under their blood quantum requirement." The court agreed, though the Agency now concedes the record contains no such "blood quantum" information. The court went on to find that ICWA did not apply.
At the jurisdiction and disposition hearing, the court confirmed its finding that ICWA did not apply. It acknowledged, however, that a child need only be eligible for tribal membership for ICWA to apply and that Mother's biological mother was an enrolled member of Campo.
DISCUSSION
Mother contends the court did not properly fulfill its duty of inquiry prior to arriving at its finding that ICWA does not apply. Specifically, she argues that further inquiries should have been made regarding whether T.T. is eligible for membership in Campo, and there was no "blood quantum" information to show that T.T. is not eligible for membership. The Agency concedes these points, and we accept its concession. ICWA defines an Indian child as any unmarried person who is under age 18 and is either: (1) a member of an Indian tribe, or (2) eligible for membership in an Indian tribe and the biological child of a member of an Indian tribe. (25 U.S.C. § 1903(4).) The letters from Campo do not speak to T.T.'s eligibility for tribal membership nor do they disavow Mother's membership. Further inquiries are appropriate. (In re Shane G. (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 1532, 1538-1539.)
We reverse the judgment and remand the case to the juvenile court for a further ICWA inquiry with respect to the Campo tribe, a finding whether ICWA applies, and any necessary ICWA notice and further proceedings in compliance with ICWA. If the tribe claims T.T. is an Indian child, the court shall proceed in conformity with ICWA. If not, the court shall reinstate the judgment. (In re Francisco W. (2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 695, 710.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is reversed. This case is remanded to the juvenile court with directions to conduct a further ICWA inquiry with respect to the Campo tribe, determine whether ICWA applies, and if, necessary following the inquiry and determination, to order ICWA notice and conduct any further proceedings in compliance with ICWA. If the tribe claims T.T. is an Indian child, the court shall proceed in conformity with ICWA; if not, the court shall reinstate the judgment.



HUFFMAN, J.

WE CONCUR:



BENKE, Acting P. J.



IRION, J.