Fear Not Law Articles: In reTrent V.

In reTrent V

In reTrent V.

Filed 2/20/07 In reTrent V. CA2/5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

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

B193155

(Los Angeles County

Super. Ct. No. CK43621)

LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

MABEL V.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, David Doi and Irwin H. Garfinkel, Judge. Affirmed in part; reversed in part with directions.

Andrea R. St. Julian, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Raymond G. Fortner, Jr., Los Angeles County Counsel, and Judith A. Luby, Senior Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

______________________

I. Introduction AND STATEMENT OF ISSUES

The mother, Mabel V., appeals from the orders terminating her parental rights to the child, Trent V. pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code^{^[1]} section 366.26 and finding that there had been proper compliance with the notice requirements of the Indian Child Welfare Act. (25 U.S.C. §§ 1901-1963.) On January 19, 2006, we reversed the juvenile court's June 29, 2005 parental rights termination order and remanded the matter for the sole purpose of complying with the notice provisions of the Indian Child Welfare Act. (In re Trent V. (Jan. 19, 2006, B184197) [nonpub. opn.].) We further ordered, â€

Description	The mother, appeals from the orders terminating her parental rights to the child. pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 and finding that there had been proper compliance with the notice requirements of the Indian Child Welfare Act. (25 U.S.C. SS 1901 - 1963.) On January 19, 2006, court reversed the juvenile court's June 29, 2005 parental rights termination order and remanded the matter for the sole purpose of complying with the notice provisions of the Indian Child Welfare Act. (In re Trent V. (Jan. 19, 2006, B184197) [nonpub. opn.].) Court further ordered, "If after proper notice is given, the child is determined not to be a Native American, the juvenile court is directed to reinstate the parental rights termination order." (Id. [typed opn. at p. 8].) On appeal, the mother claims the termination order should be reversed a second time because the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services ("the department") failed to provide proper notice as required by the Indian Child Welfare Act. Court agree with the department and reverse the parental rights termination order solely for purposes of complying with the Indian Child Welfare Act.
Rating	0/5 1 2 3 4 5 0/5 based on 0 votes.