In re B.T.
Filed 7/26/06 In re B.T. CA3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(Sacramento)
----
| In re B.T. et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. | |
| SACRAMENTO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DANNY T., Defendant and Appellant. |
C051683 (Super. Ct. Nos. JD218873, JD221773) |
Danny T. (appellant), the father of B.T. and E.T., appeals from the juvenile court's order terminating his parental rights. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 366.26, 395; undesignated section references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.) Appellant's sole contention on appeal is the Sacramento County Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) violated the notice requirements of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 (ICWA). (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) We affirm with respect to B.T., but reverse and remand for compliance with ICWA notice for E.T.FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On December 12, 2002, DHHS filed a juvenile dependency petition on behalf of B.T. The petition alleged that when the mother had been brought to the hospital to give birth she had no pants, was dirty, had strong body odor, and live ants and worms were crawling on her body. She had few baby supplies, no car seat, and no pediatrician. The mother was receiving Supplemental Security Income due to depression. She had an open family reunification case for domestic violence, and for physical abuse, physical neglect, and dental neglect of the minor's siblings.
A detention report filed on December 23, 2002, noted both parents reported heritage with the Blackfoot Nation.[1] The juvenile court ordered the minor's detention on December 24, 2002. It also ordered DHHS to investigate whether B.T. is an Indian child within ICWA and provide the necessary notice.
In a January 13, 2003, declaration, a DHHS paralegal stated she mailed forms SOC 318 and 319 to the Blackfeet Tribe of Montana and the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) on December 24, 2002. The declaration stated the return receipt cards indicated the forms were received by the Blackfeet Tribe on January 2, 2003, and the BIA on December 27, 2002.
The jurisdictional/dispositional report filed on January 15, 2003, noted the possible Blackfeet heritage of B.T. The report included the SOC 318 and 319 forms. These forms identified the names, birthplaces, and Blackfeet heritage of the minor's parents, grandparents, and great grandparents. The forms also listed the names and birthdates of B.T.'s siblings.
A status review report filed on July 24, 2003, stated ICWA did not apply because Phyllis Olivares, a DHHS social worker, determined on December 24, 2002, that â€
