C.T. v. Superior Court
C.T. and M.W., the parents of baby E., petition under rule 8.452 of the California Rules of Court to vacate an order setting a selection and implementation hearing pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26.[1] Mother contends she should have been offered additional reunification services after the 12-month review hearing, that there was insufficient evidence that E. would be at substantial risk if returned to Mother’s care, and that she was not offered adequate reunification services. She also contends the court erred when it found the child welfare agency made active efforts to reunify the family as required by the Indian Child Welfare Act (25 U.S.C. § 1912 et seq. (ICWA, or the Act)) and complied with the ICWA’s preferences for placement with an Indian family. Father, like Mother, alleges inadequate reunification services under the ICWA and violation of the ICWA’s placement preferences without good cause.
The order setting the section 366.26 hearing is supported by substantial evidence and complies with the ICWA, so we deny both petitions on their merits.
Comments on C.T. v. Superior Court