In re G.T.
Filed 10/26/10 In re
G.T. CA3
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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(Sacramento
----
In re G.T., a Person Coming
Under the Juvenile Court Law.
C062966
(Super.
Ct. No. JD217497)
SACRAMENTO
COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
G.S. et al.,
Defendants and Appellants.
In the 2008
dependency action brought by the Sacramento
County Department of Health and Human Services (the Department), the
juvenile court ordered a permanent plan of guardianship over G.T. (the
minor). Father and mother appeal
separately.
The minor's
father, O.T., contends the juvenile court did not comply with the Indian Child Welfare Act (the ICWA)
(25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.), improperly delegated visitation to the
guardian, and abused its discretion in terminating the dependency action. The minor's mother, G.S., joins these claims,
and also contends the court erred by denying her reunification services, and the court's
order contains clerical errors.
We shall reverse
and remand with directions to the juvenile court to ensure proper ICWA inquiry
and notice is performed and to modify the visitation order.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
A prior
dependency case is relevant to the current case.
Prior Dependency Action
On November 27,
2001, the Department filed a petition alleging the then-six-year-old minor fell
within dependency jurisdiction because mother failed to protect her from
corporal punishment by mother's boyfriend, exposed her to domestic violence,
and failed to give her adequate food; further, mother's boyfriend had abused
the minor's older brother (then seven).
(Welf. & Inst. Code, § 300, subds. (b) & (j).)[1] The petition named â€
| Description | In the 2008 dependency action brought by the Sacramento County Department of Health and Human Services (the Department), the juvenile court ordered a permanent plan of guardianship over G.T. (the minor). Father and mother appeal separately. The minor's father, O.T., contends the juvenile court did not comply with the Indian Child Welfare Act (the ICWA) (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.), improperly delegated visitation to the guardian, and abused its discretion in terminating the dependency action. The minor's mother, G.S., joins these claims, and also contends the court erred by denying her reunification services, and the court's order contains clerical errors. Court shall reverse and remand with directions to the juvenile court to ensure proper ICWA inquiry and notice is performed and to modify the visitation order. |
| Rating |
