In re E.T.
S.T. (Mother) appeals an order entered October 18, 2006, by the Humboldt County Superior Court, Juvenile Division, which terminated her parental rights to her daughter, E. T. (born July 2001). She contends the order must be reversed because she did not receive proper notice of the hearing that resulted in that order, as well as earlier proceedings that led to a dispositional order entered on April 4, 2006, which denied reunification services for her and set a hearing under section 366.26 of the Welfare and Institutions Code[1]to select a permanent plan for E. T. Mother also argues that she received ineffective assistance from her appointed trial counsel, and that the evidence was insufficient to support the courts adoptability finding. Finally, Mother urges that reversal is required due to noncompliance with the notice provisions of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA).
As discussed below, Court reject Mothers claims, except that pertaining to noncompliance with the notice provisions of ICWA. As to that claim, Court direct a limited reversal. On remand the juvenile court shall order the Humboldt County Department of Health and Human Services (Department) to provide notice as required by ICWA. If, after such notice, no tribe intervenes to claim E. T. as an Indian child, the order be reinstated.
Comments on In re E.T.