In re M.R.
R.R. (father) appeals from the juvenile court’s jurisdictional and dispositional order adjudging his daughters dependents of the court. He contends that substantial evidence did not support the court’s jurisdictional findings regarding his conduct. V.S. (mother) similarly appeals, contending that substantial evidence did not support the court’s jurisdictional findings regarding her conduct. Mother also argues that the juvenile court erred in its Indian Child Welfare Act (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.; ICWA) findings, and the court should have ordered the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) to notice the Apache tribe. DCFS cross-appeals and argues that substantial evidence did not support the court’s dismissal of a count against mother under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivision (a).[1] DCFS does not oppose a limited remand for the trial court to comply with the notice provisions of ICWA.
We reverse and remand for the limited purpose of completing an ICWA investigation and complying with the ICWA notice provisions, but in all other respects, we find no cause to reverse. Additionally, we find that DCFS’s appeal is nonjusticiable and dismiss it.
Comments on In re M.R.