Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Super. Ct. Nos. JV08501, JV08502
ROBIE, J.
Appellant D. L., the mother of L. R. and K. R. (the minors), appeals from the juvenile court’s dispositional orders in this dependency case. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 360, subd. (d), 395.) Appellant contends, and the Department of Employment and Social Services (the Department) concedes, the dispositional orders must be reversed because the court and the Department failed to comply with the notice provisions of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 (ICWA). (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) We shall reverse conditionally and remand to permit compliance with ICWA.
ICWA protects the interests of Indian children and promotes the stability and security of Indian tribes by establishing minimum standards for, and permitting tribal participation in, dependency actions. (25 U.S.C. §§ 1901, 1902, 1903(1), 1912.) The juvenile court and the Department both have an affirmative duty to inquire at the outset of the dependency proceedings whether a child who is subject to the proceedings is, or may be, an Indian child. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 5.481(a).) If, after the petition is filed, the court “knows or has reason to know that an Indian child is involved,” notice of the pending proceeding and the right to intervene must be sent to the tribe or the Bureau of Indian Affairs (the Bureau) if the tribal affiliation is not known. (25 U.S.C. § 1912; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 5.481(b).)
Here, the minors’ paternal grandfather reported Yavui or Yaqui Native American heritage through the minors’ paternal great grandmother. The social worker reported that the paternal grandfather was able to provide some of the pertinent information for noticing purposes and said the Department would be making ICWA inquiries. The maternal grandmother also said the minors had possible Native American heritage through their maternal grandfather. The record, however, is devoid of evidence either of further inquiry that would dispel the possibility the minors are Indian children, or proper notice to the tribe and/or the Bureau of the pending proceeding. There is also no indication the juvenile court ever made a determination whether the case came within the provisions of ICWA.
The Pascua Yaqui Tribe of Arizona is a federally recognized tribe. (25 U.S.C. § 1903(8); 73 Fed.Reg. 18553 (Apr. 4, 2008).)
Failure to comply with the notice provisions and to determine whether ICWA applies is prejudicial error. (In re Desiree F. (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 460, 472.) Consequently, we must reverse the dispositional orders and remand for further proceedings regarding compliance with ICWA.
DISPOSITION
The dispositional orders are reversed, and the matter is remanded for the limited purpose of compliance with the notice provisions of ICWA and a determination whether ICWA applies in this case. If proper notice has not been given, the juvenile court shall order the Department to promptly comply with the notice provisions of ICWA. If, after proper inquiry, the juvenile court determines that the appropriate tribes or the Bureau were properly noticed and there either was no response or the tribes or the Bureau determined that the minors are not Indian children, the orders shall be reinstated. If, however, it is determined that the minors are Indian children within the meaning of ICWA, the juvenile court shall conduct a new disposition hearing in conformance with all provisions of ICWA.
We concur:, BLEASE, Acting P. J., CANTIL-SAKAUYE, J.