Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Stephen Marpet, Commissioner. Conditionally reversed with directions. Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. CK12852
T.F., in pro. per., and John L. Dodd, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Office of the County Counsel, Robert E. Kalunian, Acting County Counsel, Kim Nemoy, Deputy County Counsel for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Rothschild, J.
T.F. appeals from the juvenile court’s order terminating her parental rights to her daughter, R.J.
After examining the record, appellant’s appointed counsel was unable to identify any arguable issues and so informed this court. We directed counsel to immediately send a copy of that letter and the record on appeal to appellant. We also wrote a letter to appellant advising her that she had the right to personally submit any contentions she felt we should consider and that the appeal would be dismissed in the absence of arguable issues. (In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952.)
In response to our letter appellant raised the issue of the Department of Children and Family Services’ compliance with the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA). Appellant stated: “I have also written to the I.C.W.A. about my Indian heritage, as I feel it should apply in this case. I am still waiting for a reply.” Earlier, in a declaration seeking an extension of time to file an opening brief, appellant’s appointed counsel noted that mother claimed Indian heritage at the detention hearing. Our further review of the record revealed that the court ordered the Department “to investigate mother’s alleged tribal affinity and submit [a] report” but the record did not show that the Department complied with this order.
Accordingly, we notified counsel for the Department that if the Department had evidence that it complied with the requirements of ICWA in this case it may move to augment the record on appeal with that evidence and that unless such a motion was filed by a certain date we intended to issue a conditional reversal of the order terminating appellant’s parental rights pending proof in the trial court of the Department’s compliance with ICWA.
Counsel for the Department replied to our letter agreeing to a conditional reversal of the order terminating appellant’s parental rights over R.J. in order to ensure compliance with ICWA.
DISPOSITION
The judgment terminating appellant’s parental rights to R.J. is conditionally reversed. The cause is remanded to the juvenile court with instructions to direct the Department to provide the appropriate ICWA notice of the proceedings to the Bureau of Indian Affairs and any appropriate tribes. If, after receiving notice, no tribe intervenes, the court shall reinstate its judgment. If a tribe does intervene, the court shall proceed in accordance with law.
We concur: MALLANO, P. J., CHANEY, J.