In re F.M. CA3

── In re F.M. CA3 ── Court: California Court of Appeal Date: April 23, 2026 Category: General Filed 4/23/26 In re F.M. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Shasta) In re F.M., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court C103992 Law. (Super. Ct. No. 23JV3275401) SHASTA COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. E.M. et al., Defendants and Appellants. S.A. (father) and E.M. (mother) separately appeal the juvenile court’s orders terminating their parental rights as to F.M. (the minor). They contend the juvenile court erred in finding that the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) and related state law (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 224.2) did not apply.1 Specifically, father argues the Shasta County Health and Human Services Agency (Agency) failed to satisfy its duty of further inquiry into the minor’s possible Native American heritage under section 224.2, subdivision (e), and mother joins in the argument. 1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code. 1  We agree the Agency’s further inquiry under section 224.2 was inadequate. We will conditionally reverse the orders terminating parental rights and remand for further ICWA proceedings. BACKGROUND Mother and father are the parents of the minor.2 In December 2023, the Agency filed a dependency petition on behalf of the then three-month-old minor based on failure to protect (§ 300, subd. (b)(1)) and abuse of a sibling (§ 300, subd. (j)). The petition alleged the minor was at risk of harm in the parents’ custody due to their prior child welfare histories of abuse, father’s unsanitary and hazardous home conditions, father’s untreated mental health disorders, and mother’s aggressive conduct toward the social workers. Mother was hostile and refused to speak to the social worker about ICWA during several home visits. In his prior dependency cases, father reported Cherokee ancestry. While the Agency’s ICWA inquiry in the present case remained ongoing, the petition stated there was “no reason to believe” the minor was or may be an Indian child. According to the detention report, mother said her mother (maternal grandmother) told her she was Blackfoot, Aztec, and Mayan, although she was unsure if this was true because maternal grandmother had lied to her before. Mother’s past case history indicated no Native American ancestry. Father reported some Native American ancestry, and in the 2022 dependency case he had identified possible ancestry with the United 2 Mother has an older child from a previous relationship who was placed out of mother’s care with his grandmother in a voluntary dependency case in Humboldt County based on physical abuse and domestic violence. Father is married to G.A. (stepmother) and they share three children together (the paternal half-siblings). The paternal half-siblings were the subject of a separate dependency proceeding (the 2022 dependency case) based on father’s and stepmother’s untreated mental health problems and their unsanitary home conditions. Father’s parental rights to two other children, W. and G., were previously terminated in separate dependency proceedings in Tehama and Humboldt Counties. 2 Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians, Eastern Band of Cheroke