California Court of Appeal

Trial court's findings in terminating petitioner's parental rights to her eleven-year-old daughter is affirmed where: 1) the trial court has discretion to consider the totality of the information presented concerning the child's family circumstances to determine whether it meets the threshold required for ICWA notice ("the court knows or has reason to know the child is an Indian child"); 2) ICWA notice is not required unless the totality of the family's circumstances indicate there is a low but reasonably probability the child is an Indian child; 3) here, the case need not be remanded for ICWA notice because the family's specific but attenuated Indian heritage does not provide reason to know the child is an Indian child; 4) the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it found that the parent did not show a prima facie case of changed circumstances and best interests of the child, and in summarily denying the parent's petition for modification under section 388; and 5) there is substantial evidence to support the court's finding the beneficial parent-child relationship exception did not apply.

Appellate Information

• Decided 07/28/2010
• Published 07/28/2010

Judges

• BENKE

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Andrea R. St. Julian, John J. Sansone