AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The case involves the termination of parental rights of Jacqueline P. (Mother) regarding her children, Jaylin R.S. and Jayvlin S. (Children). The Children, Youth and Families Department (the Department) moved to terminate Mother's parental rights. The trial, which Mother did not attend, led to a series of orders by the district court that initially granted, then vacated, and finally terminated Mother's parental rights after a series of procedural complexities (para 2).

Procedural History

• District Court, January 30, 2018: Initial trial held where Mother did not attend, leading to the first order to terminate parental rights, which was later vacated and then reinstated (para 2).
• District Court, June 1, 2018: Entered an order denying the Department’s motion to terminate parental rights, which was later rescinded (para 2).
• District Court, November 15, 2018: Filed a motion to vacate the June 1, 2018 order, which was granted on January 29, 2019, terminating Mother's parental rights (para 3).

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioner-Appellee (the Department): Argued for the termination of Mother's parental rights due to neglect and other unspecified reasons leading to the children's custody with the Department (N/A).
• Respondent-Appellant (Mother): Contested the termination of her parental rights on several grounds, including the failure of the Department to prove neglect beyond a reasonable doubt, lack of active efforts to prevent the breakup of an Indian family as required by the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), failure of the district court to make requisite ICWA findings, and failure to accommodate Mother’s disabilities (para 1).

Legal Issues

• Whether the Department proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Mother neglected the Children.
• Whether there were active efforts to prevent the breakup of an Indian family as required by the ICWA.
• Whether the district court made the requisite ICWA findings as required by 25 U.S.C. § 1912(f).
• Whether the Department failed to reasonably accommodate Mother’s disabilities pursuant to State ex rel. Children, Youth & Families Department v. Alicia P.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s order terminating Mother’s parental rights in her Children (para 8).

Reasons

• Per M. Monica Zamora, Judge (Julie J. Vargas, Judge and Jacqueline R. Medina, Judge concurring):
  The Court found that Mother failed to preserve her appellate issues due to procedural noncompliance and lack of proper preservation at trial (para 4-5).
  The Court concluded that Mother's participation or her attorney's participation in the trial did not suffice for the preservation of the issues raised on appeal (para 5).
  Despite Mother's arguments, the Court determined that the district court complied with the ICWA requirements and made the requisite findings as required by 25 U.S.C. § 1912(f) (para 6).
  The Court declined to address the issue of whether the Department failed to reasonably accommodate Mother’s disabilities due to a lack of proper assertion and evidence in the record (para 7).