Chapter 419A
419A.004
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Provision
in definition of “Indian child” referring to persons covered by terms of Indian
Child Welfare Act agreement does not allow agreement to encompass person other
than “Indian child” as defined in Act. State ex rel
State Office for Services to Children and Families v. Klamath Tribe, 170 Or App
106, 11 P3d 701 (2000)
Definition
of “youth offender” as amended in 2001 applies only for offenses committed on
or after effective date of amendment. State ex rel Juvenile
Dept. v. Strothers, 195 Or App 372, 97 P3d 1276
(2004)
419A.010
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Under former similar statute
Personnel
serving at pleasure of appointing authority are not subject to termination
protections applicable to classified employees. Fritz v. Norblad,
566 F. Supp. 1459 (1983)
419A.150
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Under former similar statute
No
particular qualitative or quantitative level of procedural participation is
required to qualify as person appearing on child’s behalf for purposes of
requesting rehearing. State ex rel Children’s
Services Div. v. Dolan, 47 Or App 401, 614 P2d 614 (1980)
At
rehearing, juvenile court judge is not bound by interlocutory order of referee.
State ex rel Juvenile Dept. v. M, 62 Or 785, 662 P2d
733 (1983)
Child
has no right to initial hearing before referee. State ex rel
Juv. Dept. v. Arevalo, 117 Or App 505, 844 P2d 928
(1992), Sup Ct review denied
Child
was not prejudiced when informed just before hearing that judge, rather than
referee, would hear case. State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. Arevalo, 117 Or App 505, 844 P2d 928 (1992), Sup Ct review
denied
419A.170
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Where
suitable adoptive placement is sought for child, court has discretion to order
disclosure to court appointed special advocate of home study information
submitted to adoption committee for consideration. State ex rel
State Office for Services to Children and Families v. Mitchell, 182 Or App 402,
49 P3d 838 (2002), Sup Ct review denied
Where
child is no longer candidate for adoption, court may not order disclosure of
adoption home studies to child’s attorney or court appointed special advocate.
State ex rel State Office for Services to Children
and Families v. Morgan, 183 Or App 140, 51 P3d 637 (2002)
Court
appointed special advocate continues to be party to case for as long as
juvenile court retains jurisdiction over child. State ex rel
Dept. of Human Services v. Guldager, 187 Or App 543,
69 P3d 764 (2003)
419A.190
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Prohibition
against adult court action “based on” or “arising out of” juvenile offense bars
use of offense as incident of racketeering activity for purposes of Oregon
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (ORS 166.715 to 166.735).
State v. Harris, 157 Or App 119, 967 P2d 909 (1998)
419A.200
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Under former similar statute
Grandparents
do not have standing to appeal from the disposition of a termination of
parentage proceeding. State ex rel Juvenile Dept. v.
Hayes, 16 Or App 438, 519 P2d 104 (1974)
State
is not authorized to appeal from order tantamount to judgment of acquittal in
proceeding where juvenile was tried for commission of criminal act. State ex rel Juvenile Dept. v. Knox, 20 Or App 455, 532 P2d 245
(1975)
It
is not necessary as a matter of due process that, for the protection of the
children’s interests, a parent’s right to appeal from an order terminating
parental rights be foreclosed for failure to serve notice of appeal on
children. State ex rel Juvenile Dept. of Multnomah
County v. Navarette, 29 Or App 121, 563 P2d 1221
(1977)
Appeals
from juvenile court are reviewed de novo, with findings of juvenile court given
no weight except on matters of credibility of witnesses. State ex rel Juvenile Department v. Kent, 31 Or App 1219, 572 P2d
1059 (1977), Sup Ct review denied
Because
an order denying remand does not end juvenile court jurisdiction it is not
appealable. State ex rel Juvenile Department v.
Brown, 33 Or App 423, 576 P2d 830 (1978)
Where
order resulting from October review proceeding set by court on motion as part
of continuing supervision of initial wardship assumed
in May merely continued existing placement under wardship
and made no new or additional disposition, October order was not appealable
order. State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. Nagle, 36 Or App
237, 584 P2d 338 (1978)
Action
appealed from denominated as order and disposing of petition duly filed and
directing certain things be done which terminated mother’s parental rights was
final and appealable order. State ex rel Juv. Dept.
v. East, 38 Or App 59, 589 P2d 744 (1979), Sup Ct review denied
In
juvenile proceeding in which child was accused of murdering his sister, where
juvenile court allowed motion to suppress results of luminol
test and child’s statements to authorities, appellate court had no jurisdiction
to hear state’s appeal of suppression order. State ex rel
Juv. Dept. v. Leroy, 45 Or App 65, 607 P2d 772 (1980), Sup Ct review denied
State
does not have right to appeal pretrial suppression order in juvenile case.
State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. Gates, 46 Or App 587, 612
P2d 734 (1980), Sup Ct review denied
“Informal”
notice requires only that juvenile court actually be apprised of child’s desire
to appeal. State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. Hardy, 93 Or
App 584, 763 P2d 406 (1988), Sup Ct review denied
Person
with physical custody of child has standing to appeal trial court order giving
legal custody to someone else, provided person participated in dispositional
hearing below. State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. Crenshaw,
103 Or App 359, 797 P2d 397 (1990)
Subsection
enumerating specific types of order subject to
appeal by state supersedes subsection
providing general right of appeal from final orders by persons adversely
affected. State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. M. T., 321 Or
419, 899 P2d 1192 (1995)
In general
Where
appointed appellate counsel is alleged to be inadequate, party may pursue
delayed appeal filed after statutory time limits upon showing colorable claim
of error in underlying proceeding. State ex rel State
Office for Services to Children and Families v. Hammons, 169 Or App 589, 10 P3d
310 (2000)
Youth
asserting inadequate assistance of appellate counsel due to untimely filing of
appeal must show that delayed notice of appeal was filed within reasonable
time. State ex rel Juvenile Dept. v. Balderas, 172 Or
App 223, 18 P3d 434 (2001)
Where
state has sought finding of jurisdiction based on particular factual
allegation, duties of state are “adversely affected” by denial of jurisdiction
on alleged basis regardless of whether court establishes jurisdiction on other
basis. State ex rel State Office for Services to
Children and Families v. Imus, 179 Or App 33, 39 P3d
213 (2002)
Order
denying request to modify conditions of placement previously imposed by court
is not appealable. State ex rel Juvenile Dept. v.
Ortiz, 187 Or App 116, 65 P3d 1118 (2003)
“Colorable
claim of error” means claim that party may reasonably assert under current law
and that is plausible given facts and given current law or reasonable extension
or modification of current law. State ex rel Dept. of
Human Services v. Rardin, 338 Or 399, 110 P3d 580
(2005)
Denial
of petition for affirmative relief adversely affects rights and duties of
petitioner. State ex rel Dept. of Human Services v.
S.P.B., 218 Or App 97, 178 P3d 307 (2008)
Jurisdictional
order and dispositional judgment in juvenile court proceedings are separately
appealable, and requirements for filing appeal apply to both order and judgment
separately. State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. J. H.-O., 223
Or App 412, 196 P3d 36 (2008)
419A.205
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Judgment
described in this section must comply with ORS chapter 18 requirements for
judgment. State ex rel Juvenile Department v. J.W.,
345 Or 292, 193 P3d 20 (2008)
419A.255
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Under former similar statute
In
view of the confidential nature of the juvenile casework file, the trial court
should have gone through the file and made available pertinent parts of it for
defense (opposing) counsel to use in cross-examination. State ex rel Juvenile Dept. v. La Mar, 7 Or App 132, 490 P2d 191
(1971)
A
juvenile witness may not be impeached by evidence that he admitted acts which
would be a crime if committed by an adult. State v. Burr, 18 Or App 494, 525
P2d 1067 (1974)
Files
relating to parent’s treatment of other children are not absolutely
inadmissible in proceeding terminating parental rights. State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. Kramer, 34 Or App 1013, 580 P2d 211
(1978)
Defendant
charged with arson was denied right of confrontation where trial court
prevented defense from questioning alleged accomplices about burglaries which
they had admitted in prior juvenile proceedings, because defendant’s need to
cross-examine principal witnesses to show possible bias outweighed state’s need
to maintain confidentiality of juvenile records. Burr v. Sullivan, 618 F2d 583
(1980)
In general
Juvenile
court may order agency to provide adoptive home studies to attorney of
dependent child prior to agency issuance of placement report. State ex rel State Office for Services to Children and Families v.
Williams, 168 Or App 538, 7 P3d 655 (2000)
Where
suitable adoptive placement is sought for child, court has discretion to order
disclosure to court appointed special advocate of home study information
submitted to adoption committee for consideration. State ex rel
State Office for Services to Children and Families v. Mitchell, 182 Or App 402,
49 P3d 838 (2002), Sup Ct review denied
Where
child is no longer candidate for adoption, court may not order disclosure of
adoption home studies to child’s attorney or court appointed special advocate.
State ex rel State Office for Services to Children
and Families v. Morgan, 183 Or App 140, 51 P3d 637 (2002)
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS
Under former similar statute
Access
to police reports and records on juveniles by Oregon Law Enforcement Council,
(1974) Vol 36, p 782; constitutionality of provisions
that juvenile court proceedings and records may be closed to public, (1977) Vol 38, p 1504; release by police officer of juvenile’s
name at time of arrest, (1981) Vol 42, p 17
419A.260
NOTES OF DECISIONS
ORS
419C.610 allows court to set aside order finding youth within jurisdiction of
court notwithstanding that underlying conduct is type for which this section
prohibits expungement of record. State ex rel Juvenile Dept. v. Tyree, 177 Or App 187, 33 P3d 729
(2001)
419A.262
NOTES OF DECISIONS
“Release”
refers to making records available to others in disregard of confidential
status. In re Gustafson, 333 Or 468, 41 P3d 1063 (2002)