State v. B.H.C.

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Juvenile Law
  • Date Filed: 10-04-2017
  • Case #: A159484
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Lagesen, J. for the Court; Ortega, P.J.; & Egan, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

ORS 419C.453(1) provides, “[p]ursuant to a hearing, the juvenile court may order a youth offender placed in a detention facility for a specific period of time not to exceed eight days...”

Youth appealed the juvenile court’s delegation of sanctions to the Juvenile Department. Youth appealed three delinquency judgments. Youth assigned error to the juvenile court’s delegation of sanctions to the juvenile department under 419C.453. On a consolidated appeal, Youth argued that the juvenile court unlawfully delegated authority to the juvenile department to sanction her with detention (condition 26) for probation violations. In response, the State argued that (1) Youth’s argument is not ripe for review and (2) the Court of Appeals should infer the juvenile court has the authority to delegation sanction because the provisions of 419C.453 are consistent with other provisions of the juvenile code. ORS 419C.453(1) provides, “[p]ursuant to a hearing, the juvenile court may order a youth offender placed in a detention facility for a specific period of time not to exceed eight days...” The Court of Appeals determined that the claim is ripe because the Youth would not have any way of relief without intervention. The Court held that the juvenile court erred because the legislative history, text, and context of 419C.453 does not suggest “someone other than the juvenile court” is permitted to impose probation violation sanctions. Reversed and remanded with directions to strike Condition 26; otherwise affirmed. 

Advanced Search