432 P.3d 1175
Or. Ct. App.2018Background
- Twin infants born June 2017; three‑month‑old twin C died while sleeping with father; autopsy showed bruises and healing rib fractures inconsistent with accidental injury.
- Medical examiner and detective testimony led the juvenile court to infer father likely caused C’s nonaccidental injuries; father denied knowing how injuries occurred.
- DHS opened an investigation; a safety plan placed surviving twin M with approved safety‑service providers and required supervised contact; father later moved out and left M with mother.
- Mother knew of prior DHS involvement with father (2007) and his 2010 assault conviction; she observed father’s impatient/verbal anger toward the twins but repeatedly vacillated about separating and delayed filing for divorce until the day before trial.
- Juvenile court assumed jurisdiction over M, finding mother knew or should have known of the risk father posed and failed to protect M, creating a nonspeculative risk of harm; mother appealed.
- While the appeal was pending DHS later dismissed jurisdiction after finding mother had alleviated concerns; DHS argued the appeal was moot but, alternatively, urged affirmance on the merits.
Issues
| Issue | Mother’s Argument | DHS’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether appeal is moot after later dismissal of jurisdiction | Appeal not moot because unreversed jurisdictional findings will disadvantage mother in future DHS proceedings and carry social stigma | Moot because DHS now finds no ongoing risk and dismissal eliminates practical effects | Not moot: court finds potential future DHS disadvantage and stigma make appeal justiciable |
| Whether record supports finding mother "knew or should have known" and that a nonspeculative risk to M existed | Insufficient: mother’s subjective beliefs and feelings do not show she is likely to act in a way that places M at risk | Sufficient: mother knew of prior DHS action and assault conviction, observed father’s anger, knew of C’s bruise and later injuries, yet minimized risks and vacillated about separation | Affirmed: evidence supports that mother knew or should have known and that a nonspeculative risk to M existed under her care |
Key Cases Cited
- Dept. of Human Services v. A. B., 362 Or. 412 (addresses mootness and practical effects of unreversed jurisdictional findings)
- Dept. of Human Services v. N. P., 257 Or. App. 633 (standard of review for jurisdictional findings and legal sufficiency)
- Dept. of Human Services v. K. V., 276 Or. App. 782 (failure to protect inference where parent observed injuries but took no protective action)
- Dept. of Human Services v. J. M., 260 Or. App. 261 (limits on inferring future harm from a parent’s beliefs when credible compliance evidence exists)
- State ex rel. Juv. Dept. v. T. S., 214 Or. App. 184 (past abuse of one child supports inference of risk to siblings)