Department of Human Services v. J. B. V.
262 Or. App. 745
| Or. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Father appeals two judgments changing two children’s permanency plans from reunification to adoption under ORS 419B.476.
- Motion to dismiss juvenile court’s jurisdiction over the children was denied.
- Exhibits, including a psychological evaluation, police report, counseling records, and medical records, were admitted under ORS 419B.325(2) for purposes of both jurisdiction and permanency decisions.
- The court’s disposition included changing the permanency plans and citing challenged exhibits; the court later vacated/ remanded the motion to dismiss.
- On appeal, the court held ORS 419B.325(2) does not apply to initial jurisdictional determinations but does apply to permanency hearings; otherwise affirmed, with remand.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does ORS 419B.325(2) apply to jurisdictional determinations? | Father argues no; it applies only to disposition. | DHS argues it applies to both jurisdictional and permanency determinations. | Ors 419B.325(2) cannot support jurisdictional determinations. |
| Does ORS 419B.325(2) apply to permanency hearings? | Father contends no bifurcation; only dispositional phase. | DHS argues it applies to permanency hearing as disposition. | Yes, it applies to permanency hearings. |
| Were the challenged exhibits admissible for the permanency plan change? | Exhibits are hearsay; not admissible under evidence rules. | Exhibits admissible under ORS 419B.325(2) for purposes of disposition. | Exhibits properly admitted for purposes of permanency determination under ORS 419B.325(2). |
| Should the case be remanded for reconsideration of the motion to dismiss under proper evidentiary rules? | Record insufficient under proper rules. | Exhibits admissible; record adequate. | Remand for reconsideration of the motion to dismiss under applicable evidentiary rules. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Klein, 352 Or 302 (2012) (context of disposition vs. jurisdictional terms in related statutes)
- State v. Stewart/Billings, 321 Or 1 (1995) (adjudicatory vs. dispositional phases in juvenile proceedings)
- State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. Reynolds, 317 Or 560 (1993) (two relevant determinations: jurisdictional and disposition)
- State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. Reding, 23 Or App 413 (1975) (two relevant determinations in dependency cases)
- Dept. of Human Services v. B. J. W., 235 Or App 307 (2010) (ward-centric evidence relevant to prognosis in permanency decisions)
- State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. J. M., 260 Or App 261 (2013) (burden in continued jurisdiction determinations)