In the Interest of A.H., a Child
332 Ga. App. 590
Ga. Ct. App.2015Background
- A. H., age 16, was involved in a police chase of a stolen car, fled on foot holding a pistol, and was shot and arrested; he was placed in detention and had previously been adjudicated delinquent and committed to DJJ restrictive custody.
- On May 9, 2014 the State filed a delinquency petition charging multiple offenses and an adjudicatory hearing was set for May 19, 2014; DJJ probation officer and DFACS case manager were given notice.
- At the May 19 hearing the State moved for a 48-hour continuance to decide whether to seek transfer to superior court; A. H. wished to admit and objected to the continuance.
- The juvenile court refused to accept A. H.’s admission because no DFACS representative (his legal custodian) was present and the court ruled that DJJ did not have legal custody; the court granted the 48-hour continuance and continued detention.
- On appeal A. H. sought interlocutory review; the Court of Appeals held the juvenile court’s legal conclusions were erroneous, vacated the continuance order, and remanded for the trial court to determine whether the State showed good cause for the continuance under OCGA § 15-11-478.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether juvenile court erred by not applying OCGA § 15-11-110(a) when granting continuance | A. H.: court should have considered § 15-11-110(a) factors | State: § 15-11-110(a) governs dependency, not delinquency | Court: § 15-11-110(a) is inapplicable to delinquency proceedings; no error on that ground |
| Whether court may refuse to accept child’s admission without legal custodian present | A. H.: DFACS waived presence; court could accept admission; DJJ probation officer present | State: needed legal custodian present before acceptance | Court: legal custodian’s presence is not a prerequisite; custodians may waive right to be present; court erred in refusing admission |
| Whether DJJ is a legal custodian for juveniles in restrictive custody | A. H.: DJJ is legal custodian because commitment to restrictive custody is by court order | State: argued DJJ did not have legal custody (below) | Court: DJJ qualifies as a legal custodian when juvenile is committed to restrictive custody; trial court erred in ruling otherwise |
| Whether the continuance was supported by good cause under OCGA § 15-11-478 | A. H.: continuance not justified given his objection and willingness to admit | State: needed 48 hours to review case and decide on transfer petition | Court: vacated continuance because trial court’s stated legal grounds were incorrect; remanded for court to determine, on the record and considering circumstances, whether State’s proffered reason constituted good cause |
Key Cases Cited
- Scriven v. State, 330 Ga. App. 826 (Ga. App. 2015) (existence of "good cause" is fact-specific)
- Kesterson v. Jarrett, 291 Ga. 380 (Ga. 2012) (rights such as presence may be waived)
- In the Interest of I. W., 304 Ga. App. 225 (Ga. App. 2010) (custodian who received notice may waive right to be heard)
- Cormier v. Cormier, 280 Ga. 693 (Ga. 2006) (party properly informed who chooses not to participate waives presence/right to be heard)
- In the Interest of A. G. I., 246 Ga. App. 85 (Ga. App. 2000) (parental absence can constitute waiver of presence)
- Dept. of Human Resources v. Johnson, 264 Ga. App. 730 (Ga. App. 2003) (noting juvenile in restrictive custody is in joint legal custody of DJJ and DFACS)
- In the Interest of J. S., 283 Ga. App. 448 (Ga. App. 2007) (DJJ becomes legal custodian when child is committed to restrictive custody)