R.P. v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
19A-JV-536
| Ind. Ct. App. | Aug 14, 2019Background
- R.P., age 14, previously adjudicated CHINS after physical abuse/neglect and experienced multiple placements (relative, foster, emergency shelter, Youth Opportunity Center (YOC)).
- While at YOC he engaged in repeated violent, self‑harm, and property‑destructive behaviors (threats to kill staff, assaults on staff, property destruction, suicide attempts), producing multiple restraints and removal requests by YOC.
- DCS sought secure residential placements; nine youth facilities refused to accept R.P. due to his behavior. DCS briefly recommended return to Mother; Mother soon reported R.P. assaulted her.
- State filed delinquency petitions alleging battery, domestic battery, and criminal mischief; R.P. admitted domestic battery and criminal mischief; battery was dismissed.
- At disposition, the probation department recommended placement in the Indiana Department of Correction (DOC) Juvenile Division because of prior placement failures and lack of alternative secure placements; the juvenile court ordered DOC placement.
- R.P. appealed, arguing that placement in the DOC for a first delinquency adjudication was an abuse of discretion and that less restrictive placement was appropriate given his abuse/neglect history.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether placing R.P. in DOC for first delinquency was an abuse of discretion | R.P.: first offense and history of abuse/neglect mean DOC is overly restrictive; he needs intensive services in a less restrictive setting | State: R.P.'s extensive violent behavior and repeated placement failures, plus refusal by nine facilities, made DOC placement necessary for safety | Court: No abuse of discretion; statute requires least restrictive placement only if consistent with community safety and child’s best interest, and factual record justified DOC placement |
Key Cases Cited
- C.T.S. v. State, 781 N.E.2d 1193 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (juvenile court has discretion over disposition subject to child welfare, community safety, and preference for least harsh disposition)
- D.B. v. State, 842 N.E.2d 399 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (standard for reversing juvenile court disposition is abuse of discretion)
- K.A. v. State, 775 N.E.2d 382 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002) (statute allows more restrictive placement when consistent with child’s best interest and community safety)