119 So. 3d 710
La. Ct. App.2013Background
- J.S.A. was adjudicated delinquent and committed to OJJ custody for two years after Battery of a Correctional Facility Employee and Unauthorized Entry of an Inhabited Dwelling.
- In July 2012, a review hearing ordered OJJ to provide tutoring services to J.S.A.
- OJJ argued the juvenile court exceeded its authority by ordering a specific educational service.
- Louisiana law assigns the state custody with discretion over placement, care, and treatment once a juvenile is committed, while the juvenile court retains authority to review disposition and recommend plans.
- The court previously held that a juvenile court may not order a specific treatment or tutoring once custody is with the state, citing prior decisions such as R.F. and V.N., and vacated the tutoring order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| May the juvenile court order a specific tutoring service after commitment? | OJJ contends the court exceeded its authority. | Wick erred by ordering a specific tutoring program for J.S.A. | Yes; the court exceeded its authority and the tutoring order was vacated. |
Key Cases Cited
- State in the Interest of V.N., 712 So.2d 954 (La.App. 5 Cir. 1998) (juvenile court cannot order specific treatment once in state custody)
- State in the Interest of R.F., 733 So.2d 84 (La.App. 5 Cir. 1999) (one hour of tutoring error; court exceeded authority)
- State in the Interest of L.A.H., 836 So.2d 447 (La.App. 1 Cir. 2002) (court may not order specific treatment or placement)
- State in the Interest of D.B., 739 So.2d 918 (La.App. 1 Cir. 1999) (similar limitation on court-ordered treatment post-commitment)