521 P.3d 186
Utah Ct. App.2022Background
- A.C., age 18, had consensual sexual intercourse with a 15‑year‑old; police discovered them in a parked car on May 7, 2020.
- DCFS investigated, made a "supported finding of Sexual Abuse," and placed A.C. on the Licensing Information System (LIS).
- A.C. petitioned the juvenile court; after trial the court found sexual abuse occurred but changed DCFS’s finding from "severe" to "non‑severe" and ordered substantiation for non‑severe sexual abuse.
- The juvenile court based that change on a Juvenile Court Act definition of "severe abuse" requiring that the abuse "causes or threatens to cause serious harm," noting the parties’ friendship and mutual consent.
- The State moved for post‑judgment relief arguing the LIS definition unambiguously treats any sexual abuse by an adult against a minor as a "severe type of child abuse or neglect." The juvenile court denied the motion.
- The Court of Appeals reversed, holding the statutory definition unambiguously requires LIS inclusion whenever an adult commits sexual abuse against a minor, and ordered A.C. relisted on the LIS.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether sexual abuse by an adult against a minor is categorically a "severe type of child abuse or neglect" for LIS purposes | Statute’s plain text lists "sexual abuse" (when committed by someone 18+) as a severe type; no harm analysis required | The term should be harmonized with Juvenile Court Act definitions so that "sexual abuse" may be non‑severe unless it causes or threatens serious harm | The Definition is unambiguous: sexual abuse by an adult is categorically a severe type for LIS; relist A.C. |
| Whether the juvenile court erred in modifying DCFS’s finding and denying the State’s post‑judgment motion | The court should not reweigh harm; statutory mandate requires LIS entry for adult sexual abuse findings | The court permissibly applied the Juvenile Court Act’s "serious harm" standard to avoid LIS listing | Court erred; must grant State’s motion, enter substantiated finding of severe abuse, and place A.C. on the LIS |
Key Cases Cited
- In re A.K., 285 P.3d 772 (Utah Ct. App. 2012) (questions of statutory interpretation reviewed for correctness)
- Brewster v. Brewster, 241 P.3d 357 (Utah Ct. App. 2010) (start statutory construction with plain language)
- Biddle v. Washington Terrace City, 993 P.2d 875 (Utah 1999) (expressio unius canon: expression of one is interpreted as exclusion of another)