770 P.2d 79 | Or. Ct. App. | 1989
Father appeals from a trial court judgment that made his daughter, Elizabeth, a ward of the court, temporarily committed her to CSD for placement and supervision in foster care and ordered father to participate in drug, alcohol and sexual offender treatment and evaluation under ORS 419.507. We review de novo, ORS 419.561(4), and affirm.
CSD alleged that the juvenile court had jurisdiction pursuant to ORS 419.476(1),
Father assigns error to the trial court’s admission of certain portions of the testimony of Bowcutt and Green, assistant teachers at a Head Start program, and Byrne, a CSD caseworker, each of whom testified as to statements made by the child. Father asserts that the testimony was hearsay and that there is no authority for its admission.
It is unnecessary to decide whether it was admissible. Jurisdiction of the juvenile court may be established by a
Affirmed.
ORS 419.476(1) provides, in pertinent part:
“The juvenile court has exclusive original jurisdiction in any case involving a person who is under 18 years of age and:
«* * * * *
“(c) Whose behavior, condition or circumstances are such as to endanger the welfare of the person or the welfare of others; or
“(e) Either the person’s parents or any other person having custody of the person have abandoned the person, failed to provide the person with the support or education required by law, subjected the person to cruelty or depravity or to unexplained physical injury or failed to provide the person with the care, guidance and protection necessary for the physical, mental or emotional well-being of the person * *
The petition also alleged, and it was conceded, that the mother was unable to care for the child.
In view of our disposition of the case, we need not consider father’s remaining assignments of error.