Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re C. I. H.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

June 28, 2017

In the Matter of C. I. H., a Child.
v.
L. S. H., Appellant. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Respondent,

          Argued and submitted May 16, 2017

         Lane County Circuit Court 16JU08184 Clara L. Rigmaiden, Judge.

          Shannon Storey, Chief Defender, Juvenile Appellate Section, Offce of Public Defense Services, argued the cause and fled the brief for appellant.

          Inge D. Wells, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, and Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General.

          Before DeHoog, Presiding Judge, and Lagesen, Judge, and Wollheim, Senior Judge.

         Case Summary:

         Mother appeals from a juvenile court judgment taking dependency jurisdiction over her fve-year-old daughter, C. The juvenile court determined that it had jurisdiction over C based on mother's admission to a jurisdictional allegation made in an agreement she had entered into with the Department of Human Services (DHS). Under that agreement, mother waived her right to an evidentiary hearing on jurisdiction and admitted to one of the jurisdictional allegations in the petition, as that allegation had been modifed in accordance with the parties' agreement. Mother assigns error to the juvenile court's determination, arguing that her admission, standing alone, is insuffcient to support the juvenile court's exercise of jurisdiction. Held: Mother's admission to the amended jurisdictional allegation, viewed under the standard of review articulated in Dept. of Human Services v. D. D., 238 Or.App. 134, 241 P.3d 1177');">241 P.3d 1177 [286 Or. 478] (2010), rev den, 349 Or. 602 (2011), is suffcient to support the juvenile court's exercise of dependency jurisdiction over C.

         Affrmed. [286 Or. 479]

          LAGESEN, J.

         Mother appeals from a juvenile court judgment taking dependency jurisdiction over mother's five-year-old daughter, C. The juvenile court determined that it had jurisdiction over C after mother entered into an agreement with the Department of Human Services (DHS). Under that agreement, mother waived her right to an evidentiary hearing on jurisdiction and admitted to one of the jurisdictional allegations in the petition, as that allegation had been modified in accordance with the parties' agreement.[1] The issue before us is whether the amended jurisdictional allegation to which mother admitted is sufficient to support the juvenile court's exercise of dependency jurisdiction over C. Although mother did not contest the point below, she now contends that her admission, standing alone, is insufficient to support the juvenile court's exercise of jurisdiction. We conclude that mother's admission to the amended jurisdictional allegation, viewed under the standard of review articulated in Dept. of Human Services v. D. D., 238 Or.App. 134, 241 P.3d 1177');">241 P.3d 1177 (2010), rev den, 349 Or. 602 (2011), is sufficient to support the juvenile court's exercise of dependency jurisdiction over C. We therefore affirm.

         The relevant facts are procedural and not disputed. DHS petitioned the juvenile court to exercise dependency jurisdiction over C. The petition alleged that C is within the court's dependency jurisdiction under ORS 419B.100(1)(c).[2]Specifically, paragraph 4 of the petition alleged:

"The child is within the jurisdiction of the Court by reason of the following facts, to wit: ORS 419B.100(1)(c)
"The circumstances and conditions of [C] are such as to endanger her own ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.