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 M. B.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

August 1, 2018

In the Matter of M. B., a Youth .
v.
M. B., Appellant. STATE OF OREGON, Respondent,

          Argued and Submitted August 29, 2017

          Multnomah County Circuit Court 2003819111, 14JU03322, 15JU05277, Petition Numbers 99341, 21806, 141024095, 150908015 Kathryn L. Villa-Smith, Judge.

          Christa Obold Eshleman argued the cause and filed the briefs for appellant.

          Jonathan N. Schildt, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. Also on the brief were Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, and Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General.

          Before DeHoog, Presiding Judge, and Egan, Chief Judge, and Aoyagi, Judge.

         Case Summary:

         In this consolidated case, youth appeals from an order adjudicating her for probation violations in three cases-Case Nos. 2003819111, 14JU03322, and 15JU05277-and dispositional orders committing her to the custody of the Oregon Youth Authority for a period of up to five years. Youth asserts, in her first and second assignments of error, that the juvenile court erred [293 Or.App. 123] by adjudicating the petitions against her for probation violations in Case Nos. 14JU03322 and 2003819111. She contends that, in Case No. 15JU05277, based on her admission, the juvenile court had adjudicated her to be within its jurisdiction for the same conduct on which the probation violation proceedings were based and, therefore, ORS 419A.190 barred the probation violation proceedings. In her third assignment of error, youth asserts that the juvenile court erred by entering a probation violation order against her in Case No. 15JU05277, a case in which she had never been placed on probation.

         Held:

         Based on State v. S.-Q. K., 292 Or.App. 836, P.3d (2018), where a juvenile court has adjudicated a youth to be within its jurisdiction based on particular conduct, ORS 419A.190 bars subsequent probation violation proceedings against the youth based on the same conduct. Accordingly, the juvenile court erred in adjudicating the petitions against youth alleging she had violated her probation in Case Nos. 14JU03322 and 2003819111, and the probation violation petitions in those case numbers should have been dismissed. The order adjudicating the probation violations also, on its face, improperly includes Case No. 15JU05277.

         In Case Nos. 2003819111, 14JU03322, and 15JU05277, order finding youth in violation of probation and committing her to Oregon Youth Authority reversed; remanded with instructions to dismiss the probation violation petitions in Case Nos. 2003819111 and 14JU03322; otherwise affirmed.

         [293 Or.App. 124] EGAN, C. J.

         In this consolidated case, youth appeals from an order adjudicating her for probation violations in three cases- Case Nos. 2003819111, 14JU03322, and 15JU05277-and dispositional orders committing her to the custody of the Oregon Youth Authority (OYA) for a period of up to five years. Youth raises seven assignments of error on appeal. As explained below, we agree with youth that the juvenile court erred with respect to her first, second, and third assignments of error. We reject her fifth assignment of error without discussion, and our disposition of youth's first and second assignments obviates the need to address her fourth, sixth, and seventh assignments of error.

         The relevant facts are procedural in nature and are undisputed. In Case No. 15 JU05277, based on youth's admission, the court found youth within its jurisdiction for conduct that, if committed by an adult, would constitute resisting arrest, ORS 162.315, and committed her to OYA's custody for a period not to exceed five years. At that time, youth was on probation in Case Nos. 2003819111 and 14JU03322. At the same hearing, based on youth's violation of the law that it had adjudicated in Case No. 15JU05277, the court determined that youth was also in violation of her probation in Case Nos. 2003819111 and 14JU03322 and entered an order revoking her probation in those cases and committing her to OYA for five years. Furthermore, although youth was not on probation in Case No. 15JU05277, the order revoking her probation included that case number.

         In her first and second assignments of error, youth asserts that the juvenile court erred by adjudicating the petitions against her for violations of her probation in Case Nos. 14JU03322 and 2003819111.[1] She contends that ORS 419A.190 barred those probation violation proceedings because, based on her admission in Case No. 15JU05277, she had already ...


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.