You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

DJ v. State

Citations: 798 N.E.2d 535; 2003 WL 22682438Docket: 49A02-0304-JV-000295

Court: Indiana Court of Appeals; November 13, 2003; Indiana; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In this case, a fifteen-year-old delinquent, referred to as D.J., challenged a court decision placing him at the Kokomo Academy after he violated probation terms on a suspended commitment to the Indiana Department of Correction. D.J. argued that his placement violated Indiana Code § 31-37-19-23, which mandates placement within the child’s county unless no comparable local facility is available. He suggested that Washington Place, a therapeutic group home, would have been a suitable alternative. However, the court determined that Kokomo Academy, a secure facility, offered a structured environment necessary for D.J.'s rehabilitation, rendering the two facilities non-comparable. The court also considered the least restrictive environment requirement under Indiana Code § 31-37-18-6, concluding that Kokomo Academy was appropriate given D.J.'s behavioral issues. The trial court's decision was affirmed by the appellate court, as it found no abuse of discretion in the original placement decision. The ruling emphasized the need for a controlled setting to address D.J.'s aggression and disobedience, ultimately upholding the trial court’s determination that Kokomo Academy was the suitable placement.

Legal Issues Addressed

Abuse of Discretion in Juvenile Placement Decisions

Application: The court's decision to place the juvenile in a more structured environment was upheld as there was no evidence of an abuse of discretion.

Reasoning: The trial court's decision to place D.J. at Kokomo Academy, despite the availability of a placement at Washington Place, did not constitute an abuse of discretion.

Comparison of Facilities for Juvenile Placement

Application: The court evaluated the two facilities and found that Kokomo Academy's secure environment was not comparable to Washington Place's therapeutic group home setting.

Reasoning: In contrast, Kokomo Academy is a secure facility, making the two non-comparable under Ind.Code. 31-37-19-23.

Consideration of Child’s Behavioral Needs in Placement Decisions

Application: The court considered the child's history of aggression and disobedience as factors necessitating a more structured placement.

Reasoning: The record reflected D.J.'s issues with aggression, disobedience, and trouble in school, supporting the trial court's conclusion that he required a structured and accountable environment.

Least Restrictive Environment Requirement under Indiana Code § 31-37-18-6

Application: The court found that Kokomo Academy was the least restrictive environment suitable for the child’s needs, despite it being outside the county of residence.

Reasoning: The court, during a dispositional hearing, determined that placement at Kokomo Academy was the least-restrictive and appropriate option.

Placement of Delinquent Children under Indiana Code § 31-37-19-23

Application: The court determined that placement at a facility outside the county of residence is permissible when no comparable local facility with adequate services is available.

Reasoning: D.J. contends that this placement violated Indiana Code § 31-37-19-23, which restricts placing delinquent children in facilities outside their county of residence unless no comparable facility with adequate services is available locally.