Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
IN THE MATTER OF JDG
Citations: 603 S.E.2d 169; 166 N.C. App. 279; 2004 N.C. App. LEXIS 1724Docket: No. COA03-1306
Court: Court of Appeals of North Carolina; September 7, 2004; North Carolina; State Appellate Court
Respondent J.D.G. appeals a juvenile order that found him in willful violation of protective supervision following his earlier adjudication as an undisciplined juvenile. The case stems from a juvenile petition filed on April 2, 2002, by respondent's mother, leading to a finding of undisciplined status on April 23, 2002. This ruling imposed protective supervision for up to three months, including a curfew and restrictions on his movements and associations. On May 8, 2002, a motion was filed to show cause for contempt due to non-compliance with the curfew. After a hearing on May 20, 2002, the court found him in willful violation and extended his supervision, adding a 24-hour secure custody provision. Respondent's counsel later filed a motion seeking to vacate the custody order, arguing that the Supreme Court's decision in Alabama v. Shelton should apply, as he was not provided counsel at the initial hearing. The trial court denied this motion on June 4, 2002. Respondent raised two assignments of error regarding the secure custody order and the supervising counselor's discretion over confinement timing. However, the appellate court dismissed the appeal as moot, stating that a determination could not have practical effects on the existing controversy, citing relevant case law. Courts do not address moot cases as they are not tasked with resolving abstract legal questions. In this instance, the respondent has completed the 24-hour confinement resulting from a trial court's finding of willful violation of protective supervision. The respondent turned 18 on February 27, 2004, which ended the trial court's jurisdiction over him as an undisciplined juvenile, according to N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1600 (b) (2003). Since the underlying issues are moot, the standard procedure is to dismiss the appeal. Although no motion to dismiss for mootness was filed, the appeal is dismissed ex mero motu due to its moot nature. Judges McGee and McCullough concur in this decision.