J.R. v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

• Court: Indiana Court of Appeals
• Decided: September 17, 2020
• Docket: 19A-JV-3026
• Status: Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be FILED regarded as precedent or cited before any Sep 17 2020, 7:40 am

court except for the purpose of establishing CLERK Indiana Supreme Court the defense of res judicata, collateral Court of Appeals and Tax Court estoppel, or the law of the case.

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Glen E. Koch II Curtis T. Hill, Jr. Boren, Oliver & Coffee, LLP Attorney General of Indiana Martinsville, Indiana Jodi Kathryn Stein Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

J.R., September 17, 2020 Appellant-Respondent, Court of Appeals Case No. 19A-JV-3026 v. Appeal from the Brown Circuit Court State of Indiana, The Honorable Mary H. Wertz, Appellee-Petitioner Judge Trial Court Cause Nos. 07C01-1905-JD-39 07C01-1908-JD-66

Baker, Senior Judge.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-JV-3026 | September 17, 2020 Page 1 of 5 [1] On November 27, 2019, J.R., a juvenile, was placed in the Department of

Correction (DOC) after admitting to violating probation, Leaving Home

Without Permission, and committing acts that would have been Residential

Entry, a Level 6 felony if committed by an adult,1 and Theft of a Firearm, a

Level 6 felony if committed by an adult.2 J.R. now appeals the juvenile court’s

order placing him in the DOC. We affirm.

Facts [2] In November of 2018, J.R. admitted delinquency for leaving home without the

permission of a parent, guardian or custodian and was placed on probation.

J.R. violated the terms of that probation, and he was placed at Wernle Youth

and Family Treatment Center. After four escapes from Wernle, he was moved

to Lutheran Child and Family Services. He escaped from Lutheran on May 5,

2019. Appellant’s App. Vol. II p. 9.

[3] Seventeen days later, on May 22, 2019, authorities located J.R. and took him

into custody. He was adjudicated a delinquent child for escape, a Level 5

felony if committed by an adult, and criminal mischief, a Class A misdemeanor

if committed by an adult. He was sentenced to forty-five days of secure

detention and three months of probation. He was detained at Dickinson

1 Ind. Code §35-43-2-1.5. 2 Ind. Code §35-43-4-2(a).

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-JV-3026 | September 17, 2020 Page 2 of 5 Juvenile Justice Center. On July 27, 2019, he was released into his father’s

custody and received services through the Youth Villages Intercept Program.

[4] On August 6, 2019, J.R. committed leaving home without permission and

residential entry, a Level 6 felony if committed by an adult. On August 21,

2019, he left home without permission again, and committed theft of a firearm,

a Level 6 felony if committed by an adult. The State filed a new petition

alleging delinquency based on these incidents and petitioned to modify the

previous dispositional decree.

[5] On August 26, 2019, J.R. was placed at Dickinson Juvenile Justice Center until

his dispositional hearing. He committed seven infractions there between

August 26 and November 1.

[6] On October 23, 2019, J.R. admitted to violating probation and to three of the

counts against him: residential entry, a Level 6 felony if committed by an adult,

theft of a firearm, a Level 6 felony if committed by an adult, and leaving home

without permission. Appellant’s App. Vol. II p. 87.

[7] On November 27, 2019, the juvenile court held a dispositional hearing. A

probation officer was tasked with finding three facilities that might take J.R.

outside of the DOC. Tr. Vol. II p. 138. One of those facilities, Campagna

Academy, was willing to accept J.R., but the probation officer recommended

against the placement because of J.R.’s history of escapes. Id. at 139. She

feared that if J.R. escaped Campagna, located near Gary, it would be difficult to

find him. Id. at 142. “I worry about the distance and the area,” she said. Id. at

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-JV-3026 | September 17, 2020 Page 3 of 5 139. Additionally, the Department of Child Services advised against sending

anyone to Campagna. Id. at 141. J.R.’s father asked that J.R. be sent to

Campagna, whereas J.R.’s mother argued against that placement, fearing her

son would again escape. Id. at 167-171, 173.

[8] At the dispositional hearing, the juvenile court ordered that J.R. would be

committed to the DOC and transferred to Logansport Juvenile Correctional

Facility. In making this decision, the juvenile court observed that there was no

other “realistic option” for J.R., as he had repeatedly escaped his past

residential placements, and treatment at home had also failed. Id. at 181. J.R.

now appeals this placement.

Discussion and Decision [9] Placement of a juvenile who is adjudged delinquent is within the discretion of

the juvenile court. M.C. v. State, 134 N.E.3d 453, 458 (Ind. Ct. App. 2019).

This broad discretion is “subject to the statutory considerations of the welfare of

the child, the safety of the community, and the policy of favoring the least harsh

disposition.” Id.; see also Ind. Code § 31-37-18-6 (listing statutory factors). We

will reverse only if the disposition is clearly erroneous and against the logic and

effect of the facts and circumstances before the court or the reasonable,

probable, and actual inferences that may be drawn therefrom. M.C., 134

N.E.3d at 458.

[10] J.R. argues that the juvenile court failed to adequately consider alternatives to

the DOC placement, rendering its decision erroneous. We disagree. Since

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-JV-3026 | September 17, 2020 Page 4 of 5 2018, J.R. has been on probation, participated in residential programs, and been

placed at home. In all these settings, he has failed to obey the rules and, at

times, the law. He violated his probation, escaped his residential programs,

repeatedly left home without permission, and committed new, more serious

delinquent acts.

[11] Despite this track record, the juvenile court seriously weighed the possibility of

sending J.R. to another residential facility. However, the court ultimately

observed, “I can’t in good faith send you to another residential placement that I

don’t have faith you will comply with.” Tr. Vol. II p. 181. The court ordered

J.R. placed in the DOC because, “I do not believe there’s another realistic

option.” Id. J.R.’s record, the probation officer’s testimony, the

recommendation of the Department of Child Services, and his mother’s express

wishes all support this decision. Id. at 138-39, 140, 173. We find that the

juvenile court did not err in ordering that J.R. be committed to the DOC.

[12] The judgment of the juvenile court is affirmed.

Bailey, J., and Vaidik, J., concur.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-JV-3026 | September 17, 2020 Page 5 of 5