State ex rel. R.U.

Louisiana Court of Appeal

State ex rel. R.U.

534 So. 2d 492, 1988 La. App. LEXIS 2466, 1988 WL 127039

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedNovember 16, 1988

DocketNo. 88-CA-406

StatusPublished

This text of 534 So. 2d 492 (State ex rel. R.U.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State ex rel. R.U., 534 So. 2d 492, 1988 La. App. LEXIS 2466, 1988 WL 127039 (La. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

WICKER, Judge.

This matter involves a juvenile proceeding in which R.U., the minor, initially admitted to the offenses of La.R.S. 14:95, Illegal Carrying of Weapons and La.R.S. 14:110, Simple Escape. R.U. was committed to the Department of Public Safety and Corrections (DPSC) for a total of one and one-half years. After several sentencing reviews, the juvenile court ordered DPSC, Jefferson Parish Department of Juvenile Services (JP/DJS) and the Department of Health and Human Resources — Office of Human Development (DHHR/OHD) to serve as joint custodians of the minor. Thus, legal custody is now with three governmental agencies.

DHHR moved for a discharge of the minor from their custody which was denied by the trial court. It now appeals the adverse ruling. We reverse and remand.

DHHR assigns the following errors:

1. That the trial court erred when it awarded joint custody to more than one agency, and

2. That the trial court erred when it awarded legal custody of the delinquent minor to DHHR after commitment of the delinquent minor to DPSC.

We recently addressed these identical issues in State in Interest of J.A., 532 So.2d 943, 947 (La.App. 5th Cir.1988) wherein we held “[t]he court’s modification of disposition should not have granted joint custody [since] statutes prohibit the awarding of joint custody.” [Emphasis added]. See, La.C.J.P. arts. 83, 86; La.R.S. [493]*49313:1569(11); La.R.S. 13:1580; State in Interest of Sapia, 397 So.2d 469 (La.1981).

Furthermore, in State in Interest of J.A., supra at 948 we held:

The juvenile court may “[cjommit a child to the custody of a private or public institution or agency.” La.C.J.P. art. 83(A)(6). The court may “[m]ake such combination of the above dispositions or such other disposition as the court deems to be in the best interest of the child.” La.CJ.P. art. 83(A)(8). [emphasis in original].

Clearly the statute allows for the possibility of DHHR being awarded custody of the [delinquent] minor although the court should not place custody jointly in DHHR and DPSC.

Accordingly, this assignment lacks merit.

For the reasons stated the ruling of April 21, 1988 maintaining joint custody of the minor to DPSC/OJS, JP/DJS and DHHR/OHD is reversed. The order of April 14, 1988 making DHHR an additional joint custodian is also reversed. The proceedings are remanded to the trial court for a disposition hearing in accordance with the views expressed herein.

REVERSED AND RENDERED; REMANDED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

WICKER, Judge.

This matter involves a juvenile proceeding in which R.U., the minor, initially admitted to the offenses of La.R.S. 14:95, Illegal Carrying of Weapons and La.R.S. 14:110, Simple Escape. R.U. was committed to the Department of Public Safety and Corrections (DPSC) for a total of one and one-half years. After several sentencing reviews, the juvenile court ordered DPSC, Jefferson Parish Department of Juvenile Services (JP/DJS) and the Department of Health and Human Resources — Office of Human Development (DHHR/OHD) to serve as joint custodians of the minor. Thus, legal custody is now with three governmental agencies.

DHHR moved for a discharge of the minor from their custody which was denied by the trial court. It now appeals the adverse ruling. We reverse and remand.

DHHR assigns the following errors:

1. That the trial court erred when it awarded joint custody to more than one agency, and

2. That the trial court erred when it awarded legal custody of the delinquent minor to DHHR after commitment of the delinquent minor to DPSC.

We recently addressed these identical issues in State in Interest of J.A., 532 So.2d 943, 947 (La.App. 5th Cir.1988) wherein we held “[t]he court’s modification of disposition should not have granted joint custody [since] statutes prohibit the awarding of joint custody.” [Emphasis added]. See, La.C.J.P. arts. 83, 86; La.R.S. [493]*49313:1569(11); La.R.S. 13:1580; State in Interest of Sapia, 397 So.2d 469 (La.1981).

Furthermore, in State in Interest of J.A., supra at 948 we held:

The juvenile court may “[cjommit a child to the custody of a private or public institution or agency.” La.C.J.P. art. 83(A)(6). The court may “[m]ake such combination of the above dispositions or such other disposition as the court deems to be in the best interest of the child.” La.CJ.P. art. 83(A)(8). [emphasis in original].

Clearly the statute allows for the possibility of DHHR being awarded custody of the [delinquent] minor although the court should not place custody jointly in DHHR and DPSC.

Accordingly, this assignment lacks merit.

For the reasons stated the ruling of April 21, 1988 maintaining joint custody of the minor to DPSC/OJS, JP/DJS and DHHR/OHD is reversed. The order of April 14, 1988 making DHHR an additional joint custodian is also reversed. The proceedings are remanded to the trial court for a disposition hearing in accordance with the views expressed herein.

REVERSED AND RENDERED; REMANDED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

534 So. 2d 492, 1988 La. App. LEXIS 2466, 1988 WL 127039, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-ru-lactapp-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack