Who may appeal
- time limitations
- procedure
- effect of filing appeal
- record on appeal
- disclosure
Source:
Section 419A.200 — Who may appeal; time limitations; procedure; effect of filing appeal; record on appeal; disclosure, https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors419A.html.
Notes of Decisions
Under former similar statute
Grandparents do not have standing to appeal from the disposition of a termination of parentage proceeding. State ex rel Juvenile Dept. v. Hayes, 16 Or App 438, 519 P2d 104 (1974)
State is not authorized to appeal from order tantamount to judgment of acquittal in proceeding where juvenile was tried for commission of criminal act. State ex rel Juvenile Dept. v. Knox, 20 Or App 455, 532 P2d 245 (1975)
It is not necessary as a matter of due process that, for the protection of the children’s interests, a parent’s right to appeal from an order terminating parental rights be foreclosed for failure to serve notice of appeal on children. State ex rel Juvenile Dept. of Multnomah County v. Navarette, 29 Or App 121, 563 P2d 1221 (1977)
Appeals from juvenile court are reviewed de novo, with findings of juvenile court given no weight except on matters of credibility of witnesses. State ex rel Juvenile Department v. Kent, 31 Or App 1219, 572 P2d 1059 (1977), Sup Ct review denied
Because an order denying remand does not end juvenile court jurisdiction it is not appealable. State ex rel Juvenile Department v. Brown, 33 Or App 423, 576 P2d 830 (1978)
Where order resulting from October review proceeding set by court on motion as part of continuing supervision of initial wardship assumed in May merely continued existing placement under wardship and made no new or additional disposition, October order was not appealable order. State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. Nagle, 36 Or App 237, 584 P2d 338 (1978)
Action appealed from denominated as order and disposing of petition duly filed and directing certain things be done which terminated mother’s parental rights was final and appealable order. State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. East, 38 Or App 59, 589 P2d 744 (1979), Sup Ct review denied
In juvenile proceeding in which child was accused of murdering his sister, where juvenile court allowed motion to suppress results of luminol test and child’s statements to authorities, appellate court had no jurisdiction to hear state’s appeal of suppression order. State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. Leroy, 45 Or App 65, 607 P2d 772 (1980), Sup Ct review denied
State does not have right to appeal pretrial suppression order in juvenile case. State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. Gates, 46 Or App 587, 612 P2d 734 (1980), Sup Ct review denied
“Informal” notice requires only that juvenile court actually be apprised of child’s desire to appeal. State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. Hardy, 93 Or App 584, 763 P2d 406 (1988), Sup Ct review denied
Person with physical custody of child has standing to appeal trial court order giving legal custody to someone else, provided person participated in dispositional hearing below. State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. Crenshaw, 103 Or App 359, 797 P2d 397 (1990)
Subsection enumerating specific types of order subject to
appeal by state supersedes subsection providing general right of appeal from final orders by persons adversely affected. State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. M. T., 321 Or 419, 899 P2d 1192 (1995)
In general
Youth asserting inadequate assistance of appellate counsel due to untimely filing of appeal must show that delayed notice of appeal was filed within reasonable time. State ex rel Juvenile Dept. v. Balderas, 172 Or App 223, 18 P3d 434 (2001)
Where state has sought finding of jurisdiction based on particular factual allegation, duties of state are “adversely affected” by denial of jurisdiction on alleged basis regardless of whether court establishes jurisdiction on other basis. State ex rel State Office for Services to Children and Families v. Imus, 179 Or App 33, 39 P3d 213 (2002)
Order denying request to modify conditions of placement previously imposed by court is not appealable. State ex rel Juvenile Dept. v. Ortiz, 187 Or App 116, 65 P3d 1118 (2003)
“Colorable claim of error” means claim that party may reasonably assert under current law and that is plausible given facts and given current law or reasonable extension or modification of current law. State ex rel Dept. of Human Services v. Rardin, 338 Or 399, 110 P3d 580 (2005)
Denial of petition for affirmative relief adversely affects rights and duties of petitioner. State ex rel Dept. of Human Services v. S.P.B., 218 Or App 97, 178 P3d 307 (2008)
Jurisdictional order and dispositional judgment in juvenile court proceedings are separately appealable, and requirements for filing appeal apply to both order and judgment separately. State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. J. H.-O., 223 Or App 412, 196 P3d 36 (2008)
Time limitations on filing notice of appeal under this section are not facially violative of Due Process Clause of Fourteenth Amendment to United States Constitution. Department of Human Services v. W.S.C., 248 Or App 374, 273 P3d 313 (2012), Sup Ct review denied
The phrase “affected by a judgment of the juvenile court” is not limited solely to judgements described in ORS 419A.205 (1). Dept. of Human Services v. C.M.H., 301 Or App 487, 455 P3d 576 (2019), aff’d 368 Or 96, 486 P3d 772 (2021)
Up to date