2017 ORS 419B.150¹
When protective custody authorized
  • disposition of runaway child taken into protective custody

(1) A child may be taken into protective custody by a peace officer, counselor, employee of the Department of Human Services or any other person authorized by the juvenile court of the county in which the child is found, in the following circumstances:

(a) When the child’s condition or surroundings reasonably appear to be such as to jeopardize the child’s welfare;

(b) When the juvenile court, by order indorsed on the summons as provided in ORS 419B.839 (Required and discretionary summons) or otherwise, has ordered that the child be taken into protective custody; or

(c) When it reasonably appears that the child has run away from home.

(2)(a) Before issuing an order under subsection (1)(b) of this section, the court shall review an affidavit sworn on information and belief provided by a peace officer, counselor or employee of the department or other person authorized by the juvenile court that sets forth with particularity the facts and circumstances on which the request for protective custody is based, why protective custody is in the best interests of the child and the reasonable efforts or, if the Indian Child Welfare Act applies, active efforts made by the department to eliminate the need for protective custody of the child.

(b) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this subsection, an order directing that a child be taken into protective custody under subsection (1) of this section shall contain written findings, including a brief description of the reasonable efforts or, if the Indian Child Welfare Act applies, active efforts to eliminate the need for protective custody of the child that the department has made and why protective custody is in the best interests of the child.

(c) The court may issue an order even though no services have been provided if the court makes written findings that no existing services could eliminate the need for protective custody of the child and that protective custody is in the best interests of the child.

(3) When a child is taken into protective custody as a runaway under subsection (1) of this section, the peace officer or other person who takes the child into custody:

(a)(A) Shall release the child without unnecessary delay to the custody of the child’s parent or guardian or to a shelter facility that has agreed to provide care and services to children who have run away from home and that has been designated by the juvenile court to provide such care and services; or

(B) Shall follow the procedures described in ORS 419B.160 (Place of detention), 419B.165 (Release of child taken into custody), 419B.168 (Procedure when child is not released) and 419B.171 (Report required when child is taken into custody);

(b) Shall, if possible, determine the preferences of the child and the child’s parent or guardian as to whether the best interests of the child are better served by placement in a shelter facility that has agreed to provide care and services to children who have run away from home and that has been designated by the juvenile court to provide such care and services or by release to the child’s parent or guardian; and

(c) Notwithstanding ORS 419B.165 (Release of child taken into custody) and subsection (1) of this section, shall release the child to a shelter facility that has agreed to provide care and services to children who have run away from home and that has been designated by the juvenile court to provide such care and services if it reasonably appears that the child would not willingly remain at home if released to the child’s parent or guardian. [1993 c.33 §61; 1993 c.546 §27; 1997 c.873 §10; 1999 c.691 §1; amendments by 1999 c.691 §2 repealed by 2001 c.484 §1; 2001 c.622 §§46,47; 2001 c.686 §§1,2]

Notes of Decisions

Under Former Similar Statutes

Due process does not require the appoint­ment of “independent counsel” to represent the child in every adop­tion or termina­tion of parental rights pro­ceed­ing. F. v. C., 24 Or App 601, 547 P2d 175 (1976)

When sec­ond termina­tion of parental rights pro­ceed­ing was not itself barred, proof was not limited by res judicata or collateral estoppel principles to facts or evidence which was not considered in or which came in to being after first pro­ceed­ing. State ex rel Juvenile Dept. v. Newman, 49 Or App 221, 619 P2d 901 (1980), Sup Ct review denied

Notes of Decisions

Because of­fi­cers relied on Depart­ment of Human Services protective-custody determina­tion, made no independent decisions re­gard­ing protective-custody determina­tion and merely assisted DHS in securing children, of­fi­cers were entitled to qualified immunity for entering residence without warrant. Sjurset v. Button, 810 F3d 609 (9th Cir. 2015)

Chapter 419B

Notes of Decisions

Due process rights of parents are al­ways implicated in construc­tion and applica­tion of pro­vi­sions of this chapter. Depart­ment of Human Services v. J.R.F., 351 Or 570, 273 P3d 87 (2012)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 419B—Juvenile Code: Dependency, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors419B.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 419B, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano419B.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.