Department of Human Services v. J.H.

Under ORS 419B.100(1)(c), the juvenile court may assert jurisdiction only where the evidence is sufficient to establish “a current threat of serious loss or injury that is likely to be realized” which is to be based on “the totality of the children’s circumstances or conditions.” Dept. of Human Services v. A. W., 276 Or App 276 (2016). Dept. of Human Services v. A. L., 268 Or App 391 (2015)

Mother appealed both judgments of jurisdiction. Mother assigned error to the assertion of jurisdiction based on substance abuse interfering with her ability to safely parent, exposing the child to domestic violence, and the court’s general assertion of jurisdiction over the child. On appeal, Mother argued that there was no evidence of drug use at the time of the jurisdiction hearing, that the child never saw her using drugs, and that all of the child’s day to day needs were met. In response, the State argued that the juvenile court found Mother’s testimony “not credible” and that the court “was not required to find that [mother] was no longer using drugs at the time of trial” because the only evidence that Mother had stopped using three months before trial was her own “non-credible testimony.” Under ORS 419B.100(1)(c), the juvenile court may assert jurisdiction only where the evidence is sufficient to establish “a current threat of serious loss or injury that is likely to be realized” which is to be based on “the totality of the children’s circumstances or conditions.” Dept. of Human Services v. A. W., 276 Or App 276 (2016). Dept. of Human Services v. A. L., 268 Or App 391 (2015) The Court of Appeals held that there was no evidence of current conduct or condition because as a matter of law, the conversation the child heard was insufficient exposure and that the jurisdictional bases were not compelling enough as they were based on the child’s unpersuasive testimony. Reversed and remanded.