DHS v. M.D.L.

Under ORS 419B.875(2)(c), a party has a right to be represented by counsel at a permanency hearing.

After the father made affirmative statements about substance abuse and domestic violence, the juvenile court entered judgments against the father over his three children. DHS then sought to change the children’s permanency plans from reunification to adoption in the juvenile court. After finding against the father, the father argued that the juvenile court erred when it barred his counsel from the permanency hearing. On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed finding that the juvenile court plainly erred under ORS 419B.875(2)(c) and the court had discretion to correct that plain error due to the gravity of the error. The court reasoned that the legislature has defined specific situations where a parent must appear before the court and a permanency hearing is not one of them. Because the father was represented by counsel, the juvenile court violated the father’s ORS 419B.875(2)(c) statutory rights by not allowing father’s counsel to question a key witness and from making closing arguments. This error fell with the Appeal Court’s discretion because the testimony that could have been elicited may have been of particular importance. Therefore, the father had a right to be represented by counsel at the permanecy hearing. REVERSED and REMANDED.