State v. T.J.L.

OYA placement is appropriately ordered by a court when the “best interest” of the youth is taken into consideration alongside the circumstances.

The appellant assigned two assignments of error to the juvenile court’s opinion which ultimately resulted in the appellant being placed with Oregon Youth Authority, or OYA. First, he argued that the earlier court’s usage of ORS 419C.411 undermined the “best interest” requirement of ORS 419C.478(1). On this issue, the Oregon Court of Appeals clarified that not all ORS 419C.411 factors are relevant to the “best interest” analysis and decided to slightly modify the opinion by striking the reference of ORS 419C.411 to avoid confusion. Second, the youth argued that one of the footnotes of the earlier opinion failed to acknowledge the presumption that favors parental or familial custody. The Court, again to avoid confusion, decided to delete the footnote entirely, especially because the earlier court had considered whether it was in the best interest of the youth/appellant to remain with family. The Court here also denied the Oregon Public Defense Commission’s motion to appear as Amicus Curiae.