Beginning in 2012, Oregon began the transition from OJIN to eCourts. Implementation has occurred in 10 counties and on May 12, 2014, implementation will happen in Oregon’s largest county – Multnomah.
Per the BOG email that went out today:
Multnomah’s move to Oregon eCourt will be unique, due to the 10.2 million cases that need to be transferred. Because of the sheer volume of cases, the conversion process will result in an online blackout for Multnomah Circuit Court data currently scheduled to begin on May 5 (5:30 p.m.). The blackout is currently scheduled to last until May 27 (8:00 a.m.); however, previous conversions have been successfully completed ahead of schedule. At this time, it is not clear whether the public access terminals found in the Multnomah Circuit Court will be able to access data during the 21-day blackout.
Although OJIN OnLine users will not be able to access Multnomah Circuit Court case data during this 21-day period, the court will be operating under the Oregon eCourt system for most of this period. Beginning on May 10, the court’s judges and staff will have access to the approximately 2 million active cases. Beginning on May 12, calendars will be posted online and hearing notices will be emailed during the remainder of the OJIN OnLine blackout. The remaining inactive cases, a little more than 8 million, will be converted and accessible to the court after May 21. Online access to Multnomah court data will be restored on May 27. Judges will be conducting hearings and ruling on matters, documents will be scanned into the eCourt system and staff will be filing and entering documents, producing, posting and distributing calendars for trials and hearing, and sending notices to parties of cases set.
If you have not yet had a chance to work in a county with eCourt, training sessions are scheduled in the coming weeks. See the schedule at the link below:
Multnomah County Training Schedule
On January 11, 2014 JLEC met for the first time of 2014. We welcomed 5 new members and had very robust discussion to include topics regarding CEJ contributions, disproportionate representation of juveniles in dependency cases as well at the February CLE.
The meetings can be downloaded here:
The survey results are in and we are thrilled that we have such interested members! Thank you for taking the time to give us valuable feedback that will help shape what we, as a committee, provide to you. You can review the results here and if you have any additional input, please email Morgan Long at firstname.lastname@example.org
HB 3363 created the Joint Interim Task Force on Juvenile Court Proceedings. The group met yesterday for the first time and the meeting materials can be found here.
DHS will be implementing Differential Response next year in 5 Casey Counties. You can find out more about the new program here.
Dept. of Human Services v. A. R. S. II
Issued: May 15, 2013
Reversed and Remanded
Mother and child made various assignments of error. The court determined that the trial court erred in relying on conditions and circumstances outside of the scope of the basis for jurisdiction – specifically, mother’s personality disorder – when denying mother and child’s motions to dismiss and assessing mother’s progress.
Dept. of Human Services v. A. J. M.
Issued: May 15, 2013
Under ORS 419B.923(1)(a), a judgment may be modified (1) to correct a “clerical mistake” in the judgment, or (2) to correct errors in the judgment arising from “oversight or omission.” Those types of modifications may be made by the juvenile court at any time, even during the pendency of an appeal.
The trial court initially issued a permanency judgment failed to recite a brief description of services offered by DHS to the mother. During the pendency of the appeal, the court issued a corrected judgment containing the list of services that DHS offered to mother. The court determined that the trial court was correcting an “oversight or omission” and denied mother’s request for relief.
In addition, the court noted that 419B.476(5)(a) requires that court enter a permanency judgment within 20 days of the hearing. Mother raised the issue that the corrected judgment was not entered within the time allowed. However, the court also rejected this argument because the initial judgment was entered within 20 days and 419B.923(1)(a) allows a court to correct a judgment at any time.
Dept. of Human Services v. A. B.
Issued: May 30, 2013
Reversed and Remanded – Per Curiam
At the time of the review hearing, mother had ameliorated all of the issues on which jurisdiction was established. The only remaining allegation was that father lacked legal custody. Repeating the holding in State v. A. L. M., 232 Or App 13 (2009), a court cannot continue jurisdiction under 419B.100 based solely on lack of a custody order if all other safety threats have been ameliorated.
Judith Swanson put together a great list of ALL of the proposed legislation relating to Juvenile Law. This year has 38 bills that would impact our practice. From a bill stating that grandparents should be parties in dependency proceedings to a statute creating a juvenile aid and assist process, this is a session to watch.
You can track the bills here.
Youth, Rights & Justice, Oregon’s nonprofit law firm for children, is seeking volunteer attorneys and law firm partners who will help some of Oregon’s most vulnerable children get the support they need to enroll in school, stay in school, succeed and graduate. The students who will be served will be in the foster care system, the juvenile justice system, or both. The majority of the students will reside in Washington County. Volunteer lawyers will help protect students’ rights to due process and to a “Free and Appropriate Public Education.”
Continue reading Call for Pro Bono Attorneys – Washington County