Dept. of Human Services v. C. V. S. ( 2020 )

87
Submitted May 3, 2019, reversed May 6, 2020
In the Matter of P. J. V. S.,
a Child.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES,
Petitioner-Respondent,
v.
C. V. S.,
Appellant.
Washington County Circuit Court
18JU06143; A169675
466 P3d 82
Erik M Buchér, Judge.
Shannon Storey, Chief Defender, Juvenile Appellate
Section, and Tiffany Keast, Deputy Public Defender, Office
of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant.
Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman,
Solicitor General, and Cecil A. Reniche-Smith, Assistant
Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.
Before Armstrong, Presiding Judge, and Tookey, Judge,
and Shorr, Judge.
PER CURIAM
Reversed.
88 Dept. of Human Services v. C. V. S.
PER CURIAM
In this juvenile dependency case, father appeals the
judgment taking jurisdiction over his child, J. On appeal,
father argues in seven assignments of error that that there
was insufficient evidence for the court to take jurisdiction.
In response, the Department of Human Services (DHS)
concedes that the judgment was not supported by sufficient
evidence that J was exposed to a continuing risk of serious
injury or loss if the juvenile court did not take jurisdiction.
ORS 419B.100(1)(c) 1; Dept. of Human Services v. A. W., 276
Or App 276, 278, 367 P3d 556 (2016) (“To establish jurisdic-
tion pursuant to ORS 419B.100(1)(c), DHS must present evi-
dence sufficient to support a conclusion that the child’s con-
dition or circumstances expose the child to a current threat
of serious loss or injury that is likely to be realized.”). We
agree with and accept DHS’s concession that the evidence
is legally insufficient to establish a current, nonspeculative
risk of harm to the child. Accordingly, we reverse the juris-
dictional judgment.
Reversed.
1
The 2018 version of ORS 419B.100 applies to this case. That statute has
since been amended. Or Laws 2019, ch 594, § 8. Because the amendment does not
affect the analysis in this case, we cite the current version of the statute.