Pennsylvania Juvenile Laws
Juvenile Delinquency Laws in Pennsylvania
Juvenile delinquency actions can commonly be thought of as court action involving a minor child who is believed to have committed a crime. In juvenile law, the term "delinquent act" is used rather than the term "crime." Further, because a juvenile is involved, the case is handled in special proceedings designed for juvenile matters rather than through adult criminal court proceedings. Juveniles charged with serious crimes may face a detention hearing whereby a juvenile court hearing office will decide whether the juvenile may be released to his or her parents or whether the juvenile should be detained in a facility such as Shuman Center pending the adjudication at the juvenile delinquency hearing. It is important to remember that neither the juvenile nor the parents of the accused juvenile should make any statements to police prior to speaking with an attorney.
Juveniles who have been found to have committed a delinquent act are not sent to an adult prison; however, a juvenile may be sent to a juvenile detention facility. Delinquent children with a prior history are often sent to more serious detention facilities such as New Castle Youth Development Center (YDC) which is considered to be a maximum security facility for juveniles. Most counties have specialized placement programs for delinquent children with drug and alcohol problems or who have committed sex crimes. Juveniles who have been found to have committed less serious delinquent acts may be allowed to remain in their home under the supervision of a juvenile court probation officer.
Juvenile Dependency Laws in Pennsylvania
Juvenile dependency actions are commonly actions brought by the county child welfare agency (often called CYF or the Office of Children, Youth & Families) claiming that a parent or guardian has committed child abuse or child neglect. A child can also be found to be a dependent child if the child's parents or guardian cannot control the actions of a child. This situation often occurs when a child refuses to go to school or is a runaway. In addition to the local child welfare office, any interested individual is permitted to commence a juvenile dependency action. The interested individual may be a parent who is attempting to care for an unruly child, a teacher, police officer, neighbor, or other person. A child who is declared to be a dependent child may be allowed to remain in the care of his or her parent or guardian under the supervision of the court and a CYF caseworker, be placed with a foster parent or foster family, or be placed in a facility designed for dependent children. Parents whose children have been removed from their care have a limited amount of time to rectify the problems that led to the child's placement and to seek reunification of their family. If reunification does not happen within a certain time, CYF may seek to terminate the parent's parental rights to the minor child and allow the child to be adopted by third parties.
What to do if Served with a Pennsylvania Juvenile Court Notice?
Our PA law firm has extensive experience in juvenile court matters. Attorney Lisa Marie Vari was formerly employed in the Juvenile Court section, as well as the Adult Sections, of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County as former Administrative Judge Max Baer's Staff Attorney.
Juvenile court matters often arise with little advance notice to the parent or guardian. Furthermore, in initial proceedings, the technical rules regarding courtroom procedure are sometimes not applicable. If served with any type of notice that a juvenile court proceeding is scheduled, the parent or guardian of the subject child should immediately email our Pittsburgh lawyers' office or contact us by telephone at (412) 281-9906 for our Pittsburgh office, (724) 776-9906 for our Cranberry office, or toll-free at 1(866) PA-DIVORCE or 1(866) PA-CUSTODY for your Pennsylvania juvenile dependency or juvenile delinquency matters.
Low income parents in Allegheny County who cannot afford to hire a private attorney should contact the Juvenile Court Project at (412) 391-4467 to obtain a Parent Advocate attorney if their matter involves a dependency or termination of parental rights matter. All children in dependency matters are appointed a Child Advocate to represent their legal interests. In Allegheny County, KidsVoice which can be contacted at (412) 391-3100, operates as the Child Advocates. In addition, a Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) volunteer may also be assigned to the dependency case. Parents of juveniles accused of committing a delinquent act may contact the Allegheny County Public Defenders' office at (412) 350-2401 to obtain representation for their child if they cannot afford to hire a private juvenile delinquency attorney .
Our PA law firm has offices located in downtown Pittsburgh where we can meet with clients or at several meeting locations including Cranberry Township (Butler County), Robinson Township, South Hills, Washington, and Sewickley. Appointments are availabale by telephone if you cannot attend a consultation in person. Our attorneys accept juvenile delinquency and juvenile dependency cases in Allegheny County (Pittsburgh), Armstrong County, Beaver County, Butler County, Somerset County, Washington County, and Westmoreland County (Greensburg). Our PA lawyers accept juvenile law cases from other Western Pennsylvania counties including Clarion County, Fayette County, Greene County, Indiana County, Lawrence County, Mercer County, Venango County on a case-by-case basis.
PA Appellate Cases involving Juvenile Delinquency &Juvenile Dependency
In Re DG, Jr. - No contact provision vacated when requested by CYF attorney after father and his attorney left the courtroom.
In Re Adoption of JEF, CJU, NGF - PA Supreme Court ruled that the CYF Agency does not have to give its consent or approval before a family member can seek to adopt children whose parents' parental rights have been terminated.
In Re Adoption of RJS - Termination of parental rights (TPR) case.
In Re Adoption of SEG - CYF can file a petition for termination of parental rights prior to the court ordering a change of goal to termination of rights.
In Re CP - Termination of parental rights (TPR) case.
In Re Involuntary Termination of Parental Rights to EM, RM - Termination of parental rights (TPR) case.
In The Interest of GT - Termination of parental rights (TPR) case.
In The Interest of JE - Finding of delinquency overturned when probation officer did not have probable cause to search bedroom where juvenile was sitting and Motion to Suppress Evidence should have been granted.
In The Interest of KC - Juvenile dependency case.
In The Interest of LC, II - PA Superior Court ruled that grandmother of minor child did not have standing to participate in grandchild's juvenile dependency hearing.
In The Interest of MJS - Biological father's termination of parental rights and adoption of child by grandparents upheld after father sought to vacate adoption decree when father failed to participate in judicial proceedings seeking to advance his rights when he knew he was not named on child's birth certificate.
In The Interest of SJ - Office of Children, Youth, & Families (OCYF) compelled to pay expenses related to dependent child's college education when child requested to remain under dependency status beyond her 18th birthday.
In The Matter of AK and LK - Goal change from reunification to termination reversed by Superior Court when mother showed she had made progress in correcting conditions that necessitated original placement.
In The Matter of EB - Finding of dependency upheld when child indicated mother's friend made sexual advances towards her and mother chose not to believe child and did nothing to protect her.
In The Matter of IAC - Termination of parental rights (TPR) case.
In the matter of N.C. - The PA Superior Court decided that although a parent made substantial progress towards achieving the goal of her permanency plan, the trial court properly decided to change the permanency goal to adoption because the trial court must focus on the child and determine the goal in accordance with the child's best interest and not those of his or her parents. In the matter of: N.C., 2006 Pa. Super 285.
In Re: Adoption of A.P. & A.P. - Termination of mother's parental rights upheld after children in placement for more than 12 months and grounds for their removal continue. In Re: Adoption of A.P. & A.P., Minors, 2007 Pa. Super. 80
In the Interestof D.K. - Non-relative who had raised children prior to their dependency adjudication was deemed to stand in loco parentis, or acting like a parent, and was therefore entitled to standing as a party in all dependency proceedings, permitted to testify and present evidence, and should have been appointed counsel to represent him in the juvenile court proceedings. In the Interest of: D.K, 2007 Pa. Super. 99
Bradford County CYS v. Moon - The PA Superior Court affirmed an order directing mother to pay one-half of the costs for the placement for her son by Children and Youth Services in a foster setting. Bradford County Children and Youth Services v Moon, 2007 Pa. Super. 127
Morgan v. Weiser - Mother and father's parental rights were terminated and the maternal grandparents became the children's adoptive parents. After the grandparents' adoption, the grandparents permitted father some minimal contact with the children. The court held that father no longer had standing to seek custody of the children since his rights were terminated and he did not stand in loco parentis any longer to the children. Morgan v Weiser, 2007 Pa. Super. 128
Mother's appeal of the order terminating her parental rights to her daughter was waived for failing to comply with court rules which required her to file a concise statement of matters complained of on appeal, pursuant to PA Rule of Appellate Procedure 1925(b). In Re: L.M., Appeal of: S.M., 2007 Pa. Super.
In re S.D.T., Jr., a minor - The PA Superior Court reiterates that Pennsylvania courts are required to engage in a two-step evaluation process before terminating parental rights. First, the conduct of the parent must be examined. The petitioner seeking termination must establish by clear and convincing evidence that the parent's conduct satisfies at least one of the nine statutory grounds for termination, as set forth in 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 2511(a). If it is determined that this burden of proof has been met, then the trial court must next consider the second step of the process, which entails a determination of whether termination best serves the needs and welfare of the child. The needs and welfare of the child are the paramount consideration in deciding whether to terminate parental rights. The effect of severing the bond between the parent and the child is a major aspect of the needs and welfare analysis. In Re: S.D.T, Jr. a Minor, Appeal of: S.D.T., Sr., 2007 Pa. Super. 277
In the Interest of M.S.K. - Father appeals order denying his petition for leave to appeal nunc pro tunc the order terminating his parental rights to his minor child. In the Interest of: M.S.K., Minor Child Appeal of: B.F.K., Natural Father, 2007 Pa. Super.
In re: Adoption of K.J. - Mother appeals final decrees which terminated her parental rights to her minor children. In re: Adoption of: K.J., Minor Child Appeal of: C.S., Natural Mother, 2007 Pa. Super.
In the Interest of B.L.J., Jr. - Appellants, S.A.L. and C.E.L. appeal the order which sustained the preliminary objections of Appellee, T.G.H. ("Mother"), to Appellants' petition to terminate her parental rights as to B.L.J., Jr. and dismissed the termination petition. In the Interest of: B.L.J., Jr. Appeal of: S.A.L. and C.E.L., 2007 Pa. Super
In the Interest of KZS, Appeal of CVS, mother - Termination of parental rights case when the child tested positive for cocaine at birth, remained in placement for substantial period of time, and the mother had not proven she remedied her housing or drug addiction problems.
In Re: Z.S.W., a/k/a Z.J., - Termination of parental rights case affirmed when biological father who did not come forward to claim his paternity until after child was already dependent and who did not seek to establish relationship with child even after paternity test confirmed his parentage. In Re: Z.S.W., a/k/a Z.J., 2008 PA Super 55
R.C. v. J.S. - The Pennsylvania Superior Court determined that it is improper to suspend child support orders during periods of transitory in-patient treatment outside the home given that the custodial parent still must maintain an appropriate residence in anticipation of the child's eventual return. While this case applied to a temporary hospitalization, the case also cited examples such as when the minor child is in temporary placement due to a juvenile court order removing the child from the home. R.C. v. J.S., 2008 PA Super 219
P.T. & K.T. v. M.H. - Superior Court ruled that if a juvenile dependency case is pending, any child custody litigation must be consolidated with and heard as part of the dependency proceeding since both proceedings involve an analysis of a child's best interests. P.T. & K.T. v. M.H., 2008 PA Super 155
In Re: C.T. and G.T.F., Both Minors, Appeal of C.T., Biological Father, P.T. & K.T. v. M.H. - The Superior Court affirmed termination of father's parental rights when evidence failed to prove that the children had any bond with their father. In Re: C.T. and G.T.F., Both Minors, Appeal of C.T., Biological Father, P.T. & K.T. v. M.H., 2008 PA Super 31
Disclaimer
The statements in this section are based on Pennsylvania law and have been issued to inform and not advise. The statements are general in nature and individual facts in a given case may alter their application or involve other laws not referred to here.
