State Ex Rel. Juvenile Department v. Rial

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that ORS 419C.411 did not “expressly require the court to make detailed findings on the record to support its dispositional determination” and declining to construe the statute to impose such a requirement
• explaining that a youth has the right to adequate notice of the allegations against them as to a purported probation violation, and evaluating whether the juvenile court’s decision was tied to the allega- tions made
• explaining that a youth has the right to adequate notice of the allegations against them as to a purported probation violation, and evaluating whether the juvenile court’s decision was tied to the allega- tions made
• “Youth is correct that he is entitled to the protec- tions of the Due Process Clause in his probation revocation hearing, including adequate notice of the ‘charges’ against him.”
• “Youth is correct that he is entitled to the protec- tions of the Due Process Clause in his probation revocation hearing, including adequate notice of the ‘charges’ against him.”
• “because youth failed at the proper time to challenge the [juvenile] court’s November 18,1998, order imposing sex offender treatment as a condition of his probation,” he could not do so in challenging the later revocation of his probation for violating that condition

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).