|
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND RELEASED JULY 18, 1995 |
NOTICE |
|
A party may file with the
Supreme Court a petition to review an adverse decision by the Court of Appeals. See § 808.10 and Rule 809.62, Stats. |
This opinion is subject to
further editing. If published, the
official version will appear in the bound volume of the Official Reports. |
Nos. 95-0861-FT
95-0862-FT
STATE
OF WISCONSIN IN COURT OF
APPEALS
DISTRICT III
IN THE INTEREST OF
GREGORY H., A
JUVENILE:
STATE OF WISCONSIN,
Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
GREGORY H.,
Respondent-Appellant.
APPEALS from an order[1]
of the circuit court for Langlade County:
JAMES P. JANSEN, Judge. Affirmed.
CANE, P.J. Gregory H., age seventeen, appeals the
trial court's order placing him back in Lincoln Hills School.[2] He contends the State failed to give
adequate notice for the hearing on his change of placement and that there was
no rational basis to support the court's finding that he should be transferred
back to Lincoln Hills. This court
rejects Gregory's arguments, and the change of placement order is affirmed.
The juvenile court had
originally placed Gregory at Lincoln Hills on August 5, 1992, where he had an
extensive stay because of behavioral problems.
In September 1993, he was placed in a group home, but had to be returned
to Lincoln Hills the following month because of an incident where he had stolen
a car and burglarized a home. He was
again released to another group home in August l994, but Gregory continued to
abscond from the group home and other placements. Finally, on September 20, 1994, the State filed a petition
seeking Gregory's placement back in Lincoln Hills, which the court granted
after a hearing on September 29, 1994.
That order is the subject of this appeal. Gregory had also filed a petition seeking placement at home with
his mother, which the court denied.
Section 48.357, Stats., governs juvenile change of
placement requests and hearings and provides in part:
[T]he notice shall contain the name and
address of the new placement, the reasons for the change in placement, a
statement describing why the new placement is preferable to the present
placement and a statement of how the new placement satisfies objectives of the
treatment plan ordered by the court.
First, Gregory contends
that the notice fails to contain information why the Lincoln Hills placement is
preferable to the present placement and how this placement satisfies the
objectives of the treatment plan ordered by the court. In response, the State contends the notice
contains ample information why placement at Lincoln Hills was preferable and
how it would achieve the objectives of the trial court's treatment plan. This court agrees with the State.
Eric Roller, a juvenile
court supervisor, filed the petition requesting Gregory's return to Lincoln
Hills. In Roller's petition for change
of placement and court addendum, he provides an extensive history of Gregory's
placements, problems at these placements and why he recommends Gregory's return
to Lincoln Hills. Essentially, Roller
outlined how Gregory had to be returned to Lincoln previously because he
absconded from a group home and engaged in criminal conduct. In August 1994, Gregory was placed in the
Washington House Group Home from where he absconded early the next month and
was later apprehended at his mother's home.
While at Washington House, Gregory was involved in gang situations,
skipped school and showed disrespect to the other residents and staff. His mother had concealed Gregory's hiding at
her home for about eight days and admitted that during this time Gregory
apparently had changed little as he refused to follow her orders.
Roller indicated that
placement at Washington House was no longer appropriate because of his running
away from that facility and lack of progress while at the facility. Additionally, Roller points out that even
after Gregory was apprehended at his mother's home, he ran away twice from a
shelter home where he was temporarily placed.
He indicated that placement at his mother's home was also inappropriate
inasmuch as she had failed to cooperate with the authorities while she
concealed her son and that Gregory would not even cooperate with his
mother. He also indicated shelter care
was inappropriate because of Gregory's two abscondences. Roller concluded that placement at Lincoln
Hills was preferable as it provided the needed security.
Roller stated how this
change of placement back to Lincoln Hills would also satisfy the court's
treatment plan as the secure facility would not only prevent Gregory from
continuing to run away, but would also force him to follow rules and work on
his behavior modification program. This
court is satisfied that Roller's information amply notified Gregory why the
Lincoln Hills placement was preferable and how it would satisfy the objectives
of the court's treatment plan.
Next, Gregory contends
there was no rational basis for the trial court's placing him back at Lincoln
Hills. This court disagrees. Here, the trial court reviewed Gregory's
juvenile file and Roller's addendum report and conceded that in a sense it was
warehousing Gregory. It stated however,
"But you have such a dangerous attitude problem that you are a danger to
the community, because if you want something, you just take it. If you want your mother's car, you just take
it." Knowing Gregory's propensity
for criminal misconduct, his prior placement and unsuccessful releases to group
homes and shelter facilities and his apparent uncooperative attitude at the
placement hearing, the trial court had no reasonable alternative but to return
Gregory to Lincoln Hills. Consequently,
this court is satisfied that under these circumstances, the trial court
reasonably exercised its discretion by placing Gregory back in Lincoln Hills.
By the Court.—Order
affirmed.
This opinion will not be
published. Rule 809.23(1)(b)4, Stats.