Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

01/13/95 R. D. P. v. STATE DEPARTMENT YOUTH

January 13, 1995

R. D. P.
v.
STATE DEPARTMENT OF YOUTH SERVICES



Appeal from Houston Circuit Court. (CC-94-504). Michael Crespi, Trial Judge.

Released for Publication May 24, 1995.

Yates, Judge. Robertson, P. J., and Thigpen, J., concur.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Yates

YATES, Judge

R. D. P. appeals from the circuit court's dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. We affirm.

On July 21, 1993, the juvenile court entered an order declaring R. D. P. delinquent, recommending that he be placed in a sexual offender program, and transferring his custody from the Department of Human Resources ("DHR") to the Alabama Department of Youth Services ("Youth Services").

On March 3, 1994, Youth Services petitioned the juvenile court to commit R. D. P. to the custody of the Alabama Department of Mental Health and Mental Retardation ("Mental Health Department"), stating that R. D. P. was mentally ill and that he posed a "real and present threat of substantial harm to himself and others." On March 23, 1994, the juvenile court ordered that R. D. P. be examined by the Mental Health Department.

After examining R. D. P., the Mental Health Department informed the juvenile court that "in view of the diagnosis of pedophilia, it is recommended by [his] treatment team that he should be enrolled in a treatment program for this disorder." The treatment team also determined that R. D. P. did not need further hospitalization in an acute care psychiatric facility and recommended that he continue in a residential setting to learn more appropriate behavior before his release into the community.

On May 25, 1994, Youth Services petitioned the juvenile court to release R. D. P. from its custody, stating that R. D. P. had substantially completed his service plan with Youth Services. On June 13, 1994, the juvenile court notified DHR of the need for a multi-needs *fn1 assessment of R. D. P. On June 15, 1994, the Houston County Service Facilitation Team issued a report with the following recommendations:

"The team encourages to request an immediate hearing in order to advise the court that our county doesn't have an appropriate placement for this child.

"... Based on the fact that [he] will soon be 19 years old and has a history of pedophilia, our team strongly urges that he be placed in an adult facility.... Placing [him] in a juvenile facility or in any location where he might have access to younger children would be setting him up for failure and would be placing other children at high risk for sexual abuse. Utilizing any placement which can not provide 24 hour a day supervision would be placing the community at risk."

On August 4, 1994, the juvenile court found R. D. P. to be a multiple needs child and referred his case to the State Facilitation Team. It further ordered that R. D. P. "remains in physical custody of [Youth Services] with status quo to be maintained until further information and recommendation is available for the Court."

On August 10, 1994, R. D. P. petitioned the circuit court for a writ of habeas corpus, alleging that he was due to be released from the custody of Youth Services. The next day, the circuit court entered an order stating:

"I have considered the petition for writ of habeas corpus and decline to issue it at this time. I have granted the petitioner 7 days to show cause of record why I should not dismiss this petition or transfer it to the juvenile court. On the face of the pleading, the cause of detention is a juvenile court order ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.