|
December 20, 2007
The Washington Supreme Court has ruled that a Yakima Juvenile Court Commissioner improperly used the court’s “inherent” contempt powers to sentence children to up to 60 days in jail for running away from foster care. The Supreme Court, in its December 20, 2007 ruling, substantially limited the use of the controversial “inherent contempt” procedure.
“The Supreme Court decision reversing the Commissioner’s sentence is a victory for troubled youth who are being incarcerated for behaviors symptomatic of their mental illness, broken homes, and the trauma they have suffered. Incarcerating juveniles for running away will only exacerbate their problems and harm rather than help them,” said Pat Arthur, Senior Attorney at the National Center for Youth Law (NCYL), which filed an amicus brief in the case.
The opinion of the Supreme Court in In Re the Dependency of A.K. et al, authored by Chief Justice Gerry L. Alexander, requires that before a court utilizes its inherent contempt power to incarcerate a juvenile, it must find that “all less restrictive alternatives have failed.”
A concurring opinion, written by Justice Barbara Madsen, recognized that: “Detention should not be used as a substitute for access to basic services, treatment, and care.” In particular, the concurrence expressed concerns that using contempt proceedings to incarcerate juveniles is “often ineffective” and may in fact cause great harm to the child.
In 2004, three foster children in Washington State were held in contempt several times by the Yakima County juvenile court for violating the court’s orders not to run away from their foster placements. As punishment for violating the court’s dependency orders, the juvenile court sentenced the youth to time at the Yakima County Juvenile Detention Facility. The juvenile court’s contempt sanctions were imposed under the court’s “inherent contempt” authority. The terms of the sentences (one of the girls was sentenced to a term of 60 days) far exceeded the maximum term of seven days allowed under Washington law for violation of a status offense order.
After they had already served their time in jail, the youth appealed the contempt orders issued by the juvenile court to the Washington Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals upheld several of the contempt orders. The appeals court determined that the juvenile court had the “inherent authority” to sentence foster youth who are chronic runaways to jail for any amount of time in excess of the seven-day limit imposed by statute, provided there is a “reasonable basis” to believe the longer sentence will achieve what a seven-day sentence would not. The attorney for the dependent youth petitioned the Washington State Supreme Court to review the appeals court’s decision in Washington Supreme Court.
In an amicus brief filed on May 1, 2006, the NCYL, in collaboration with Columbia Legal Services, TeamChild, and the University of Washington School of Law Children and Youth Advocacy Clinic, joined the foster youth in their request to the Washington Supreme Court to review the appeals court’s decision. The Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law and K & L Gates, a Seattle law firm, also submitted an amicus brief on behalf of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry urging the Washington Supreme Court to review the court of appeals decision. Amici urged the Court to review the decision permitting juvenile court judges to use their “inherent contempt” authority to sentence foster youth to prolonged indeterminate punitive sentences in detention for running away.
Updated January 2, 2008
|
 | |
|
