SUMMARY: If a child no longer comes within the meaning of the statute under which he was adjudicated, a juvenile court may terminate jurisdiction without consideration of the best interests of the child.
Kevin K. was adjudicated on April 22, 2005 under N.R.S. 43-247(3)(b) upon a finding that he had been habitually truant from school. At disposition on July 14, 2005, the court ordered Kevin to attend all classes without truancies or tardies. After becoming 16 years of age on August 21, 2005, Kevin’s mother signed a release authorized under N.R.S. 79-201(3)(d) to discontinue Kevin’s enrollment at school. A hearing was held on Kevin’s motion to terminate jurisdiction. The court found that, although Kevin’s best interests would not be served by termination of jurisdiction based on Kevin’s lack of progress, a best interests standard did not apply and jurisdiction must be terminated because the discontinuation of enrollment “negates his or her status or definition as a ‘habitually truant’ juvenile over whom the court should exercise jurisdiction under Neb. Rev. Stat. Section 43-247 (3)(b).”
In an appeal by the Lancaster County Attorney, the Court of Appeals reversed the court’s decision terminating jurisdiction after concluding that the best interests standard should be applied.
The Nebraska Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals decision. In 2004, Nebraska’s compulsory attendance law for children attending school was altered to provide for a parent or guardian to sign a notarized released discontinuing the child’s enrollment. No order from the juvenile court can preclude a child’s parent from discontinuing the child’s enrollment per this statute. Since Kevin’s mother discontinued Kevin’s enrollment in school, he became no longer truant. The court therefore can terminate jurisdiction in this case where the sole adjudication is truancy and need not make a best interests finding.