In re Aaron J.

Aaron had an extremely abusive and traumatic childhood. In 2010 the San Francisco County District Attorney filed an original juvenile wardship petition under Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 alleging that Aaron, age 12, had committed robbery and assault with a deadly weapon. Aaron was placed on home supervision; the petition was ultimately dismissed. Five additional wardship petitions were filed during the next 26 months. In 2015, the juvenile court declared wardship and ordered out-of-home placement with conditions of probation. Due to the juvenile court’s decision to treat him as a ward under section 241.1, Aaron’s dependency jurisdiction was terminated one month shy of his eighteenth birthday. The court of appeal affirmed, rejecting Aaron’s arguments that that the county protocol under which his juvenile court status was assessed violates state law; that the juvenile court’s status determination was prejudicially flawed; that the juvenile court’s refusal to modify its dispositional order to reinstate dependency was error; and that the juvenile court’s underlying jurisdictional finding that he committed second-degree robbery was not supported by substantial evidence.The juvenile court considered all the evidence and determined that wardship was appropriate because it believed that Aaron would benefit from a “different approach.” The juvenile court’s decision as to whether an earlier juvenile court order should be modified rests within the court’s discretion. View "In re Aaron J." on Justia Law