Connecticut Law Tribune
  • Home
  • News
  • Decisions
  • Columns
  • Special Issues
  • Practice Areas
  • Verdicts
  • Books
  • Lawjobs
  • Events

Home > Court Confirms DCF's Juvenile Placement Powers

Font Size: increase font decrease font

Court Confirms DCF's Juvenile Placement Powers

Agency's recent policy is to greatly limit use of out-of-state facilities

By THOMAS B. SCHEFFEY All Articles 

The Connecticut Law Tribune

January 25, 2013

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 
Aaron Romano

Aaron Romano

The Connecticut Supreme Court last week agreed that the Department of Children and Families has the final say over whether a juvenile is sent for out-of-state treatment or confinement, through a statute that takes that power away from juvenile judges.

The decision lets stand a year-old Appellate Court ruling, which was subsequently bolstered with new amendments to state law. Two years ago, as many as 300 youths were in out-of-state facilities, but the number has dropped to 70, as the DCF has focused on in-state placements.

Lawmakers and others say the new direction will save the state "millions" in treatment costs.

In Supreme Court Justice Dennis Eveleigh's written decision in the case known as Jeffrey M., he quotes state Sen. Toni Harp, D-New Haven, on the subject. "[We have] heard a lot about what has not worked in the budget. One of the things that has worked, and it was one of the cries that we heard in a bipartisan way, is that we bring kids back. We have brought kids back. It has saved us millions of dollars and basically this [amendment] is to assure that we can continue those savings."

But some attorneys who work with juvenile offenders don't like the new policy. They say with the out-of-state facilities largely off limits, young lawbreakers can end up in Connecticut facilities that don't offer what they need.

To be sure, there's more than money at stake here. This case seems to be part of an ongoing turf battle between the DCF and juvenile judges. The child welfare agency is currently challenging the authority of juvenile judges to shorten DCF commitments through plea agreements, and argued a Supreme Court appeal of that issue on Dec. 5.

Cultural Shift

The out-of-state placement case was launched two years ago, when Bloomfield lawyer Aaron Romano was assigned to defend juvenile offender Jeffrey M. He was a 300-pound, 15-year old kid who had confessed to a strong-arm robbery in Hartford. Romano was mainly aiming to keep his client from being tried as an adult.

For many years, one accepted juvenile court alternative has been treatment in a specialized facility for juveniles, like Pennsulvania's Glen Mills facility. Romano was about to learn that a cultural shift—and a change in the rules — was underway at DCF.

Over the course of two years, coinciding with the incoming administration of Governor Dannel P. Malloy, Connecticut began to scrutinize with an eagle eye the commitment of any juvenile to an out-of-state facility.

A browser or device that allows javascript is required to view this content.

Continue reading

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

Next



Subscribe to The Connecticut Law Tribune

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Find similar content

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • Appellate Court
  • Connecticut Juvenile Training School
  • Department of Children and Families
  • Supreme Court

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Questions Raised About Legal Malpractice Policies
    •      
  2. Groups Aim To Shoot Down New State Gun Laws
    •      
  3. Court Continues To Grant Lawyers Fraud Immunity
    •         
      • Subscription Required
  4. Locker Room Injury Leads To Municipal Liability Drama
    •      
  5. Jury Convicts Former Aide To House Speaker Donovan
    •         
      • Subscription Required
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

Hiring Interns? Be Sure to Do It Right

ACC Weighs in on Arizona's In-House Pro Bono Rules

Ex-Dewey Partners Face New Foe in Firm's Bankruptcy

S&C Adds Linklaters Restructuring Partner in London
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Contrite Companies Can Win Forgiveness in Bribery Cases
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Plaintiffs Want to See Toyota's 'Crown Jewels'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Enron Sandbox Stirs Up Private Data, Again

LegalTech West Coast Wraps Up With Ethics, VC News

In Tricky Prosecutions, Judges Play Peacemakers

Ropers Majeski Tries to Re-Invent Itself
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Fla. Attorneys Lead Force-Placed Insurance Fight

Lawsuit Names Missing Fla. Attorney for Alleged Fraud
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Summer Programs Still in a Drought

Lawyer Not Covered for Alleged Malpractice at Prior Firm
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Firm Takes Another Hit in Bid for 'Unconscionable' Fees

New York's Martin Act Faces Test in Challenge to 2005 Case

Castille Testifies in Favor of 'Civil Gideon' Funding

Workers' Comp Judges Can't Fight Rescinded Raise
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Law Schools Are Looking Beyond LSATs, Says Mich. Dean

Is Freezing Your Eggs the Solution?

Advising Clients on Weather and the Workplace
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Texas Sues BP, Others Over Deepwater Oil Spill Disaster
  •      
    • Subscription Required

'Follow That Escapee!'

Judge Who Tossed Defense Counsel Accused of 'Partiality'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Corporate Bribery Case Part Of National Trend
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Court Continues To Grant Lawyers Fraud Immunity
  •      
    • Subscription Required

  • About The Connecticut Law Tribune
  • Contact The Connecticut Law Tribune
  • Advertise with Us
  • Sitemap
  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media