Background
Mother appealed a judgment entered after a review hearing concerning her child, I. G. F. At the hearing, the trial court ordered that the child’s permanency plan of APPLA—another planned permanent living arrangement—remain in place.
The trial court found, as required by ORS 419B.449(3)(d) and (e), that the child was progressing adequately toward high-school graduation, the resource parents were following the reasonable and prudent parent standard, and the child had regular, ongoing opportunities to participate in age-appropriate activities.
The Court’s Holding
The Oregon Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment. It concluded that testimony and exhibits supported the trial court’s statutory findings concerning the APPLA plan.
Mother’s appointed counsel filed a brief under ORAP 5.90 and State v. Balfour without a Section B identifying any claims for reversal. After independently reviewing the record, including the trial court file, hearing transcript, and counsel’s brief, the Court of Appeals found no arguably meritorious issues.
Key Takeaways
- The child’s APPLA permanency plan remains in place.
- Testimony and exhibits supported the findings required by ORS 419B.449(3)(d) and (e).
- The appellate court’s independent Balfour review disclosed no arguably meritorious basis for reversal.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the findings an Oregon juvenile court must make when continuing an APPLA permanency plan, including findings about educational progress, resource-parent decision-making, and opportunities for age-appropriate activities.
The opinion is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion under ORAP 10.30 and may be cited only as that rule permits.