Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 15-11-146 | Car Wreck Lawyer

Link to State of Georgia Official Statute 2018 Georgia Code Annotated (sourced from legal.resource.org)
O.C.G.A. 15-11-146 Case Law from Google Scholar Amendments to OCGA 15-11-146

TITLE 15 COURTS

Section 11. Juvenile Code, 15-11-1 through 15-11-747.

ARTICLE 3 DEPENDENCY PROCEEDINGS

15-11-146. Preliminary protective hearing; findings.

  1. At the preliminary protective hearing, the court shall determine:
    1. Whether there is probable cause to believe a child is a dependent child; and
    2. Whether protective custody of a child is necessary to prevent abuse or neglect pending the hearing on the dependency petition.
  2. The court:
    1. On finding that the complainant has proven neither of the required elements prescribed in subsection (a) of this Code section, shall dismiss the case and shall return the child before the court to his or her parent, guardian, or legal custodian;
    2. On finding that the complainant has not met the burden of proving that protective custody is necessary, shall return the child before the court to his or her parent, guardian, or legal custodian pending the hearing on the dependency petition; or
    3. On finding that the complainant has met the burden prescribed in subsection (a) of this Code section, may place the child before the court in the temporary custody of DFCS pending the hearing on the dependency petition.DFCS shall prioritize temporary placement with an adult who is a relative or fictive kin, provided that such individual has met DFCS's requirements for relative placement and such temporary placement is in the best interests of such child.
  3. A court's order removing a child from his or her home shall be based upon a finding that:
    1. Continuation in his or her home would be contrary to such child's welfare; and
    2. Removal is in such child's best interests.
  4. The court shall make written findings as to whether DFCS has made reasonable efforts to prevent or eliminate the need for removal of a child from his or her home and to make it possible for such child to safely return home. If the court finds that no services were provided but that reasonable services would not have eliminated the need for protective custody, the court shall consider DFCS to have made reasonable efforts to prevent or eliminate the need for protective custody. The court shall include in the written findings a brief description of what preventive and reunification efforts were made by DFCS.
  5. In determining whether a child shall be removed or continued out of his or her home, the court shall consider whether reasonable efforts can prevent or eliminate the need to separate the family. The court shall make a written finding in every order of removal that describes why it is in the best interests of the child that he or she be removed from his or her home or continued in foster care.
  6. To aid the court in making the required written findings, DFCS shall present evidence to the court outlining the reasonable efforts made to prevent taking a child into protective custody and to provide services to make it possible for such child to safely return to his or her home and why protective custody is in the best interests of the child.

(Code 1981, §15-11-146, enacted by Ga. L. 2013, p. 294, § 1-1/HB 242; Ga. L. 2015, p. 540, § 1-6/HB 361; Ga. L. 2016, p. 134, § 1-2/HB 887.)

The 2015 amendment, effective May 5, 2015, substituted "proven neither" for "not proved either" near the beginning of paragraph (b)(1).

The 2016 amendment, effective July 1, 2016, added the second sentence in paragraph (b)(3).

PART 5 D EPENDENCY PETITIONS

15-11-150. Authority to file petition.

A DFCS employee, a law enforcement officer, or any person who has actual knowledge of the abuse, neglect, or abandonment of a child or is informed of the abuse, neglect, or abandonment of a child that he or she believes to be truthful may make a petition alleging dependency. Such petition shall not be accepted for filing unless the court or a person authorized by the court has determined and endorsed on the petition that the filing of the petition is in the best interests of the public and such child.

(Code 1981, §15-11-150, enacted by Ga. L. 2013, p. 294, § 1-1/HB 242; Ga. L. 2014, p. 780, § 1-10/SB 364.)

The 2014 amendment, effective April 28, 2014, added the last sentence to this Code section.

Cross references.

- Definition of grandparent and securing of rights, § 19-7-3.

Law reviews.

- For article, "See No Evil, Speak No Evil: Georgia Supreme Court Narrows Requirements for Mandatory Reporters in May v. State," see 66 Mercer L. Rev. 837 (2015). For note criticizing jurisdiction of juvenile justice system over runaways and advocating alternative legal approaches, see 24 Emory L. J. 1075 (1975). For comment on grandparents' visitation rights in Georgia, see 29 Emory L. J. 1083 (1980).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Editor's notes.

- In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under pre-2000 Code Section 15-11-24, which was subsequently repealed but was succeeded by provisions in this Code section, are included in the annotations for this Code section. See the Editor's notes at the beginning of the chapter.

Construction with former provisions.

- Nonprofit advocacy organization was authorized to file a deprivation petition which was separate and distinct from the initial deprivation adjudication since there is no statutory requirement that a petition for modification must be filed under former O.C.G.A. § 15-11-42 (see now O.C.G.A. § 15-11-312), instead of a deprivation petition under former O.C.G.A. § 15-11-24 (see now O.C.G.A. § 15-11-150,15-11-390, and15-11-420). In re A.V.B., 222 Ga. App. 241, 474 S.E.2d 114 (1996) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 15-11-24).

Great aunt and uncle.

- Child's great aunt and uncle had standing to bring a petition to terminate the parental rights of the child's father and mother. In re J.J., 225 Ga. App. 682, 484 S.E.2d 681 (1997) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 15-11-24).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

Editor's notes.

- In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, opinions under former Code 1933, § 24-2403, which was subsequently repealed but was succeeded by provisions in this Code section, are included in the annotations for this Code section. See the Editor's notes at the beginning of the chapter.

School official not liable for investigative referral of deprivation.

- School official would not be held liable in a legal action founded upon the official's good faith referral of a child neglect, abuse, or abandonment situation to a county department of family and children services for investigation. 1963-65 Op. Att'y Gen. p. 746 (decided under former Code 1933, § 24-2403).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 47 Am. Jur. 2d, Juvenile Courts and Delinquent and Dependent Children, § 79 et seq.

C.J.S.

- 43 C.J.S., Infants, §§ 184 et seq., 191 et seq.

U.L.A.

- Uniform Juvenile Court Act (U.L.A.) § 20.

No results found for Georgia Code 15-11-146.