O.C.G.A.
O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 15-11-70 (2019)

‘‘Risk and needs assessment’’ defined; establishment of family treatment court division; procedures; fees; acceptance of grants or donations

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a)(1) As used in this subsection, the term ‘‘risk and needs assessment’’ means an actuarial tool, approved by the Council of Accountability Court Judges of Georgia and validated on a targeted population, scientifically proven to determine an individual’s risk to recidivate and to identify criminal risk factors that, when properly addressed, can reduce such individual’s likelihood of committing future criminal behavior. (2) Any juvenile court may establish a family treatment court division to provide an alternative to the traditional judicial system for the disposition of dependancy cases and for assisting superior courts with criminal cases referred to such division under Code Section

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases, 2005–2013 · leading case: In the Interest of J. L. K., 691 S.E.2d 892 (Ga. Ct. App. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In the Interest of J. L. K., 691 S.E.2d 892 (Ga. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 6× “He invoked OCGA § 15-11-70 (d) in support of the motion and requested a hearing on the matter, which was scheduled for April 2.”
In the Interest of E. W., 658 S.E.2d 854 (Ga. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “149, 150 ( 486 SE2d 177 ) (1997) (finding a juvenile court’s order extending custody of a delinquent juvenile for two additional years pursuant to former OCGA § 15-11-41 (g) (now OCGA § 15-11-70 (a)) did not run afoul of the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy…”
In the Interest of J. R., 633 S.E.2d 447 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 6× “Pursuant to OCGA § 15-11-70 (a), an order of disposition “continues in force for two years or until the child is sooner discharged by the Department of Juvenile Justice.”
Wright v. State, 614 S.E.2d 56 (Ga. 2005). · cites it 4× “Under OCGA § 15-11-70, the order of the juvenile court adjudicating a juvenile as delinquent and committing the juvenile to the custody of the Department continues for two years unless extended or terminated by the juvenile court.”
In the Interest of C. S., 635 S.E.2d 176 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 8× “” Counsel further argued that a juvenile court has no authority to extend probation for the purpose of requiring an offender to pay restitution, citing OCGA § 15-11-70 (a) (3). At the hearing, the juvenile court stated that, prior to entering the initial probation order in July…”
In the Interest of M. A. I., 737 S.E.2d 585 (Ga. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 8× “” 23 The choice of which disposition is best suited for these purposes is vested in the discretion of the juvenile court, 24 and *584 OCGA § 15-11-70 (a) permits a juvenile court to extend the duration of an order of disposition by an additional two years so long as, inter alia,…”
In the Interest of B. Q. L. E., 676 S.E.2d 742 (Ga. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “” See, however, OCGA § 15-11-70 (a) (order of disposition committing delinquent or unruly child to DJJ continues in force for two years or until child is sooner discharged by DJJ).”
In the Interest of J. R. L., 738 S.E.2d 144 (Ga. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 4× “See OCGA § 15-11-70 (a). 2 According to the supervisor, if a commitment order was issued, the department’s screening committee would examine factors such as J.”
In the Interest of T. H., 680 S.E.2d 569 (Ga. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “also restrain the application of OCGA § 15-11-70 (d) 1 which, likewise, cannot be harmonized with OCGA § 15-11-40 (b), he was sentenced under a designated felony order which is controlled by OCGA § 15-11-63.”
In Re Jlk, 691 S.E.2d 892 (Ga. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 6× “Bell, 264 Ga. 832, 833 , 452 S.E.2d 103 (1995).”
In the Interest of R. T., 628 S.E.2d 662 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 4× “Thus, because of OCGA § 15-11-70 (d) 2 the juvenile court could not be *228 assured that R.”
In the Interest Of: M. A. I., a Child (Ga. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 4× “But OCGA § 15-11-66 (a) provides a list of “orders of disposition best suited to the child’s treatment, rehabilitation, and welfare,” which a juvenile court may make “if the child is found to have committed a delinquent act and is subsequently determined to be in need of…”
Show all 16 citing cases →
— 15-11-70(a) — 2 cases
In Re Bqle, 676 S.E.2d 742 (Ga. Ct. App. 2009).
In Re Ew, 658 S.E.2d 854 (Ga. Ct. App. 2008).
— 15-11-70(d) — 2 cases
In Re Jlk, 691 S.E.2d 892 (Ga. Ct. App. 2010). “Bell, 264 Ga. 832, 833 , 452 S.E.2d 103 (1995).”
In Re Th, 680 S.E.2d 569 (Ga. Ct. App. 2009).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.