Neb. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 43
Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408 (2026)

Office of Juvenile Services; committing court; powers and duties; commitment review; hearing; immediate change of placement; procedure; annual review of commitment and placement; review status; when

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NE-LEGnebraskalegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) Whenever any juvenile is committed to the Office of Juvenile Services, the juvenile shall also be considered committed to the care and custody of the Department of Health and Human Services for the purpose of obtaining health care and treatment services.

(2) The committing court may order placement at a youth rehabilitation and treatment center for a juvenile committed to the Office of Juvenile Services following a commitment hearing pursuant to subdivision (1)(b)(iii) of section 43-286. The court shall continue to maintain jurisdiction over any juvenile committed to the Office of Juvenile Services, and the office shall provide the court and parties of record with the initial treatment plan and monthly updates regarding the progress of the juvenile.

(3) In addition to the hearings set forth in section 43-285, during a juvenile's term of commitment, any party may file a motion for commitment review to bring the case before the court for consideration of the juvenile's commitment to a youth rehabilitation and treatment center. A hearing shall be scheduled no later than thirty days after the filing of such motion. No later than five days prior to the hearing, the office shall provide information to the parties regarding the juvenile's individualized treatment plan and progress. A representative of the office or facility shall be physically present at the hearing to provide information to the court unless the court allows the representative to appear telephonically or by video. The juvenile and the juvenile's parent or guardian shall have the right to be physically present at the hearing. The court may enter such orders regarding the juvenile's care and treatment as are necessary and in the best interests of the juvenile, including an order for early discharge from commitment when appropriate. In entering an order for early discharge from commitment to intensive supervised probation in the community, the court shall consider to what extent:

(a) The juvenile has completed the goals of the juvenile's individualized treatment plan or received maximum benefit from institutional treatment;

(b) The juvenile would benefit from continued services under community supervision;

(c) The juvenile can function in a community setting with appropriate supports; and

(d) There is reason to believe that the juvenile will not commit further violations of law and will comply with the terms of intensive supervised probation.

(4) When filing a motion pursuant to subsection (3) of this section, the office may also file a motion for immediate change of placement to another youth rehabilitation and treatment center operated and utilized in compliance with state law. When filing a report and notice of placement change pursuant to subsection (3) of section 43-407, or upon a court order to set a hearing to review a change in placement or stay a change in placement pursuant to subsection (3) of section 43-407, the office may file a motion for immediate change of placement to the inpatient or subacute residential treatment facility licensed as a treatment facility in the State of Nebraska. The motion shall set forth with reasonable particularity the grounds for an immediate change of placement. A motion for immediate change of placement under this subsection shall be heard within twenty-four hours, excluding nonjudicial days, and may be heard telephonically or by videoconferencing. Prior to filing a motion for immediate change of placement, the office shall make a reasonable attempt to provide notice of the motion to the juvenile's parent or guardian, including notice that the motion will be set for hearing within twenty-four hours. The court shall promptly provide the notice of hearing to all parties of record. In advance of the hearing, the office shall provide to the other parties of record any exhibits it intends to offer, if any, and the identity of its witnesses. The office shall provide the juvenile an opportunity before the hearing to consult with the juvenile's counsel and review the motion and the exhibits and witnesses. The court shall order the immediate change of placement pending an order pursuant to subsection (3) of this section or subsection (3) of section 43-407 if the court determines that an immediate change is in the best interests of the juvenile and further delay would be contrary to the juvenile's well-being, physical health, emotional health, or mental health.

(5) Each juvenile committed to the Office of Juvenile Services for placement at a youth rehabilitation and treatment center shall also be entitled to an annual review of such commitment and placement for as long as the juvenile remains so committed and placed. At an annual review hearing, the court shall consider the factors described in subsection (3) of this section to assess the juvenile's progress and determine whether commitment remains in the best interests of the juvenile.

(6) If a juvenile is placed in detention while awaiting placement at a youth rehabilitation and treatment center and the placement has not occurred within fourteen days, the committing court shall hold a hearing every fourteen days to review the status of the juvenile. Placement of a juvenile in detention shall not be considered a treatment service.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 2003–2014 · leading case: Carson P. ex rel Foreman v. Heineman, 240 F.R.D. 456 (D. Neb. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Carson P. ex rel Foreman v. Heineman, 240 F.R.D. 456 (D. Neb. 2007). · cites it 21× “2003)(interpreting amendments to Neb.Rev.Stat. § 43-408 and distinguishing In re Interest of David, C.”
In Re Tamantha S., 672 N.W.2d 24 (Neb. 2003). · cites it 12× “At issue in this appeal is OJS' assertion that the Legislature, in drafting Neb.Rev.Stat. § 43-408 (Cum.Supp.2002), intended to give OJS the sole responsibility and the sole authority over the discharge of juveniles committed to OJS.”
In Re Interest of Chelsey D., 707 N.W.2d 798 (Neb. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 8× “ANALYSIS Although it is clear that the juvenile court maintains jurisdiction over any juvenile committed to the custody of OJS until such time as the juvenile is discharged from OJS’ custody, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408 (2) (Reissue 2004), this appeal raises the issue of whether…”
In Re Interest of Jorge O., 786 N.W.2d 343 (Neb. 2010). · cites it 8× “" DHHS also objects to the additional language in each order to the effect that upon the juvenile's discharge, a review hearing purportedly pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408 (Reissue 2008) should be scheduled.”
State v. Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 672 N.W.2d 24 (Neb. 2003). · cites it 12× “At issue in this appeal is OJS’ assertion that the Legislature, in drafting Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408 (Cum. Supp. 2002), intended to give OJS the sole responsibility and the sole authority over the discharge of juveniles committed to OJS.”
In Re Interest of Christopher R., 700 N.W.2d 668 (Neb. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 3× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408 (4) (Reissue 2004) involves requests by OJS to transfer a juvenile to a higher level of care and states in part: For transfer hearings, the burden of proof to justify the transfer is on [OJS], the standard of proof is clear and convincing evidence, and…”
In Re Interest of Matthew P., 745 N.W.2d 574 (Neb. 2008). · cites it 8× “[8] Neb.Rev.Stat. § 43-408(2) (Cum.Supp. 2006).”
In re Interest of Marcella G. (Neb. 2014). · cites it 21× “2d 574 (2008); Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408 (1)(b) (Supp. 2013) (previously codified at § 43-408(2) (Reissue 2008)).”
In Re Interest of Michael S., 742 N.W.2d 791 (Neb. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “[3] The primary issue is whether the court erred in ordering that OJS "shall continue to be responsible for all costs associated with the [o]rder herein not covered by insurance.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408(1) — 2 cases
Carson P. ex rel Foreman v. Heineman, 240 F.R.D. 456 (D. Neb. 2007). “2003)(interpreting amendments to Neb.Rev.Stat. § 43-408 and distinguishing In re Interest of David, C.”
In re Interest of Marcella G. (Neb. 2014). “2d 574 (2008); Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408 (1)(b) (Supp. 2013) (previously codified at § 43-408(2) (Reissue 2008)).”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408(1)(b) — 1 case
In re Interest of Marcella G. (Neb. 2014). “2d 574 (2008); Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408 (1)(b) (Supp. 2013) (previously codified at § 43-408(2) (Reissue 2008)).”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408(2) — 7 cases
Carson P. ex rel Foreman v. Heineman, 240 F.R.D. 456 (D. Neb. 2007). “2003)(interpreting amendments to Neb.Rev.Stat. § 43-408 and distinguishing In re Interest of David, C.”
In Re Tamantha S., 672 N.W.2d 24 (Neb. 2003). “At issue in this appeal is OJS' assertion that the Legislature, in drafting Neb.Rev.Stat. § 43-408 (Cum.Supp.2002), intended to give OJS the sole responsibility and the sole authority over the discharge of juveniles committed to OJS.”
In Re Interest of Jorge O., 786 N.W.2d 343 (Neb. 2010). “" DHHS also objects to the additional language in each order to the effect that upon the juvenile's discharge, a review hearing purportedly pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408 (Reissue 2008) should be scheduled.”
In Re Interest of Chelsey D., 707 N.W.2d 798 (Neb. Ct. App. 2005). “ANALYSIS Although it is clear that the juvenile court maintains jurisdiction over any juvenile committed to the custody of OJS until such time as the juvenile is discharged from OJS’ custody, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408 (2) (Reissue 2004), this appeal raises the issue of whether…”
State v. Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 672 N.W.2d 24 (Neb. 2003). “At issue in this appeal is OJS’ assertion that the Legislature, in drafting Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408 (Cum. Supp. 2002), intended to give OJS the sole responsibility and the sole authority over the discharge of juveniles committed to OJS.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408(2)(b) — 1 case
In re Interest of Marcella G. (Neb. 2014). “2d 574 (2008); Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408 (1)(b) (Supp. 2013) (previously codified at § 43-408(2) (Reissue 2008)).”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408(3) — 1 case
Carson P. ex rel Foreman v. Heineman, 240 F.R.D. 456 (D. Neb. 2007). “2003)(interpreting amendments to Neb.Rev.Stat. § 43-408 and distinguishing In re Interest of David, C.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408(4) — 1 case
In Re Interest of Chelsey D., 707 N.W.2d 798 (Neb. Ct. App. 2005). “ANALYSIS Although it is clear that the juvenile court maintains jurisdiction over any juvenile committed to the custody of OJS until such time as the juvenile is discharged from OJS’ custody, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408 (2) (Reissue 2004), this appeal raises the issue of whether…”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408(4)(a) — 2 cases
In Re Interest of Chelsey D., 707 N.W.2d 798 (Neb. Ct. App. 2005). “ANALYSIS Although it is clear that the juvenile court maintains jurisdiction over any juvenile committed to the custody of OJS until such time as the juvenile is discharged from OJS’ custody, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408 (2) (Reissue 2004), this appeal raises the issue of whether…”
In Re Interest of Matthew P., 745 N.W.2d 574 (Neb. 2008). “[8] Neb.Rev.Stat. § 43-408(2) (Cum.Supp. 2006).”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408(4)(b) — 2 cases
In Re Interest of Chelsey D., 707 N.W.2d 798 (Neb. Ct. App. 2005). “ANALYSIS Although it is clear that the juvenile court maintains jurisdiction over any juvenile committed to the custody of OJS until such time as the juvenile is discharged from OJS’ custody, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408 (2) (Reissue 2004), this appeal raises the issue of whether…”
In Re Interest of Matthew P., 745 N.W.2d 574 (Neb. 2008). “[8] Neb.Rev.Stat. § 43-408(2) (Cum.Supp. 2006).”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-408(5) — 1 case
In Re Interest of Matthew P., 745 N.W.2d 574 (Neb. 2008). “[8] Neb.Rev.Stat. § 43-408(2) (Cum.Supp. 2006).”
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.