Juvenile Dependency and Delinquency Lawyers - Arnold Law Office, LLC, Attorneys at Law

Juvenile Dependency and Delinquency Lawyers – Lane County Juvenile Court

You have the right to have an attorney speak to DHS on your behalf. Do not let DHS tell you anything different.

Juvenile law is a specialized area in Oregon. Only a handful of lawyers in Lane County regularly make an appearance in Juvenile Court, which is at the Serbu Center off of MLK (across from Autzen Stadium).

Juvenile Dependency Cases in Oregon

Arnold Law Office is not part of the System. We are part of the Solution.

Typically a juvenile court dependency case arises in one of two ways. First, there is an anonymous report to the Oregon Department of Human Services (DHS) of some sort of child abuse or neglect, often made by an ex-spouse . Second, DHS may learn of a criminal case that the agency believes places a child in the home in danger.

Juvenile dependency cases can often be nipped in the bud before a juvenile petition is even filed in Lane County Juvenile Court. Quality representation at this stage of the case is crucial or else you can often expect to have DHS and Juvenile Court in your life for some time in the future.

[We fight hard for our clients' children.]

[We fight hard for our clients’ children.]

The goal of all juvenile cases is the return of the child to the home. When DHS no longer believes that a return to the home is possible, they may refer the case to the Oregon Attorney General’s Office to seek a termination of parental rights.

Termination of Parental Rights Cases in Oregon

Termination of parental rights (TPR) trials are referred to as the civil death penalty. TPR cases are very complex and involve multiple expert witnesses. It is absolutely imperative that you have a quality juvenile court attorney in your corner asking the tough questions of the experts that the state has hired to use against you. Cross-examining psychological experts requires your lawyer knowing as much about the subject matter as the psychological expert and the ability to effectively utilize cross-examination techniques. This means you need a juvenile lawyer who is an experienced trial lawyer.

Juvenile Delinquency Case (Children as Criminal Defendants)

A juvenile delinquency case is akin to an adult criminal case, except there is no right to a jury trial. During an investigation your child has the same rights as an adult. Most importantly a child has the right to remain silent and to speak to an attorney. He cannot be compelled to speak to an officer if either of those rights is asserted. If possible, contact an attorney prior to agreeing to speak to the police. Our office can assist you at any point of the proceedings.

Attorney Fees

Our office handles these cases on a flat or hourly fee basis. If you cannot afford an attorney for your child, you are entitled to court appointed representation and the court will assist you with that.

New Release - Buy Now

Arnold Law attorneys' new true crime book. Ebook for $6.99 or part 1 for FREE.

Awards/Recognitions
Interpreters Available
  • Representative Cases

    FAMILY LAW

    Custody - Alienation by Mother

    Mother filed false stalking order against father. We won custody for father by showing that mother was making false accusations to gain advantage in the custody case.

    Hidden Asset Divorce - Tracking down values of foreign corporations

    Jacy Arnold represented wife. Discovery from husband appeared to be missing many documents and assets. Motions to compel were granted and Jacy was able to track down foreign corporations hidden by husband, stretching from the Netherlands to southeast Asia. Result: Substantial financial settlement was obtained for client.

    Father’s Rights—Parental Alienation with a Bumpy Past

    Obtained custody for Father after Mother filed a frivolous restraining order against Father and absconded with the children from Oregon to prevent Father from having contact with the children. Of special importance in this case was Mother and Father’s history of domestic violence and drug abuse. Father had completed his probation and treatment, and had achieved many months of sobriety. We were able to show the court through multiple hearings that he had been rehabilitated, had prepared to be the primary parent and was acting in the children’s best interests by seeking custody. We were able to get the restraining order dismissed, safely retrieve the children and return them to Oregon, and obtained orders to both safeguard Father’s relationship with the children and protect the family from future drug use and domestic violence.

    Father’s Rights—Abusive Wife Flees with baby

    Obtained custody for Husband and a safety focused parenting plan restricting Wife’s access after Wife disappeared from the marital home with the parties’ one-year old child. Wife had a history of drug and alcohol use, and had previously physically abused both Husband and the child. Ms. Gardner helped Father obtain emergency custody of the child under the Immediate Danger statute, located the child, and coordinated with law enforcement agencies and the Department of Human Services to safely bring the child home.

    Father flees with children to Oregon—conflicting jurisdiction

    In a contentious California divorce, Husband took the children for a short visit and then fled in secret with the children to Oregon, where he filed for divorce and custody of the children despite a pending divorce case in California and previous orders from the California court granting mother physical possession of the children while the case was pending due to past abuse by Husband against Wife. We helped the frantic Wife safely retrieve the children, and convinced the Oregon court after multiple days in trial to stay the custody proceeding in Oregon pursuant to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Enforcement Act (UCCJEA), allowing the California case to proceed. Wife returned to California safely with the children.

    Special Needs Parenting Time

    The years of physical and verbal abuse against Mother by Father adversely impacted the parties’ high functioning special needs child, who as a teenager began to exhibit alarming violent and sexualized behaviors at school as well as regression in communication and hygiene when Father sought to enforce his parenting time after an absence of several years. At trial, Father disputed the child’s diagnosis and blamed Mother for the child’s sexualized behavior. With the support and information provided by the child’s school teachers, therapists, community support group and friends called by Arnold Law to testify at trial, the Court crafted a child-centric parenting plan for the benefit of this troubled teen and ended Father’s cyclical aggressive contact with the child.