- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Juvenile Law
- Date Filed: 10-19-2022
- Case #: A177935
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Hellman, J. for the Court; Ortega, P.J.; & Powers, J.
- Full Text Opinion
Father appealed the juvenile court’s judgment to continue the child’s permanency plan. Father argued that his right to participate in the dependency hearing under ORS 419B.875(2) was violated when the juvenile court muted his microphone. DHS argued that the juvenile court allowed Father to participate in the hearing, but exercised its discretion to mute Father when he continually spoke over others and was off-topic during the proceeding. Parties to dependency proceedings have a right to participate in hearings. See ORS 419B.875(2)(c). However, the juvenile court possesses the power “to provide for orderly conduct of proceedings before it * * *.” See ORS 1.010(3). The Court found that the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion when muting Father because the juvenile court did not mute Father until his continued off-topic remarks interrupted the proceeding. Moreover, the Court reasoned that because Father appeared and was given the opportunity to be heard, he participated in the proceeding. The juvenile court did not err. Affirmed.