In the Matter of D.H., __ N.C.App. __ (August 20, 2025)

Facts: The juvenile was held in secure custody prior to adjudication after being charged with bringing a knife to school. He was adjudicated delinquent for using, threatening to use, or displaying a firearm or other deadly weapon. After adjudication the court ordered the juvenile into the nonsecure custody of DSS and continued to hold him in detention until the disposition hearing. A level 1 disposition was ordered and included five days in detention and physical and legal custody to DSS under G.S. 7B-2506(1)(c). A nonsecure and permanency planning hearing was calendared. DSS assumed custody of the juvenile after his release from detention. DSS filed an appeal alleging that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to order continued custody with DSS, that the statutorily required findings were not made, and that the trial court lacked competent evidence to show that the parents were unable to provide alternate arrangements to meet the juvenile’s needs.

Opinion:

Jurisdiction does not terminate with the issuance of a dispositional order.

Jurisdiction lasts until the court terminates jurisdiction or the juvenile turns 18 (when their offense was committed under the age of 16). Neither of these things had occurred so the trial court continued to have subject matter jurisdiction. Additionally, the statutory requirement for review hearings under G.S. 7B-906.1 requires the trial court to oversee the placement.

A finding that it is contrary to the juvenile’s best interest to remain in his home is required when ordering DSS custody as a dispositional alternative.

A finding that continuation in the juvenile’s home would be contrary to their best interest is required when placing a juvenile in DSS custody as a disposition under G.S. 7B-2506(1)(c). There was no such finding in the dispositional order. This finding was included in the previously issued nonsecure custody order. However, that does not cure the failure to include it in the dispositional order. The matter is remanded for the trial court to include the finding in its order.

The court is not required to find that the parents were unable to provide alternate arrangements to meet the juvenile’s needs.

The court may continue the case to allow the family an opportunity to meet the juvenile's needs under G.S. 7B-2501(d). This is not mandatory. The court is not required to make this consideration determinative in disposition. This argument is without merit.