Student Claims Court Lacks Jurisdiction in Juvenile Delinquency Case
by
Joseph C. Maya on Apr. 24, 2017
Other Education Criminal Juvenile Law Criminal
Summary: Blog post on the jurisdiction of juvenile delinquency claims involving students covered by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
If you have a question or concern about special education law, school administration, federal standards, or the overall rights of a student, please feel free to call the expert education law attorneys at Maya Murphy, P.C. in Westport today at (203) 221-3100 .
In the case of State v. David F., a juvenile filed a motion to dismiss juvenile charges on the ground that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction in that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act preempted juvenile delinquency proceedings. In law, subject matter jurisdiction is the power of the court to hear and determine cases of the general class to which the proceedings in question belong. For clarity, The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act specifically allows for the reporting by school boards of crimes committed by children with disabilities, as well as for the court to adjudicate delinquency petitions filed regarding such crimes.
The court found that the existence of mitigating circumstances or a defense to his actions did not deprive the court of jurisdiction. While federal law superseded state law, the prosecution of the juvenile for alleged illegal acts was not in contravention of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The school's responsibility under the IDEA, to provide disabled children with an appropriate education, did not end when a child entered the juvenile system. Both case law and statutes supported the propositions that the IDEA continued to work even when a child was involved in juvenile court proceedings. The juvenile was not without remedy if the school was attempting to end run its responsibilities, nor was the State without remedy if the juvenile was engaged in delinquent activity. The court had subject matter jurisdiction over the proceedings as the IDEA did not preempt a delinquency proceeding concerning a crime committed by a child with a disability, but rather, explicitly authorized such delinquency proceeding.
If you have a child with a disability and have questions about special education law, please contact Joseph C. Maya, Esq., at 203-221-3100, or at JMaya@mayalaw.com, to schedule a free consultation.
Source: State v. David F., 1998 Conn. Super. LEXIS 3247 (Conn. Super. Ct. Nov. 6, 1998)
