In the Matter of J.A.M.--Appeal from 386th Judicial District Court of Bexar County

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-07-00489-CV

IN THE MATTER OF J.A.M.,

A Juvenile

From the 386th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2005-JUV-01124

Honorable Laura Parker, Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Delivered and Filed: March 19, 2008

AFFIRMED

Appellant J.A.M. appeals the second modification of his disposition order committing him to the Texas Youth Commission (TYC). In his sole point of error, J.A.M. contends that the trial court abused its discretion by committing him to the TYC for an indeterminate period because a continuation of probation is a more appropriate disposition. We affirm the trial court s order of disposition.

Factual Background

On June 13, 2005, J.A.M., a minor, entered a plea of true to one count of indecency with a child by contact, a second-degree felony. The trial court placed him in the custody of his grandmother under the supervision of the Bexar County Juvenile Probation Department for a period of 43 months. See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. 51.03 (Vernon 2003).

On March 19, 2007, the State filed an original motion to modify alleging that J.A.M. violated two of the conditions of his probation by: (1) leaving his home without permission and (2) violating his curfew. After entering a plea of true to both violations, the trial court continued J.A.M. s probation, but removed him from his grandmother s custody and placed him in the custody of his mother.

Approximately two months later, the State filed a second motion to modify disposition, alleging J.A.M. again violated the conditions of his probation by: (1) assaulting his mother and (2) failing to attend school. Although J.A.M. entered a plea of true to the allegation that he failed to attend school, he denied the assault allegation. The trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing and determined, by a preponderance of the evidence, that J.A.M. assaulted his mother. Based on the violations, the trial court ordered his commitment to the TYC. The trial court made several findings in its order committing J.A.M. to the TYC: (1) it was in J.A.M. s best interest to place him outside the home; (2) that the court made reasonable efforts to prevent or eliminate the need for his removal; (3) his mother s and grandmother s homes provided unsuitable supervision for his probation; and (4) J.A.M. needed long-term treatment available at the TYC. Additionally, the trial court found J.A.M. s history of aggression, combined with the circumstances of his original offense, required his removal from the home and commitment to the TYC. This appeal followed.

Commitment to the Texas Youth Commission

A. Standard of Review

Juvenile courts have broad discretion in determining a suitable disposition for a child adjudicated as engaging in delinquent conduct. In re K.J.N., 103 S.W.3d 465, 465-66 (Tex. App. San Antonio 2003, no pet.). Consequently, we review a trial court s modification of a juvenile disposition for an abuse of discretion. In re J.P., 136 S.W.3d 629, 633 (Tex. 2004); In re K.J.N., 103 S.W.3d at 465-66. A trial court abuses its discretion by committing an act that is arbitrary, unreasonable, or without reference to guiding rules and principles. In re K.J.N., 103 S.W.3d at 466.

B. Requirements of Texas Family Code Section 54.05

The Texas Family Code provides the guiding principles for modifying a disposition and placing a juvenile outside the home. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. 54.05 (Vernon 2007); In re K.J.N., 103 S.W.3d at 466. When a juvenile has previously engaged in delinquent conduct, the trial court may modify the original sentence to commit the juvenile to the TYC if the trial court determines, by a preponderance of the evidence, the juvenile subsequently violated a reasonable and lawful order of the court. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. 54.05(f) (Vernon 2007); In re J.P., 136 S.W.3d at 632. A single violation of a juvenile s probation provides adequate justification for commitment to the TYC. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. 54.05(f); In re S.G.V., No. 04-05-00605-CV, 2006 WL 923576, at *3 (Tex. App. San Antonio April 5, 2006, no pet.) (mem. op.).

A trial court s modification sentencing a juvenile to the TYC must include three findings: (1) it is in the juvenile s best interest to place him outside the home; (2) that the court has made reasonable efforts to prevent or eliminate the need for the juvenile s removal; and (3) that the juvenile s home cannot provide the quality of care, and level of support and supervision necessary for the child to meet the requirements of his probation. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. 54.05(m) (Vernon 2007).

C. Analysis

J.A.M. contends that the trial court abused its discretion by committing him to the TYC because a continuation of his probation was a more appropriate disposition. The trial court found that J.A.M not only violated his conditions of probation, but also that removal was appropriate in accordance with section 54.05. See id. at 54.05(f), (m). The record shows that J.A.M. violated his probation on multiple occasions. These infringements led to two separate modifications of J.A.M. s probation.

The first set of probation violations occurred while J.A.M. was in the custody of his grandmother. J.A.M. failed to attend his sex offender counseling on a regular basis and his grandmother had difficulty controlling his outbursts of anger. Moreover, the testimony suggests that J.A.M. s grandmother manipulates him emotionally, in a manner that is counterproductive to both his treatment as a sex offender and the fulfillment of his probation requirements. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining that placement with his grandmother was not in J.A.M. s best interest. See id. at 54.05(m).

Placing J.A.M in the custody of his mother was equally troubling. J.A.M. was in the custody of his mother when his aggressive behavior of assault escalated. Moreover, J.A.M s placement in the custody of his mother would result in J.A.M. living with his younger brother and mother the two people he previously assaulted. Accordingly, we cannot hold the trial court abused its discretion in finding that placing J.A.M in his mother s custody was also unsuitable. See id. at 54.05(m).

The Family Code requires the trial court to make reasonable efforts to prevent the minor s removal. See id. at 54.05(m). Here, the trial court s previous placements of J.A.M., into two different home environments, satisfy this requirement. See id. at 54.05(m). The trial court found J.A.M. violated a reasonable lawful order of the court by failing to attend school and assaulting his mother. See id. at 54.05(f). The record indicates the trial court was aware of alternatives to commitment, but agreed with the recommendation of J.A.M. s parole officer that he be committed to the TYC if the trial court found J.A.M violated his parole. See In re J.L.R., No. 04-06-00199-CV, 2006 WL 3725567, at *3-4 (Tex. App. San Antonio Dec. 20, 2006, no pet.) (mem. op.); In re M.A., 198 S.W.3d 388, 392-3 (Tex. App. Texarkana 2006, no. pet.); In re J.H., No. 12-01-00247-CV, 2002 WL 253873, at *1-2 (Tex. App. Tyler Feb. 20, 2002, pet. denied) (not designated for publication). As noted previously, a trial court has broad discretion in determining a suitable disposition for a child adjudicated as engaging in delinquent conduct. In re K.J.N., 103 S.W.3d at 465-66. Moreover, there is no requirement for a trial court to exhaust all possible alternatives prior to committing a juvenile to the TYC. In re J.R.C., 236 S.W.3d 870, 875 (Tex. App. Texarkana 2007, no pet.). J.A.M. s difficulties in complying with his probation, inadequacies present in both his prior home environments, and escalation of his violent behavior support the court s finding that commitment to the TYC was in J.A.M s best interest.

Conclusion

The trial court found, by a preponderance of the evidence, that J.A.M. violated two conditions of his probation, which were reasonable and lawful orders of the court. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. 54.05(f). The trial court also found placement with either his mother or grandmother was unsuitable and not in J.A.M. s best interest. Id. at 54.05(m). Because the evidence substantiates the trial court s findings, we cannot say the trial court abused its discretion in committing J.A.M. to the Texas Youth Commission. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court s order of disposition.

Rebecca Simmons, Justice