Changeflow GovPing State Courts In the Int. of S.C. - Juvenile Delinquency Appeal
Routine Enforcement Removed Final

In the Int. of S.C. - Juvenile Delinquency Appeal

Favicon for www.courtlistener.com PA Superior Court
Filed March 3rd, 2026
Detected March 3rd, 2026
Email

Summary

The Superior Court of Pennsylvania dismissed an appeal concerning a juvenile's out-of-home placement. The court found the appeal fell outside the scope of the relevant rule, which limits challenges to the fact of placement rather than the specific agency or institution.

What changed

The Superior Court of Pennsylvania, in a non-precedential decision (J-S44029-25), dismissed an appeal filed by S.C., a minor, regarding their out-of-home placement in a juvenile delinquency matter. The court determined that the appeal was improperly filed under Pa.R.A.P. 1612 because the challenge focused on the specific placement rather than the general fact of an out-of-home placement, which is the only aspect permitted for review under the rule. The underlying facts involved the minor possessing firearms and making threats.

This decision clarifies the scope of appellate review for juvenile out-of-home placements under Rule 1612. Legal professionals representing juveniles in delinquency cases must ensure that any appeals strictly adhere to the rule's limitations, focusing solely on the necessity of out-of-home placement itself and not on the particulars of the placement facility or agency. Failure to comply with these procedural requirements will result in dismissal, as demonstrated in this case.

What to do next

  1. Review Pa.R.A.P. 1612 to understand limitations on appeals for out-of-home juvenile placements.
  2. Ensure any future appeals regarding juvenile out-of-home placements strictly challenge the fact of placement, not the specific facility or agency.

Source document (simplified)

Jump To

Top Caption [Combined Opinion

                  by Dubow](https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10803133/in-the-int-of-sc-appeal-of-sc/about:blank#o1)

Support FLP

CourtListener is a project of Free
Law Project
, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. Members help support our work and get special access to features.

Please become a member today.

Join Free.law Now

March 3, 2026 Get Citation Alerts Download PDF Add Note

In the Int. of: S.C., Appeal of: S.C.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Combined Opinion

                        by Dubow

J-S44029-25

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT O.P. 65.37

IN THE INTEREST OF: S.C., A : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
MINOR : PENNSYLVANIA
:
:
APPEAL OF: S.C., MINOR :
:
:
:
: No. 2308 EDA 2025

Appeal from the Order Entered August 22, 2025
In the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County Juvenile Division
at No(s): CP-46-JV-0000313-2025

BEFORE: LAZARUS, P.J., DUBOW, J., and SULLIVAN, J.

JUDGMENT ORDER BY DUBOW, J.: FILED MARCH 3, 2026

S.C., a minor (“Petitioner”), files a “Petition for Specialized Review of

Out of Home Placement in Juvenile Delinquency” (“Petition”) pursuant to

Pa.R.A.P. 1612. Upon review, we dismiss this appeal because Petitioner’s sole

challenge is outside the scope of Rule 1612, as explained infra.

A detailed recitation of the factual and procedural history is unnecessary

to our disposition. Briefly, in April 2025, then-16-year-old Petitioner posted

pictures of a firearm along with threats of self-harm on social media. While

doing a wellness check, law enforcement learned that Petitioner had gone to

a party at a friend’s house the night before while intoxicated and brandished

a knife and gun at partygoers. Petitioner admitted that, after drinking vodka

all day, he stole the spare key to his Father’s gun safe and took one of the

guns from the safe to the party.
J-S44029-25

On June 6, 2025, Petitioner entered an open admission to Possession of

a Firearm by a Minor, Simple Assault, and Possessing an Instrument of Crime,

and Public Drunkenness.1 On August 22, 2025, after a disposition hearing,

the court issued an order placing Petitioner in the North East Secure Treatment

Unit.

Counsel for Petitioner timely filed the instant Petition pursuant to Rule

1612, which provides for expedited appellate review of out-of-home

placement in juvenile delinquency matters. Pa.R.A.P. 1612(a). The Petition

complies with the requirements set forth in Rule 1612(b). Id. at 1612(b)

(listing petition requirements). On September 29, 2025, the juvenile court

issued an opinion.

When reviewing a petition filed pursuant to Rule 1612, this Court “shall

not consider any challenge to the juvenile court’s selection of a specific agency

or specific institution as the site of the out-of-home placement and instead

may consider only a challenge to the fact that the placement is out-

of-home.” Id. at 1612(c)(1) (emphasis added). Furthermore, this Court

“shall not consider any challenge to the underlying adjudication of

delinquency.” Id. at 1612(c)(2). “The Juvenile Act grants broad discretion to

juvenile courts in determining appropriate dispositions,” and “this Court will

not disturb the juvenile court’s disposition absent a manifest abuse of

discretion.” In Interest of J.G., 145 A.3d 1179, 1184 (Pa. Super. 2016).


1 18 Pa.C.S. §§ 6110.1(a), 2701(a)(3), 907(a), and 5505, respectively.

-2-
J-S44029-25

Instantly, Petitioner argues that the juvenile court abused its discretion

when it entered its August 22, 2025 disposition order committing Petitioner to

North East Central Secure Treatment Unit, a state secure facility, and failed

to consider the least restrictive alternative of placing Petitioner at Manos

House Drug and Alcohol Rehabilitation Services, Inc., a non-secure residential

treatment program. Petition at 8. Notably, both are out-of-home placements.

Pursuant to Rule 1612, Petitioner’s challenge is outside the scope of our

review. Because Petitioner fails to challenge the fact that the placement is

out-of-home and only raises a “challenge to the juvenile court’s selection of a

specific agency or specific institution as the site of the out-of-home

placement[,]” Rule 1612(c) mandates that this Court “shall not consider” the

instant challenge. Pa.R.A.P. 1612(c)(1).

Since Petitioner’s sole challenge is not cognizable under Rule 1612(c),

we are constrained to dismiss this appeal.

Appeal dismissed.

Date: 3/3/2026

-3-

Source

Analysis generated by AI. Source diff and links are from the original.

Classification

Agency
Federal and State Courts
Filed
March 3rd, 2026
Instrument
Enforcement
Legal weight
Non-binding
Stage
Final
Change scope
Minor

Who this affects

Applies to
Courts Legal professionals
Geographic scope
National (US)

Taxonomy

Primary area
Criminal Justice
Operational domain
Legal
Topics
Appeals Out-of-Home Placement

Get State Courts alerts

Weekly digest. AI-summarized, no noise.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

Get alerts for this source

We'll email you when PA Superior Court publishes new changes.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.