Case Name: In the Matter of H. E., a Child. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Respondent, v. A. E., Appellant
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 2010-11-17
Citations: 238 Or. App. 752
Docket Number: 09192J; Petition Number 09192J01; A145662
Parties: In the Matter of H. E., a Child. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Respondent, v. A. E., Appellant.
Judges: Before Schuman, Presiding Judge, and Wollheim, Judge, and Rosenblum, Judge.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 238
Pages: 752–753

Head Matter:
Submitted October 11,
reversed and remanded November 17, 2010
In the Matter of H. E., a Child. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Respondent, v. A. E., Appellant.
Lane County Circuit Court
09192J;
Petition Number 09192J01;
A145662
243 P3d 138
James A. Palmer filed the brief for appellant.
John R. Kroger, Attorney General, Mary H. Williams, Solicitor General, and Greg Rios, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.
Before Schuman, Presiding Judge, and Wollheim, Judge, and Rosenblum, Judge.
PER CURIAM

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
Mother appeals a permanency judgment changing the case plan from reunification to adoption. She argues, among other contentions, that the juvenile court erred in failing to make and include in the judgment the statutorily required findings. ORS 419B.449(2); ORS 419B.476(2), (5). The state concedes that the judgment is deficient and should be remanded in order for the juvenile court to include the required findings and determinations. See State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. J .F. B., 230 Or App 106, 115, 214 P3d 827 (2009) (remanding for juvenile court to enter judgments that comply with ORS 419B.476). We agree with and accept the state's concession. Given our remand, we do not reach the other issues mother raises on appeal. See id. at 118 ("The other issues raised by mother on appeal are premature at this time.").
Reversed and remanded.