Opinion ID: 2634909
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: the juvenile court had subject matter jurisdiction

Text: ¶ 21 Whether subject matter jurisdiction exists is a threshold issue that we must resolve before we may address the appellant's substantive issues. [13] The mother contends that the juvenile court lacked subject matter jurisdiction and, therefore, the court's order is void. While she is correct that a judgment is void if the court that rendered it lacked subject matter jurisdiction, [14] we hold that the juvenile court had subject matter jurisdiction in this case because the mother voluntarily placed K.F. in state custody. ¶ 22 Utah Code section 78A-6-103(1)(c) provides that the juvenile court has exclusive jurisdiction in proceedings concerning a minor who has been abused, neglected, or is dependent. Before such proceedings may commence, the State must file a petition with the juvenile court that not only alleges that the minor has been abused, neglected, or is dependent, but also supports that allegation with a concise statement of facts, separately stated. [15] In cases of abuse, neglect, or dependency, the juvenile court need not make findings of fact to establish its jurisdiction. [16] ¶ 23 In this case, the State filed a petition for custody on October 23, 2006, alleging that K.F. was an abused, dependent and/or neglected child. The petition included facts regarding K.F.'s delinquent behavior, the mother's ignorance of that behavior, and the mother's inability to parent K.F. due in part to the mother's use of Xanax. In addition, the mother not only stipulated to these facts but also voluntarily placed K.F. in state custody. This establishes a sufficient basis for subject matter jurisdiction. ¶ 24 The mother argues that the stipulated findings did not indicate that she had abused or neglected K.F., nor did they indicate that K.F. was dependent. But she did stipulate to the facts that supported the conclusion. Further, she stipulated that the court had jurisdiction pursuant to the Juvenile Court Act of 1996. Therefore, subject matter jurisdiction was proper in the juvenile court.