Supporting a juvenile defendant in Illinois who challenged the representation he received in court, when his defense lawyer sacrificed his defense believing that it was in the child’s "best interests."
Argued that the PA Juvenile Act authorizes child welfare courts to retain jurisdiction over foster children aged 18 to 21 and to order agencies to continue to serve those youth in a course of treatment or instruction.
Supported the position that the state must apply children’s federal insurance benefits under Title II and Title XVI in accordance with the children’s best interests and not to reduce the state’s foster care system’s financial burden.
Argued for a half-brother’s standing to participate in child welfare proceedings involving his sibling and that the child advocate’s representation of both children constituted a conflict of interest.
Surveyed statutes and social science literature in a lawsuit involving the interpretation of the “reasonable efforts” to preserve and reunite families provision of the Adoption and Assistance Child Welfare Act.
Argued that a sentence of 110 years to life (three consecutive life-terms) for a non-homicide offense committed as a juvenile violates the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in Graham v. Florida.
Follow: