## Facts

- On January 19, 1981, a juvenile petition was filed alleging that 17-year-old S.J. committed robbery with another juvenile.
- After an adjudicatory hearing on February 3, 1981, the juvenile court determined that S.J. was a delinquent child.
- At a dispositional hearing on March 31, 1981, the juvenile court ordered S.J. placed in the care, custody, and control of the Superintendent of the State Industrial School until she turned eighteen on August 20, 1981.
- S.J. sought a stay of the dispositional order pending appeal of the delinquency determination; the juvenile court denied the request.
- In denying the stay, the juvenile court reasoned that an appeal likely would not be decided until shortly before or after August 20, 1981, so a stay would make the dispositional order effective for only a brief time (or possibly no time at all).
- In support of a stay, S.J. submitted an affidavit from Dr. Ismir stating S.J. would pose little danger to the public if returned to her family home, so long as she remained in the custody of the State Youth Authority.
- Other evidence before the juvenile court suggested S.J. had not responded well to structure in her home environment and had not been attending school for some time.
- After the juvenile court denied a stay, S.J. applied to the Supreme Court of North Dakota for a stay of the dispositional order pending appeal.

## Issues

1. Whether the Supreme Court of North Dakota should grant a stay pending appeal of a juvenile dispositional order committing a nearly eighteen-year-old delinquent child to the State Industrial School.
2. Whether the likelihood that the juvenile would turn eighteen before the appeal could be decided weighed against granting a stay because the disposition could become ineffective in practice.
3. Whether, at the stay stage, the Supreme Court should disturb the juvenile court’s choice of placement in light of conflicting evidence about less restrictive alternatives.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of North Dakota denied S.J.’s application for a stay of the juvenile court’s dispositional order pending appeal.
- The court stated that the propriety of the delinquency adjudication was not before it at that time; the only question was whether a stay should be granted.
- The court agreed that, given S.J.’s approaching eighteenth birthday, a stay would likely render the dispositional order largely ineffectual or a nullity by the time the appeal could be resolved.
- The court noted the juvenile court had considered conflicting evidence (including Dr. Ismir’s affidavit and other evidence about S.J.’s lack of response to home structure and truancy) and concluded that commitment to the State Industrial School was the placement best suited to S.J.
- On that record and timing, the court declined to intervene by granting interim relief.

## Legal Principles

- A stay pending appeal is discretionary; the applicant must show that temporary relief is warranted.
- In deciding whether to issue a stay, a court may consider whether delay will make the challenged order ineffective in practical terms, including when a juvenile is near the age at which juvenile court jurisdiction ends.
- When the appellate court is asked only for interim relief, it may limit its review to the stay request and not reach the merits of the underlying adjudication.
- In juvenile disposition matters, the juvenile court’s selection among available placement options is given significant weight at the stay stage, especially where the record contains conflicting evidence and the juvenile court has made findings as to what disposition is best suited to the child.

## Conclusion

The North Dakota Supreme Court denied S.J.’s request to stay a dispositional order committing her to the State Industrial School pending appeal because the short time remaining until her eighteenth birthday meant a stay would likely defeat the disposition in practice, and the juvenile court’s placement decision rested on its evaluation of conflicting evidence about the suitability of returning S.J. to her home under State Youth Authority custody.


In the Interest of S.J., A Child, 304 N.W.2d 685 (1981)