Justices hear juvenile case

Utah Supreme Court justices are being asked to determine if a juvenile court can order the parent of a minor who tests positive for drugs to be tested themselves.

The question of where a juvenile court judge's jurisdiction begins and a parent's rights end was explored by the Utah Supreme Court on Wednesday. The high court's decision is expected the first of its kind to clarify the issue.

Before a group of law students at the S.J. Quinney College of Law, justices heard arguments in the case of a father who was ordered to submit to drug testing by a juvenile court judge after his juvenile daughter violated her probation on drug charges by testing positive for marijuana.

The father claims that 5th District Juvenile Judge Hans Chamberlain overstepped his jurisdiction when he ordered him to undergo drug testing to make sure his daughter wasn't being exposed to drugs at home.

According to legal briefs filed in the case, the father and his daughter appeared in juvenile court on March 1, 2006, after the girl tested positive for marijuana. Chamberlain heard reports that the father was considered a "threat to law enforcement" and that relatives thought the father was an alcoholic. The home also had a record of domestic disturbances, none involving the daughter, and there was a incident in which the father evaded police, although he was never charged.

The father's live-in girlfriend had also served time in prison for drug possession and she was under suspicion by police for "cooking" methamphetamine.

Chamberlain ordered further drug testing for the girl and also ordered her father to submit to urinalysis and hair tests that same day. After the father failed to comply, the judge found the man in contempt of court and sentenced him to 30 days in jail and a $300 fine, which he suspended to give the father a second chance. Four months later, the court learned the father had failed to show up for drug tests and a second contempt order with an arrest warrant was issued. By that time, the father had filed a motion to have the charge dismissed and appealed the case to the state Supreme Court.

The father's attorney, Randall Allen, told justices Wednesday that ordering drug testing was a personal intrusion on the life and body of a parent. In adult court, a judge would have to find probable cause to order testing. In this case, the matter dealt with the man's daughter and there was no child-welfare issue about the father or his home.