IN RE: K. L. F. (2020)

Youth appeals a judgment terminating the juvenile court’s delinquency jurisdiction over youth and ordering youth to register as a sex offender, arguing that the juvenile court erred in imposing the registration requirement. In youth’s view, the court failed to conduct the requisite hearing under ORS 163A.030, which requires a juvenile court to hold a hearing on the issue of reporting as a sex offender during the six-month period before terminating juvenile court jurisdiction. The court reasoned that it did not need to conduct that hearing because it had ordered youth to register as a sex offender almost two years earlier, when it first considered terminating jurisdiction. The state con-cedes that, because a hearing was not held during the six-month period preceding termination of the juvenile court’s jurisdiction, the judgment terminating jurisdiction should be reversed insofar as it requires youth to register as a sex offender. We agree and accept the state’s concession.

The state suggests, however, that we should also “remand for the juvenile court to hold a hearing, as described in ORS 163A.030(1), to determine whether [youth] should report as a sex offender.” We agree. The appropriate disposition is to remand so that the juvenile court can hold a hearing and youth can seek to meet youth’s “burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that [youth] is rehabilitated and does not pose a threat to the safety of the public.” ORS 163A.030(7)(b); ORS 163A.030(12) (“Notwithstanding ORS 419C.005(4)(c) [juvenile court’s jurisdiction discontinues when it enters an order terminating judgment], the juvenile court retains jurisdiction over a person for purposes of this section.”).

Reversed and remanded.

PER CURIAM