The DeKalb County Department of Family and Children Services filed a complaint alleging that four minor children are deprived because their mother had left them alone without proper parental supervision and failed to enroll them in school. After a hearing, the juvenile court dismissed the complaint, finding that there was not probable cause to believe the children are deprived. A child advocate filed this appeal on the children’s behalf, claiming that the juvenile court abused its discretion in dismissing the complaint. Because there is some evidence to support the findings in the juvenile court’s dismissal order, we find no abuse of discretion and affirm.
1. The appellants do not contest the dismissal of the complaint as to the allegations of inadequate supervision. Instead they claim that the juvenile court erred in dismissing the complaint, because there were reasonable grounds to believe that the mother neglected to educate the children. However, “once the juvenile court determines that reasonable grounds do or do not exist, the function of the appellate court is limited to ascertaining whether there was some evidence to support the juvenile court’s determination. Determinations of a juvenile court made on an exercise of discretion, if based upon evidence, will not be controlled by this court.” Citation and punctuation omitted. In the Interest of J. F., 310 Ga. App. 807, 809-810 2 714 SE2d 399 2011. Contrary to the appellants’ claim, there is some evidence to support the juvenile court’s determination. As the juvenile court noted in its order, a foster care case manager testified that the children are enrolled in school and that any alleged issues regarding school have been solved. The state must present evidence of present deprivation, not past or potential future deprivation. In the Interest of S. D., __Ga. App.__ 2 Case No. A12A0245, decided May 31, 2012. “Based on the evidence, the juvenile court acted within its discretion in finding that there were no reasonable grounds to find educational deprivation, and thus, in dismissing the deprivation complaint.” In the Interest of J. F., supra at 810 2.
