T.M. v. State, 2026 Ind. App. LEXIS 324 (Ind. Ct. App. 2026)

The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed a commitment order, clarifying that under state statute, a youth may be placed with a friend’s parent without pre-existing guardianship. The court stated in relevant part:

When presented with the option of placing T.M. with Coates, the court determined it could not do so because she did not have guardianship or custody of T.M. and the court did not have jurisdiction over her as a non-party. But section 31-37-19-6 plainly authorizes the court to place T.M. in Coates’ home and grant wardship to her, provided that placement was “consistent with the safety of the community and the best interest of the child.” J.T. v. State, 111 N.E.3d 1019, 1026 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018) (quoting D.S. v. State, 829 N.E.2d 1081, 1085 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005)), trans. denied; see also Ind. Code 31-37-18-6 (1997). Coates is a person, and her home constitutes “another home.” I.C. § 31-37-19-6(b)(2)(D). Not only does the State offer no legal authority indicating that placing T.M. with Coates would run afoul of the statute, but it offers no argument whatsoever on this subject.

As a result of its incorrect interpretation of the juvenile code, the court did not explore placing T.M. with Coates and instead concluded the only viable disposition was placement in the DOC. We are not confident, however, that the court would have made the same decision had it correctly interpreted section 31-37-19-6.