Brown, In re, 54239

Decision Date09 February 1971
Docket NumberNo. 54239,54239
Citation183 N.W.2d 731
CourtIowa Supreme Court
PartiesIn the Interest of Phillip BROWN, a Child.

Mote, Wilson & Welp, Marshalltown, for appellant.

Carl Letz, County Atty., Eldora, for appellee.

LARSON, Justice.

Pursuant to a petition for transfer filed by the county attorney under chapter 232 of the 1966 Code as amended by chapter 203, section 23, Acts of the Sixty-second General Assembly, the Juvenile Court of Hardin County, Iowa, granted same, and the subject, Phillip Brown, after leave of this court was first obtained, appeals. We reverse and remand to the juvenile court for further proceedings.

The sole question presented by this appeal is whether the juvenile court complied with the requirements of the above-mentioned section of our Code.

On April 17, 1970, a petition to transfer a complaint alleging delinquency of Brown filed April 6, 1970, from juvenile court to the district court was filed by the county attorney, and on April 20 a proceeding was commenced before the Honorable Ed J. Kelley, then sitting as juvenile court judge in that county.

After the county attorney made his opening statement to the court, he inquired if the defense attorney wished to respond or if they should proceed with the evidence. Brown's counsel, Mr. Brennecke, then made his statement, but before any evidence was introduced by either side the court made the following ruling from the bench: 'I don't need to hear any evidence on this Petition for Transfer. I have read the record of this boy. I have checked his age and all of the numerous motions that have been made in this case. It is my decision that the case be transferred to the District Court for trial.'

It further appears that Mr. Brennecke then called the court's attention to section 232.72 of the 1966 Code Annotated and pointed out that this section requires a 'hearing' and a specific finding by the court that the transfer will be in the best interest of the child or the public before it is ordered.

Regardless of counsel's argument that under the plain wording of the statute Phillip Brown was entitled to a hearing in open court wherein he could be confronted by witnesses or evidence offered in support of the motion or petition for transfer, and wherein he could offer evidence in resistance to that petition, the court summarily stated: 'Motion to transfer has already been sustained. That is all.' On the following day the formal order of transfer was filed herein.

As errors relied upon for reversal appellant states: (1) The juvenile court failed to grant Phillip Brown a hearing as required by section 232.72 of the Iowa Code Annotated. (2) There was no proper or sufficient evidence in the record upon which the juvenile court could make the findings of fact necessary to support the granting of a petition to transfer. (3) The juvenile court violated the constitutional rights of Phillip Brown in failing to grant the hearing required by the Iowa law.

Since we decide this matter upon assignments (1) and (2) under the rule, we do not reach the constitutional question presented in assignment (3).

I. Appellant contends the record clearly shows the juvenile court failed to grant him a hearing as required by section 232.72, Iowa Code Annotated, and thus there was no evidence in the record of those proceedings upon which the court...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • State v. Savage
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • February 20, 1980
    ...a fact assumed by the trial judge but not made a part of the record. This contravenes the law of this state. See, e. g., In re Brown, 183 N.W.2d 731, 733 (Iowa 1971). See also Iowa R.Civ.P. 136(d) (facts of which court is to be asked to take judicial notice to be considered at pretrial More......
  • Clay, In Interest of, 2--59020
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • October 20, 1976
    ...States, 410 U.S. 605, 609, 93 S.Ct. 1151, 1154, 35 L.Ed.2d 528 (1973); State v. Aumann, 236 N.W.2d 320 (1975). See generally In re Brown, 183 N.W.2d 731 (Iowa 1971). III. Althouth it would at first blush appear Code § 232.58 specifically Clay's invocation of appellate review, we are not so ......
  • State v. Wright
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • May 23, 1990
    ...In support of his contention, the juvenile cites two of our cases: State v. Anthony, 239 N.W.2d 850 (Iowa 1976) and In re Brown, 183 N.W.2d 731 (Iowa 1971). Both cases stand for the proposition that the waiver hearing afforded "must be a meaningful one, including the production of evidence ......
  • State v. Halverson
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • December 15, 1971
    ...whether cases of children are to be handled in juvenile or criminal court. Mallory v. Paradise, 173 N.W.2d 264 (Iowa). See also In re Brown, 183 N.W.2d 731 (Iowa). Such is the present state of Iowa II. In the present case, a hearing in juvenile court was held on the merits as to whether Mar......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT