D.A.M. v. State

• Decision Date: 23 August 1988
• Docket Number: No. J-88-55,J-88-55
• Citation: 760 P.2d 842
• Parties: In the Matter of D.A.M., a juvenile, Appellant, v. STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee.
• Court: United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Page 842

760 P.2d 842

In the Matter of D.A.M., a juvenile, Appellant, v. STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee.

No. J-88-55.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.

Aug. 23, 1988.

An appeal from the District Court of Carter County; Richard A. Miller, District Judge.

D.A.M., a juvenile, appeals from an order of the Juvenile Division of the Carter County District Court, waiving jurisdiction over him and certifying him to stand trial as an adult for the crime of Possession and Concealment of Stolen Property. From said order a timely appeal has been perfected to this Court. Accordingly, the order of the juvenile court is AFFIRMED.

Scott W. Braden, Asst. Appellate Public Defender, Norman, for appellant.

Fred Collins, Dist. Atty. by Maria Tasi Malowney, Ardmore, for appellee.

OPINION

BUSSEY, Judge:

D.A.M., a juvenile, appeals from an order of the Juvenile Division of the Carter County District Court, Case No. JFJ-87-32, waiving jurisdiction over him and certifying him to stand trial as an adult for the crime of Possession and Concealment of Stolen Property. From said order a timely appeal has been perfected to this Court.

In order to certify a juvenile to stand trial as an adult, the juvenile judge must make two ultimate findings: First, that there is prosecutive merit to the complaint, that is, a finding that a crime has been committed and that there is probable cause to believe the accused juvenile committed it; and second, that the juvenile is not a fit subject for rehabilitation by the facilities and programs available to the juvenile court. In re E.O., 703 P.2d 192, 193 (Okl.Cr.1985). As the juvenile herein stipulated to the prosecutive merit of the crime charged, he challenges only the second finding.

Title 10 O.S.1981, § 1112(b) sets forth six factors a juvenile court must consider when determining the prospects for reasonable rehabilitation of a child. The evidence presented in the instant case regarding these factors showed the following: Although the seriousness of the alleged property offense to the community was relatively minor, it was committed in a willful manner; the juvenile possessed an average to low average level of intelligence and he appeared to be aware of social rules and sanctions; the juvenile history of the accused included eight intakes by community agencies, a period of "own home" parol, a commitment to a detention facility and the filing of a petition for escape therefrom, a record of school truancy, an allegation of marijuana...