S.R.S. v. State

• Decision Date: 07 November 1986
• Docket Number: No. J-86-471,J-86-471
• Citation: 728 P.2d 515
• Parties: S.R.S., Appellant, v. The STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee.
• Court: United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Page 515

728 P.2d 515

S.R.S., Appellant, v. The STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee.

No. J-86-471.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.

Nov. 7, 1986.

Robert A. Ravitz, Kindanne C. Jones, Oklahoma County Public Defenders, for appellant.

Robert H. Macy, Oklahoma County Dist. Atty., Fern L. Smith, Wendell I. Smith, Asst. Dist. Attys., for appellee.

OPINION ON REVERSE CERTIFICATION

BRETT, Judge:

Appellant, S.R.S., a juvenile of the age of sixteen years of age, having been born May 18, 1969, was charged under the "Reverse Certification Statute," 10 O.S. (Supp.1985), § 1104.2, in the Oklahoma County District Court with three counts of First Degree Murder. A preliminary hearing was held on May 12, 1986, before the Honorable Manville T. Buford, Associate District Judge. On May 12, 1986, Appellant filed his motion to be considered a juvenile and asked that his case be remanded to the Juvenile Division of the District Court. It was agreed between the parties that the preliminary hearing would be conducted at the same hearing on all three charges. The charge lodged in CRF-86-1231 was heard first, and immediately following, the two murder charges lodged in CRF-86-1232 were heard. At the conclusion of the hearings, the Judge declined to remand appellant to the juvenile division. From that order, this appeal has been lodged. We affirm.

Appellant raises three assignments of error in his appeal. The first assignment of error asserts that the trial judge committed error in his statutory interpretation of 10 O.S. (Supp.1985), § 1104.2, by failing to consider the likelihood of reasonable rehabilitation in the deliberation of appellant's motion to remand his case to the juvenile division of the district court.

The Statute provides the following:

§ 1104.2. Persons 16 or 17 years of age to be considered as adult for committing certain offenses--Warrants--Certification as Child

A. any person sixteen (16) or seventeen (17) years of age who is charged with murder, kidnapping for purposes of extortion, robbery with a dangerous weapon, rape in the second degree, use of firearm or other offensive weapon while committing a felony, arson in the first degree, burglary with explosives, shooting with intent to kill, manslaughter in the first degree, or nonconsensual sodomy, shall be considered as an adult. Upon the arrest and detention, such sixteen- or seventeen-year-old accused shall have all the statutory and constitutional rights and protections of an adult accused of a crime, but shall be detained in a jail cell or ward entirely separate from prisoners who are eighteen (18) years of age or over.

B. Upon the filing of an information against such accused person, a warrant shall be issued which shall set forth the rights of the accused person, and the rights of the parents, guardian or next friend of the accused person to be present at the preliminary hearing, to have an attorney present and to make application for certification of such accused person as a child to the juvenile division of the district court. The warrant shall be personally served together with a certified copy of the information on the accused person and on the parents, guardian or next friend of the accused person.

C. The accused person shall file a motion for certification as a child before the start of the criminal preliminary hearing. Upon the filing of such motion, the complete juvenile record of the accused shall be made available to the district attorney and the accused person.

At the conclusion of the state's case at the criminal preliminary hearing, the accused person may offer evidence to support the motion for certification as a child.

The court shall rule on the certification motion of the accused person before ruling on whether to bind the accused over for trial. When ruling on the certification motion of the accused person, the court shall give consideration to the following guidelines, listed in order of importance:

1. Whether the alleged offense was committed in an aggressive, violent, premeditated or willful manner;

2. Whether the offense was against persons or property, greater weight being given for retaining the accused person within the adult criminal system for offenses against persons, especially if personal injury resulted;

3. The record and past history of the accused person, including previous contacts with law enforcement agencies and juvenile or criminal courts, prior periods of probation and commitments to juvenile institutions; and

4. The prospects for adequate protection of the public if the accused person is processed through the juvenile system.

The court, in its decision on the certification motion...