The State of Oklahoma v J. F.

J-2011-514

Filed: Oct. 1, 2011

Not for publication

Prevailing Party: J. F.

Summary

J.F. appealed his conviction for Lewd Acts With a Child Under Sixteen. Conviction and sentence were affirmed by the court. No judge dissented.

Decision

The order of the District Court of Cleveland County granting Appellee's motion for certification as a juvenile in Case No. CF-2011-322 is AFFIRMED. Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch.18, App. (2011), the MANDATE is ORDERED issued upon the filing of this decision.

Issues

• Was there an abuse of discretion by the trial court in certifying Appellee as a juvenile?
• Did Appellee meet the burden of proof required to certify as a juvenile?
• Was the State authorized to appeal the order granting certification to the juvenile system?

Findings

• the court did not err in granting Appellee's motion for certification as a juvenile
• the State failed to prove that Appellee did not meet the burden of certification
• the trial court did not abuse its discretion in its decision

J-2011-514

Oct. 1, 2011

The State of Oklahoma

Appellant

v

J. F.

Appellee

SUMMARY OPINION

A. JOHNSON, PRESIDING JUDGE:

The State of Oklahoma, Appellant, appeals to this Court from an order, entered by the Honorable Steven L. Stice, Special Judge, granting the motion of the defendant J.F., Appellee herein, for certification as a juvenile in Case No. CF-2011-322 in the District Court of Cleveland County. On March 7, 2011, Appellee was charged as a youthful offender with the crime of Lewd Acts With Child Under Sixteen. The crime allegedly occurred on or about the 28th day of January, 2011, when Appellee (d.o.b. 11/17/95) was 15 years and 2 months old. On April 11, 2011, Appellee filed a motion for certification as a juvenile. On May 13, 2011 and June 1, 2011, Judge Stice conducted the preliminary examination and the hearing on the motion for certification as a juvenile. The State presented evidence during the preliminary examination, but presented no other evidence on Appellee’s motion for certification as a juvenile. In support of the motion to certify as a juvenile, Appellee presented the testimony of a Juvenile Justice Specialist with OJA, and also admitted three exhibits, a Youthful Offender Study; an Addendum to the Youthful Offender Study; and a Psychological Reevaluation. After considering the evidence and arguments, Judge Stice granted the motion for certification as a juvenile, and the State appeals.

In its single proposition of error, the State contends the trial court abused its discretion in certifying Appellee as a juvenile because Appellee failed to meet his burden and show by a preponderance of the evidence that he should be certified as a juvenile. This appeal was automatically assigned to the Accelerated Docket of this Court pursuant to Rule 11.2(A)(1) of the Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch.18, App. (2011). Oral argument to this Court on the proposition or issue was scheduled at 10:00 am on Thursday, September 15, 2011, pursuant to Rule 11.2(E). After the State failed to appear at oral argument, the Court announced the appeal would be decided on the briefs and record presented. The State is authorized to appeal the order granting Appellee’s motion for certification to the juvenile system, pursuant to 10A O.S.Supp.2010, § 2-5-206(F)(5). The law is well established that a trial court’s decision granting or denying a defendant’s motion for certification to the juvenile system is reviewed for abuse of discretion. See K. C. H. U. State, 1984 OK CR 4, T8, 674 P.2d 551, 552. Based upon the evidence presented in this case, and the prosecution of this appeal, we do not find an abuse of discretion.

DECISION

The order of the District Court of Cleveland County granting Appellee’s motion for certification as a juvenile in Case No. CF-2011-322 is AFFIRMED. Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch.18, App. (2011), the MANDATE is ORDERED issued upon the filing of this decision.

APPEARANCES AT TRIAL

JAMES SIDERIAS
Assistant District Attorney
Cleveland County District Attorney’s Office
201 South Jones Ave., Suite 300
Norman, OK 73069

COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT

KEITH J. NEDWICK
Law Offices of Keith J. Nedwick, P.C.
104 East Eufaula
Norman, OK 73069

-and-

CHARLES E. DOUGLAS
Attorney at Law
P.O. Box 472
Norman, OK 73070

COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE

OPINION BY: A. JOHNSON, P.J.
LUMPKIN, J.: Concur
C. JOHNSON, J.: Concur
SMITH, J.: Concur RA/F

Click Here To Download PDF

Footnotes:

1. 10A O.S. Supp. 2010 § 2-5-206(F)(5)
2. K. C. H. U. State, 1984 OK CR 4, ¶ 8, 674 P.2d 551, 552

Oklahoma Statutes citations:

• Okla. Stat. tit. 10A § 2-5-206(F)(5) - Appeal from juvenile certification
• Okla. Stat. tit. 22 § 11.2(A)(1) - Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals
• Okla. Stat. tit. 22 § 11.2(E) - Oral argument procedures

Oklahoma Administrative Rules citations:

No Oklahoma administrative rules found.

U.S. Code citations:

No US Code citations found.

Other citations:

No other rule citations found.

Case citations:

• K. C. H. U. State, 1984 OK CR 4, T8, 674 P.2d 551, 552