K.T.L. v The State of Oklahoma

J-2011-462

Filed: Sep. 27, 2011

Not for publication

Prevailing Party: K.T.L.

Summary

K.T.L. appealed his conviction for robbery by force/fear and kidnapping. Conviction and sentence were reversed, and K.T.L. was certified as a juvenile. Judge Lewis dissented.

Decision

IT IS THEREFORE THE ORDER OF THIS COURT that the District Court of Cleveland County's order denying the defendant's motion for certification as a juvenile should be REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions to certify K.T.L. as a juvenile. 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 District Court in denying K.T.L.'s motion for certification as a juvenile?
• Did the evidence support K.T.L.'s claim for juvenile treatment?
• Was the burden of proof properly placed on the defendant juvenile in this certification process?
• Did the discretionary decision regarding the child's amenability to rehabilitation comply with established legal standards?

Findings

• the court erred
• the evidence was sufficient
• the order denying K.T.L.'s motion for certification as a juvenile should be reversed and remanded

J-2011-462

Sep. 27, 2011

K.T.L.

Appellant

v

The State of Oklahoma

Appellee

SUMMARY OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Appellant, K.T.L., appeals the order of the Honorable Michael D. Tupper, Cleveland County Special Judge, denying his motion for certification as a juvenile in Cleveland County District Court Case No. CF-2011-351. Pursuant to Rule 11.2(A)(1), Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch. 18, App. (2011), this appeal was automatically assigned to the Accelerated Docket of this Court. K.T.L.’s proposition of error was presented to this Court in oral argument on September 8, 2011, pursuant to Rule 11.2(F). At the conclusion of the argument, the parties were advised of the decision of this Court.

The burden to sustain a motion to be remanded to the juvenile system is upon the defendant juvenile. Whether or not the proof is sufficient lies within the discretion of the magistrate, and on appeal will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion. J.D.P. v. State, 1999 OK CR 5, 96, 989 P.2d 948, 949. After a review of the record, we FIND the District Court’s order denying K.T.L.’s motion for certification as a juvenile was an abuse of discretion. The finding that a child is not amenable to rehabilitation within the juvenile system is a discretionary decision to be made by the judge, but the decision must be based on substantial evidence against the child’s claim to the benefit of juvenile treatment. M.L.S. v. State, 1991 OK CR 9, q13, 805 P.2d 665, 669. We FIND that under the facts of this case, the substantial evidence supported K.T.L.’s motion to be treated as a juvenile.

Decision

IT IS THEREFORE THE ORDER OF THIS COURT that the District Court of Cleveland County’s order denying the defendant’s motion for certification as a juvenile should be REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions to certify K.T.L. as a juvenile. 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.

ATTORNEYS AT TRIAL

CHARLES E. DOUGLAS
ATTORNEY AT LAW
NORMAN, OKLAHOMA
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT

JAMES SIDERIAS
ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY
CLEVELAND COUNTY
NORMAN, OKLAHOMA
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE

OPINION BY: PER CURIAM

A. JOHNSON, P.J.: CONCURS
LEWIS, V.P.J.: DISSENTS
LUMPKIN, J.: CONCURS
C. JOHNSON, J.: NOT PARTICIPATING
SMITH, J.: CONCURS

LEWIS, JUDGE, DISSENTS: I find no abuse of discretion by the magistrate. Therefore I would affirm his ruling denying Appellant’s motion for certification as a juvenile.

Click Here To Download PDF

Footnotes:

1. J.D.P. v. State, 1999 OK CR 5, 96, 989 P.2d 948, 949.
2. M.L.S. v. State, 1991 OK CR 9, q13, 805 P.2d 665, 669.

Oklahoma Statutes citations:

• Okla. Stat. tit. 22 § 11.2(A)(1) - Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals
• Okla. Stat. tit. 22 § 3.15 - Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals
• Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 701.8 - Robbery by Force/Fear
• Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 745 - Kidnapping

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:

• J.D.P. v. State, 1999 OK CR 5, 96, 989 P.2d 948, 949
• M.L.S. v. State, 1991 OK CR 9, q13, 805 P.2d 665, 669