Previous Story
18 yr. old to be tried in juvenile court
|
Posted on Dec 30 1999
The Supreme Court has upheld an earlier ruling denying a petition by a minor to dismiss a case against him before the juvenile court on grounds that he was no longer under 18 years old at the time of the trial.
It said the juvenile court still retains jurisdiction over the case despite the fact that the minor turned 18 since the delinquency charges he was facing were a result of his actions as juvenile.
The decision added that the age at the time of the alleged offense is based upon the theory that juvenile delinquencies are actions or conduct taking place at an age when the child is protected from the rigors of criminal laws .
This ruling by the Supreme Court stemmed from a juvenile case over an incident in November 1997, just 12 days before the minor celebrated his 18th birthday.
The government immediately filed charges of delinquency in the juvenile court, saying that the minor along with another person committed an act which is equivalent to crimes of armed robbery and auto theft if committed by an adult.
In February last year, the defendant asked for dismissal of his case on grounds that the court had lost its jurisdiction over the case as he was no longer a minor, having reached the legal age on December 1997.
But the juvenile court denied his motion, noting that it still had jurisdiction over the case as the offense occurred and charges were filed while the defendant was still under 18.
In the defendant’s appeal to the Supreme Court, his lawyers argued that the juvenile court loses its jurisdiction when a person reaches an age not legally considered a minor and that it should not try the case because he is above 18 even if the offense was committed when he was still a minor.
