The Reverse Waiver Report, dated May 15, 2017, addressed the five statutory factors that the court would be required to consider in determining whether to transfer its jurisdiction, namely: (1) the age of the child (2) the child’s physical and mental condition (3) the child’s amenability to treatment in any institution, facility, or programs available to delinquents (4) the nature of the offense(s) and (5) public safety. In anticipation of such a motion, four Reports were prepared for the court: a Reverse Waiver Report prepared by DJS case management specialists, a Mental Health Summary Form prepared by a Hickey mental health clinician, and a Detention Court Report and Detention Behavior Report prepared by Hickey case management specialists. 2 CP § 4-202(e) permits the court, in making a determination whether to transfer jurisdiction, to order that a study be made concerning the child, the family of the child, the environment of the child, and other matters concerning the disposition of the case. Code, § 4-202(h) of the Criminal Procedure Article requires that, pending a transfer determination, the court shall order the child to be held in a secure juvenile facility. On June 15, 2017, petitioner moved for such a transfer (commonly referred to as a “reverse waiver”) and asked the court to order a study pursuant to CP § 4-202(e).2 1 With exceptions not relevant here, Md. Code, §38A-03 of the Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article (CJP). Code, § 4-202 of the Criminal Procedure Article (CP). Hickey School, a detention facility operated by the Department of Juvenile Services (DJS).1 Because of petitioner’s age and the nature of some of the offenses charged, the criminal division of the Circuit Court had exclusive original jurisdiction over petitioner, subject to a transfer of that jurisdiction to the Juvenile Court division of the Circuit Court pursuant to Md. ![]() Upon his arrest, he was detained in the Charles H. For that activity, petitioner was charged in a 14-count indictment that included two counts of attempted first-degree murder, home invasion, first-degree assault, use of a firearm in the commission of a crime of violence, and reckless endangerment. During that invasion, shots were fired and one of the family members was grazed with a bullet and battered with the butt of an assault rifle wielded by petitioner. Johnson, Clerk Filed: JOn March 22, 2017, when he was just 16 years old, petitioner, along with two other young men, participated in an armed home invasion in Baltimore County. of the State Government Article) this document is authentic. Pursuant to Maryland Uniform Electronic Legal Materials Act (§§ 10-1601 et seq. (Senior Judge, Specially Assigned) Opinion by Wilner, J. McDonald Watts Getty Booth Biran Wilner, Alan M. 419686V Argued 1/7/19 HOWARD JIMMY DAVIS v. 03-K-17-001763 Argued: IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. Circuit Court for Baltimore County Case No. The controlling principle is the 1966 legislative declaration that the protection of the public is the ultimate goal of any juvenile delinquency program and that the program that is most effective in treating, educating, and rehabilitating juvenile offenders will best protect the public in the long run. The court needs to determine what programs are available to the defendant in the juvenile and adult systems, whether the defendant would be willing to participate constructively in the juvenile program, and whether he or she would benefit from it in a way that would reduce the likelihood of recidivism better than anything available in the adult system. Amenability is the factor to which the other four are uniquely connected, and it means more than mere eligibility for a juvenile program. Section 4-202(d) requires the court to consider the defendant’s age, physical and mental condition, amenability to treatment in a juvenile institution, program, or facility, the nature of the offense(s), and public safety. The Court of Appeals granted certiorari to clarify the meaning of amenability and its relationship to other statutory factors required by CP, § 4-202(d) to be considered by the court. Stressing the seriousness of the crimes and looking at petitioner’s amenability to treatment in the juvenile system only in terms of his eligibility for possible programs, the court denied the transfer motion, whereupon petitioner entered a conditional guilty plea and was sentenced to 10 years, five without parole. ![]() Petitioner was charged with several crimes beyond the jurisdiction of the Juvenile Court but sought a transfer of the criminal court’s jurisdiction pursuant to Md. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW – CP § 4-202(d) - When he was 16, petitioner participated in an armed home invasion in which shots were fired and one of the occupants was injured. 51, September Term 2020, Opinion by Wilner, J.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |