Juvenile Certification

Time Requirements on the State’s Power to Certify a Juvenile as an Adult

Texas Family Code Section 54.02 gives the juvenile court the power to transfer its exclusive jurisdiction over a juvenile case to a district court. This transfer of jurisdiction allows the State to treat a juvenile as an adult for purposes of prosecution. Section 54.02 actually lays out two different processes for transferring juvenile cases to adult court. The first process is used in cases where the juvenile is under the age of 18 at the time of certification. The second, which is laid out in Section 54.02(j), is for those cases in which a person has turned 18 prior to the filing of the case in juvenile court. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals recently upheld the time requirements placed on the power of the State to pursue post-18 certifications in Moore v. State (Case Opinion – 2017).

Section 54.02(j)’s Time Limits

Section 54.02(j) allows a juvenile court to transfer its jurisdiction to an appropriate district court for criminal proceedings if the person accused is 18 years of age or older at the time the petition is filed but was a juvenile at the time the offense was committed. During the transfer hearing, the State must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that “for a reason beyond the control of the State, it was not practicable to proceed in juvenile court before the 18th birthday of the person or after due diligence of the State, it was not practicable to proceed in juvenile court before the 18th birthday of the person because the State did not have probable cause to proceed in juvenile court and new evidence has been found since the 18th birthday of the person or the person could not be found.”

This section of the Family Code imposes on the prosecutors a duty to pursue cases in juvenile court whenever possible. In order to retain the power to prosecute cases after a person has aged out of the juvenile system, the State must show that the delay in prosecution was beyond its control. If it is unable to prove this, then the only choice available for a juvenile court in these situations is to dismiss the case.

The Issue in Moore v. State

In Moore, the accused was charged with Aggravated Sexual Assault of a Child. He was alleged to have committed the offense when he was 16 years of age. Due to a heavy caseload and an error in one of the police reports, the detective did not send the case to the District Attorney’s Office until after Moore had turned 18. The prosecutor filed a certification petition in the case over a year later when Moore was 19 years old. The juvenile court transferred the case to district court.

Moore pled in adult court and received 5 years’ probation on a deferred adjudication. He then appealed the case claiming that the juvenile court lacked the jurisdiction to transfer the case because the State did not prove that the delay in filing the case was beyond its control. The State first claimed that law enforcement should not be considered “the State” under Section 54.02(j). The State then argued that the court should consider whether the reasons for the delay were unconstitutional. According to this argument, if the reasons for the delay were not in violation of Moore’s constitutional rights, then the State should be allowed to proceed with the certification regardless of who was to blame for the postponement in filing charges.

The Court’s Ruling

After considering the arguments of both sides, the ruling of the Court of Appeals, and the case law presented by the parties, the Court of Criminal Appeals ruled on the case. First, the Court held that the term “the State” includes law enforcement and prosecutors collectively. The Court pointed out that the law consistently includes law enforcement in its use of this term.

The Court then dismissed the State’s notion that the requirements of Section 54.02(j) be treated like a claim of speedy trial, due process, or statute of limitations. The Court explained that the reason for the requirements in Section 54.02(j) is to limit the power of the State to prosecute a person as an adult for something that happened when he was a juvenile. In order for an exception to be made to this general rule, the State must prove that it was not at fault for the delay in prosecution.

Conclusion

The Court of Criminal Appeals’ decision in Moore is consistent with the Texas Supreme Court’s rulings in other cases involving juvenile certifications. The courts are clear that juvenile cases should be handled in juvenile court when possible. This means that detectives and prosecutors working juvenile cases must be diligent in giving these cases the proper priority so that an accused juvenile does not age out of the system before his case can be heard by the juvenile court. In any case in which prosecution is delayed until after a person’s 18th birthday, the State will be required to prove that the reason for this lag time was beyond its control. And if the State is unable to meet this requirement, then the courts will prevent further prosecution in these cases.

The Nuts and Bolts of the Juvenile Certification Process

The juvenile court has exclusive jurisdiction over offenses committed by juveniles (children ages 10-17)  in Texas. The only exception to this, according to Texas Family Code Section 54.02, is when the court waives its jurisdiction and transfers a juvenile to an adult district court to face the adult criminal justice process. This is what is called certifying a juvenile as an adult. The Family Code lays out a process for when and how a juvenile may be certified.

The Process of Certification

Family Code Section 54.02 actually lays out two different processes for certification. One process is for cases in which the charged person is still a juvenile. The other one is for cold cases where the person accused was a juvenile at the time of the offense, but became an adult prior to the time the case went to court. This latter process is commonly referred to as a post-18 certification.

In all cases, per Section 54.02(a), the juvenile court may certify someone as an adult ONLY if the following factors are met:

1. the alleged offense is a felony
2. the child was 14 or older at the time of the offense if the alleged offense was a first degree felony, a capital felony, or an aggravated controlled substance felony or the child was 15 or older for any other felony
3. no adjudication hearing has taken place for that offense, and
4. during a hearing, the court finds that there is probable cause to believe the juvenile committed the offense.

Additionally, in all cases, the court must order, prior to the hearing, a complete diagnostic study to be done on the juvenile, which is to include information about his circumstances and the circumstances of the crime. This study must then be given to the court, prosecutor, and defense attorney prior to the hearing. This is required by Section 54.02(d) and (e).

The “Normal” Certification Process in Texas

If the person who is the subject of a certification proceeding is under the age of 18 at the time of court, under Section 54.02(a), the court must determine whether the welfare of the community requires the child to be certified as an adult due to either the seriousness of the offense or the background of the child. In making this determination, the court must take into account, along with other things, whether the crime was committed against a person or property, the sophistication and maturity of the child, the record and previous history of the child, the potential of adequate protection of the public, and the likelihood of appropriate rehabilitation of the child using the resources and services available in the juvenile system. These factors are laid out in Section 54.02(f).

Post-18 Certification in Texas

For cold cases, in which a person was a juvenile at the time of the offense, but is now an adult, the process is a little bit different. For these cases, the certification process is the only avenue available for prosecution. According to Section 54.02(j), in addition to the factors listed above regarding age and probable cause, which must be met in every certification case, the court must also find that either:

• because of a reason beyond the control of the State, it was not practicable to proceed prior to the person’s 18th birthday or
• after due diligence on the part of the State, it was not practicable to proceed with the case prior to the person’s 18th birthday because the State did not have probable cause and new evidence has been discovered since the 18th birthday.

Who Decides on Certification?

Initially, the District Attorney’s Office makes the decision whether to seek certification. If they decide to seek certification, then a hearing will be held. At the hearing, the juvenile court judge will be the person to determine whether the juvenile will be certified. There is no jury at a certification hearing. In Tarrant County, the juvenile prosecutor who is assigned to the case is the person who decides whether to pursue certification.

Across the state of Texas, certifications make up only a small percentage of juvenile cases. Most cases are kept in the juvenile system. In Tarrant County, there are only a handful of certification hearings held each year. Most of those are post-18 certifications on sex cases where the victim did not outcry about the offense until after the juvenile charged was 18 or older. On average, there are less than 5 certifications of juveniles who are still under the age of 18 per year in Tarrant County.

Possible Defenses to Juvenile Certification

Because the State must only prove by probable cause that the charged juvenile committed the offense, it is unlikely that defenses to the offense itself will be successful at a certification hearing. However, there are some other areas where a defense attorney can attack. In cases of a post-18 certification, the best possible avenues for the defense would be to attack the age of the juvenile at the time of the offense or the due diligence of law enforcement to investigate the case.

For normal certifications, a defense attorney should look to areas such as the maturity of the juvenile, and the likelihood of rehabilitation of the juvenile through the resources available in the juvenile system. A defense attorney should also highlight the positive aspects of the juvenile’s background, including responsible adults who could provide appropriate support and supervision for that child, positive educational and extra-curricular activities, and any treatment or mentoring that the child has had in the past which showed positive results. An attorney should also be pointing out things such as a low IQ, any mental health diagnosis, a lack of treatment for those problems, and how available resources within the juvenile system would be the best approach to address those things.

Legal Ramifications of Certification

If the juvenile court waives its jurisdiction and certifies a juvenile as an adult, the case will be transferred to adult court. From there, it will be treated as an adult case for all intents and purposes. The prosecutors must present the case to a grand jury for indictment. Adult punishment ranges will apply.
If, however, the juvenile court denies certification on an accused person who is still a juvenile, the case can still be pursued by the prosecution in juvenile court. In those post-18 certifications, if the court denies the certification, then the case is dead because the court will no longer, at that point, have jurisdiction over the person accused due to their age.

Certifying a juvenile as an adult is something that does not happen a lot in the State of Texas. It is even more rare in Tarrant County. However, when it does happen, there is a specific procedure laid out in Family Code Section 54.02 which must be followed in order for the certification to happen. The prosecutor gets to decide whether to seek certification, but it is up to the juvenile court judge to determine whether it will be granted. If granted, from that point on, the case and the juvenile will be treated as an adult and will be prosecuted in the adult system.

About the Author

Christy Dunn is a writer and attorney licensed to practice in Texas. She was a prosecutor for 15 years. The last five years of her prosecutorial career was spent in the Juvenile Division of the Tarrant County District Attorney’s Office. She has tried over 20 juvenile cases in Texas and multiple certification hearings. She was part of the multidisciplinary team that created a Project SAFeR.