D.D.R. v. State, 2012 Ark. App. 329

D.D.R., age 15, was charged in circuit court with four counts of aggravated robbery, four counts of theft of property, one count of theft by receiving, and one count of aggravated assault for conduct on Oct 14, 2010 and Jan 16, 2011.
State sought enhanced penalties under a firearm and group-commission theory; D.D.R. moved to transfer all charges to juvenile court; transfer motion denied; interlocutory appeal filed.
Transfer hearing required under Ark.Code Ann. § 9-27-318 to consider ten enumerated factors and to make written findings; the court need not prove each factor or weigh them equally.
Testimony at the hearing included extended juvenile jurisdiction (EJJ) descriptions, teachers describing D.D.R. as capable of rehabilitation, and a probation officer detailing prior juvenile system involvement and ongoing issues.
State presented evidence of serious, violent, and premeditated conduct; the trial court found juvenile facilities unlikely to rehabilitate; the court denied transfer; decision affirmed on appeal.
Affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the denial of transfer to juvenile court was clearly erroneous.	D.D.R. failed to show clear and convincing evidence of suitability for EJJ.	D.D.R. showed rehabilitation potential and EJJ would provide supervision through age 21.	No clear error; denial affirmed.

Magana-Galdamez v. State, 104 Ark.App. 280, 291 S.W.3d 203 (2009) (clear-and-convincing standard for transfer; weighting of factors not required to be equal)
R.M.W. v. State, 375 Ark. 1, 289 S.W.3d 46 (2008) (appellate review of transfer decision; not clearly erroneous to affirm)
Magana-Galdamez v. State (Magana-Galdamez), 291 S.W.3d 203 (2009) (cite for standard of review in transfer context)