George J. v. State, 279 P.3d 187

In 2009 Nevada added NRS 62B.330(3)(e)(l) and NRS 62B.335 addressing juvenile court jurisdiction where acts by 16–18 year-olds would be category A or B felonies as adults.
NRS 62B.330(3)(e)(l) deems such acts not delinquent and removes juvenile court jurisdiction if the person is identified and charged between 20 years 3 months and 21 years.
NRS 62B.335 allows a juvenile court hearing to decide dismissal or transfer when a delinquent act is identified before 21 but apprehended after 21, and applies to acts within juvenile jurisdiction.
George J., age 17, allegedly committed multiple offenses that would be felony-level as an adult; he was identified at age 20y8m, filed in juvenile court at 20y10m, turned 21 in June, and was apprehended in August 2010.
The juvenile court transferred the case to district court after determining NRS 62B.335 applied, while George argued 335 did not apply or retroactivity objections.
The court concluded 335 only applies to acts within juvenile jurisdiction under 330 and cannot override acts deemed not delinquent by 330; the result, transfer to district court, was correct.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Do NRS 62B.330(3)(e)(l) and NRS 62B.335 conflict over juvenile jurisdiction?	State: 330(3)(e)(l) governs and divests juvenile court.	George: 335 governs and may apply to transferred cases.	335 cannot apply to acts deemed not delinquent by 330; 330 governs jurisdiction.
Does 62B.335 apply to acts excluded from juvenile jurisdiction under 62B.330(3)?	State: 335 applies to delinquent acts identified before 21 but apprehended after 21.	George: 335 is broader and could apply to excluded acts if framed properly.	335 applies only to acts within juvenile jurisdiction, not to acts deemed non-delinquent by 330(3).
If the juvenile court lacks jurisdiction under 62B.330(3), may it nonetheless transfer proceedings under 62B.335?	State: transfer under 335 may still be permissible if jurisdiction would exist under 335.	George: cannot rely on 335 to create jurisdiction where 330 removed it.	No jurisdiction under 335 when 330(3) removes it; but transfer result upheld due to correct outcome.

Wyatt v. State, 86 Nev. 294, 468 P.2d 338 (Nev. 1970) (judgment affirmed if correct result reached on different ground)
State v. Lucero, 127 Nev. 92, 249 P.3d 1226 (Nev. 2011) (statutory interpretation aims at legislative intent and harmony)
Hobbs v. State, 127 Nev. 234, 251 P.3d 177 (Nev. 2011) (interpretation in harmony with other statutes; avoid absurd results)
Albios v. Horizon Communities, Inc., 122 Nev. 409, 132 P.3d 1022 (Nev. 2006) (statutory provisions interpreted in harmony; multiple provisions considered together)
Pellegrini v. State, 117 Nev. 860, 34 P.3d 519 (Nev. 2001) (avoid nugatory or absurd statutory constructions)
State v. Barren, 128 Nev. 337, 279 P.3d 182 (Nev. 2012) (retroactivity considerations discussed in context of statute applicability)
Landreth v. Malik, 127 Nev. 175, 251 P.3d 163 (Nev. 2011) (supreme court allows sua sponte jurisdictional review)
Koller v. State, 122 Nev. 223, 130 P.3d 653 (Nev. 2006) (procedural considerations on appeal and jurisdiction)