In re J.C., 2016 UT App 10

During a school assembly, five students (including J.C.) left campus and went to a grove of trees; a school resource officer (SRO) observed them, smelled burnt marijuana, saw an apple pipe with burn marks, and found a small baggie of marijuana nearby.
The SRO chased the group after ordering them not to move; four students were caught, J.C. escaped from the scene.
The State charged J.C. with failure to stop, possession of drug paraphernalia, and possession/use of marijuana; the failure-to-stop charge was later dismissed by the juvenile court.
At trial the State called the SRO, another officer, the school principal, then three student witnesses; the principal testified about statements those students had made to him after apprehension implicating J.C.
When the three students later testified, each gave exculpatory accounts saying J.C. left before the circle formed or before smoking occurred.
The juvenile court found the SRO, other officer, and principal credible, disbelieved the three students (citing memory lapses or loyalty), and adjudicated J.C. delinquent for possession of paraphernalia and possession/use of marijuana.

Issue	Appellant's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether admitting the principal’s testimony about other students’ out-of-court statements was plain error (hearsay)	The principal’s testimony was hearsay, lacked foundation under Utah R. Evid. 801(d)(1) and 613(b), and the court plainly erred by admitting it	The students later testified and were subject to cross-examination; counsel’s failure to object was strategic; rule 801 requires only that the declarant be available and subject to cross-examination	Assumed admission was error but not "obvious" under plain error review; no plain error relief granted
Whether evidence was sufficient to adjudicate J.C. delinquent	Without the principal’s impeachment/substantive testimony linking J.C. to the circle and pipe, evidence was insufficient	SRO and officers’ testimony plus principal’s testimony placed J.C. in the circle and taking a hit; juvenile court credibility findings support adjudication	Evidence was sufficient; juvenile court’s credibility determinations were not clearly erroneous

State v. Dunn, 850 P.2d 1201 (Utah 1993) (plain-error three-part test)
State v. Labrum, 925 P.2d 937 (Utah 1996) (court need not sua sponte correct tactical decisions where strategic reasons exist)
State v. Bullock, 791 P.2d 155 (Utah 1989) (deference to counsel’s conscious decision not to object)
State v. Crosby, 927 P.2d 638 (Utah 1996) (wide latitude for trial counsel’s tactical decisions)