In re K.J.
2016 Tex. App. LEXIS 4456
| Tex. App. | 2016Background
- Appellant (K.J.), age 14 at the time, was charged with three counts of aggravated robbery (first-degree felonies) involving a firearm and separate victims on April 12–13, 2015.
- Juvenile court held a discretionary transfer (certification) hearing after ordering a diagnostic study, social evaluation, and full investigation; reports and exhibits (psychological evaluation, psychiatric evaluation, probation report, recordings, photos, victim testimony) were considered.
- The juvenile court found probable cause, determined the offenses were against persons (deadly weapon used; victims feared for their lives), and expressly made findings on the §54.02(f) factors: sophistication/maturity, prior record/history, and prospects for rehabilitation/public protection.
- Psychological testing showed appellant’s overall sophistication-maturity in the middle/average range but identified multiple risk factors and a moderate risk to reoffend; appellant also made incriminating/braggadocious recorded statements and displayed disrespect/indifference at arrest.
- Juvenile record included multiple prior referrals, placement on probation (including gang supervision), probation violations, runaways, and numerous disciplinary write-ups while detained; prior rehabilitative efforts were unsuccessful according to the record.
- The juvenile court waived jurisdiction and transferred K.J. to criminal district court; K.J. appealed arguing legal and factual insufficiency of the findings supporting transfer.
Issues
| Issue | Appellant's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for §54.02(f)(1) (offense against person) | Evidence does not justify transfer solely because offense grade alone is insufficient | Multiple victims, use/exhibition of firearm, victims’ fear, and photographic/video evidence show offenses were against persons and egregious | Finding supported; factor favors transfer |
| Sufficiency of evidence for §54.02(f)(2) (sophistication/maturity) | Psychological tests and young age indicate below-average maturity; appellant’s recorded naïveté/cavalier behavior shows immaturity | Psychologist’s overall opinion and testing placed appellant in middle/average range; recordings show awareness of juvenile vs adult consequences; court may credit favorable evidence | Finding supported (legally and factually); maturity/sophistication weighed for transfer |
| Sufficiency of evidence for §54.02(f)(3) (record/history) | Prior offenses and probation violations insufficiently detailed; disciplinary write-ups differ from criminal offenses | Probation report and court materials document multiple prior referrals, probation noncompliance, gang supervision, escalating violent behavior and detention misconduct | Finding supported; history favors transfer |
| Sufficiency of evidence for §54.02(f)(4) (public protection/rehabilitation) | Record does not show why available juvenile programs would be ineffective; psychological recommendations suggest rehabilitative options | Repeated failures of probation/jail, escalating violence (including discharge of firearm at home), and detention misconduct support conclusion juvenile measures unlikely to protect public or rehabilitate | Finding supported; factor favors transfer |
| Abuse of discretion in waiving jurisdiction | Even if findings supported, transfer was excessive given age and available juvenile services | Court complied with §54.02 procedures, considered required reports and testimony, and applied governing factors in a reasoned manner | No abuse of discretion; waiver affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Moon v. State, 451 S.W.3d 28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (two-step sufficiency review and abuse-of-discretion standard for juvenile transfer)
- Kent v. United States, 383 U.S. 541 (U.S. 1966) (transfer proceedings are critically important and must meet due-process essentials)
- In re J.R.C.S., 393 S.W.3d 903 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2012) (adopted approach for abuse-of-discretion review in juvenile certification)
- In re K.D.S., 808 S.W.2d 299 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1991) (factual-sufficiency standard for juvenile-transfer findings)
- Rodriguez v. State, 478 S.W.3d 783 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2015) (juvenile’s understanding of differences between adult and juvenile systems relevant to maturity/sophistication)