761 S.E.2d 231
S.C.2014Background
- Appellant (age 16) was charged with possession of marijuana; family court adjudicated him delinquent after an evidentiary hearing and imposed rehabilitative sanctions.
- At the adjudicatory hearing Appellant moved for a jury trial under the U.S. and South Carolina Constitutions; the family court denied the motion.
- Facts at hearing: officer pursued Appellant, Appellant discarded items, baggies with marijuana were recovered near where items were discarded; Appellant denied knowledge.
- Appellant appealed the denial of a jury trial; the appeal was certified to the Supreme Court of South Carolina.
- The Children’s Code and Family Court Rules provide that juvenile hearings are conducted by the court without a jury and treat adjudications as noncriminal, rehabilitative proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Appellant's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether juveniles have a federal constitutional right to a jury trial in family court delinquency proceedings | McKeiver does not preclude Appellant; he is entitled to a jury under the U.S. Constitution | McKeiver controls; no federal right to jury in juvenile adjudications | No federal right; statute and rule constitutional under federal law |
| Whether Article I, § 14 of the S.C. Constitution guarantees a jury trial in family court juvenile adjudications | The phrase “any person charged with an offense” includes juveniles and secures a jury right | Juvenile adjudication is unlike 1868 criminal prosecutions; right limited to cases triable by jury in 1868 or of like nature | No state constitutional right; juvenile adjudication not of like nature to 1868 criminal prosecutions |
Key Cases Cited
- McKeiver v. Pennsylvania, 403 U.S. 528 (U.S. 1971) (plurality: no federal constitutional right to jury trial in juvenile adjudications)
- Mims Amusement Co. v. S.C. Law Enforcement Div., 366 S.C. 141 (S.C. 2005) (state jury-right analysis tied to rights existing at constitution adoption and to later actions of like nature)
- In re Skinner, 272 S.C. 135 (S.C. 1978) (juvenile process aims to avoid stigma of criminal conviction)
- City Council of Anderson v. O’Donnell, 29 S.C. 355 (S.C. 1888) (jury right to be read in light of law existing at constitution adoption)
- State v. Harrison, 402 S.C. 288 (S.C. 2013) (standard of review for constitutional challenges to statutes)
- State v. Coleman, 54 S.C. 162 (S.C. 1899) (examples of juveniles being criminally prosecuted and tried by jury under common law)