In the Interest of C.A.G.
89 A.3d 704
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2014Background
- Seven juveniles (C.A.G., E.N.J., J.F.K., J.M.B., E.C., D.C., A.B.) admitted to offenses on multiple delinquency petitions filed in county court; each was adjudicated delinquent and given dispositions including probation or placement.
- For each juvenile the court imposed a $25 Crime Victim Compensation (CVC) fee, a $23.50 Judicial Computer Filing (JCF) fee, and a $1.50 Community Service (CS) fee for each petition filed (some juveniles had two petitions, others three).
- Appellants filed timely post-dispositional motions challenging the calculation and statutory authority for assessing those fees on a per-petition basis; motions were denied and appeals followed; appeals were consolidated.
- Core dispute: whether fees must be assessed once per adjudication (per juvenile) or may be assessed per petition/docket entry when multiple petitions arise from distinct incidents.
- Juvenile court proceeded to adjudicate each petition filed (sometimes in a single hearing), and the Commonwealth argues multiple petitions = multiple adjudications triggering multiple fees.
Issues
| Issue | Appellants' Argument | Commonwealth's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Whether fees (CVC, JCF, CS) were illegally imposed per petition rather than per juvenile adjudication | Fees should be imposed once per adjudication (per juvenile), not per petition | Multiple petitions filed and adjudicated = multiple adjudications, so fees may be imposed per petition | Court held fees properly imposed per adjudication (each petition that resulted in an admission/adjudication constituted a separate adjudication), so per-petition assessment was lawful |
| 2. Whether CVC statute triggers fee only upon "an adjudication of delinquency" (thus once) | CVC triggers on adjudication of delinquency, so only a single $25 fee per juvenile | Filing and adjudication on each petition triggers the statutory provision; multiple petitions produce multiple adjudications | Court interpreted statute with juvenile rules; multiple petitions resulting in adjudications allow multiple CVC assessments; issue rejected |
| 3. Whether JCF fee improperly applied because regulation references convictions/guilty pleas (criminal proceedings) | JCF should apply only to convictions/guilty pleas — not juvenile adjudications; internal conflict in regulation makes it inapplicable | Regulation expressly includes juvenile delinquency petitions within “initiation of any criminal proceeding,” so JCF applies when a delinquency petition is filed/adjudicated | Court upheld the regulation’s definition as reasonable; JCF may be imposed in juvenile cases where petitions were filed/adjudicated |
| 4. Whether CS fee lacks statutory authorization or may not be assessed multiple times | No statutory authorization for CS fee or multiple assessments | Section 6352(a)(5) authorizes courts to order payment of reasonable fines/costs/fees and contribution to restitution funds; the CS fee funds a restitution/community service fund | Court found CS fee fits within statutory authority to order contributions to a restitution fund and may be assessed per adjudication; issue rejected |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. M.W., 39 A.3d 958 (Pa. 2012) (describes petition/adjudication process and requirement to specify offenses when juvenile found delinquent)
- In re R.D., 44 A.3d 657 (Pa. Super. 2012) (juvenile court has broad discretion in disposition; dispositions must conform to Juvenile Act)
- Commonwealth v. Shiffler, 879 A.2d 185 (Pa. 2005) (statutory language that is clear must be applied according to plain meaning)
- Commonwealth v. Love, 957 A.2d 765 (Pa. Super. 2008) (clear and unambiguous statute must be read by its plain meaning)
- Commonwealth v. Hale, 85 A.3d 570 (Pa. Super. 2014) (juvenile adjudications are not criminal convictions)