In the Matter of J.R.C.S., a Juvenile
393 S.W.3d 903
| Tex. App. | 2012Background
- Appellant J.R.C.S., a juvenile, appealed adjudication of delinquency for felony Criminal Mischief and related disposition and restitution orders.
- Playground at Ramona Elementary in El Paso burned on July 14, 2010; replacement cost around $75,000; total restitution $75,000 to school and $25,000 to parents was ordered.
- Witnesses identified J.R.C.S. at the scene; cell phone in his possession contained photos/videos of the fire; arson investigation supported fire origin under the platform.
- Evidence included photographs, videos, and testimony from Cortez family; arson investigator Sodermann and school officials testified to destruction and value.
- Trial court adjudicated delinquency, placed on probation until age 18, and ordered restitution; J.R.C.S. timely appealed.
- Court of Appeals affirmed the adjudication and disposition, but held no jurisdiction over parental restitution issue.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Legal sufficiency of adjudication evidence | J.R.C.S. argues insufficient FMV and no destruction proof. | State contends circumstantial evidence proves intent and destruction. | Sufficiency supports adjudication. |
| Pecuniary loss proof and value methodology | Owner testimony insufficient to prove FMV/ replacement cost. | Evidence showed entire playground destroyed; costs about $75k. | Court allowed owner testimony; damages between $20k-$100k. |
| Variance between petition and proof | State failed to prove each listed item in petition. | Variance not substantial; petition identified playground generally. | Not fatal; proof sufficient for destruction/damage. |
| Discretion in disposition | Rehabilitation not needed; court abused discretion. | Disposition appropriate to protect public and juvenile given offense. | No abuse; court found need for rehabilitation. |
| Restitution by juvenile parents—jurisdiction | Parental restitution appeal should be reviewable. | Separate statutory appeal required; no independent appeal filed. | No jurisdiction over parental restitution. |
Key Cases Cited
- Sullivan v. State, 701 S.W.2d 905 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986) (owner may testify to value; replacement or market value inferred from testimony)
- Sepulveda v. State, 751 S.W.2d 667 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1988) (variance between pleadings and proof not fatal where proof supports alleged property destruction)
- In re D.R.T., 339 S.W.3d 208 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2011) (appellate standard for sufficiency in juvenile cases mirrors criminal standard)
- In re D.I.B., 988 S.W.2d 753 (Tex. 1999) (juvenile proceedings governed by civil rules to extent practicable)
- In re J.V.M., 318 S.W.3d 444 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2010) (disposition decisions reviewed for abuse of discretion with two-pronged test)