in the Matter of L.L., Jr., a Juvenile
408 S.W.3d 383
Tex. App.2011Background
- In 2007, State filed a petition alleging L.L., Jr., a 14-year-old, engaged in indecency with a child by contact.
- The juvenile court found delinquent conduct based on a written stipulation and placed L.L., Jr. on supervised probation.
- Because delinquent conduct for indecency with a child requires sex-offender registration, the court deferred registration decision under Article 62.352(b)(1).
- After completing a sex offender treatment program, the court entered an order requiring registration, which L.L., Jr. challenged on appeal.
- The court considered evidence from Pegasus treatment, aftercare officers, and various treatment providers about L.L., Jr.’s progress and risks.
- The court ultimately held there was no abuse of discretion and affirmed the registration order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the order must contain Article 62.352(a) findings. | L.L. argues the court erred by not including required findings. | State contends findings were not required in the order when registration was deferred. | No error; findings not required in the order. |
| Whether the evidence supports the implied Article 62.352(c) outcome. | L.L. contends insufficient evidence supports public-interest findings for registration. | State argues the evidence supports continued registration after treatment. | The evidence is factually sufficient to support the implied finding that the public’s interests require registration. |
| Whether the court abused its discretion in applying Article 62.352(c). | L.L. claims abuse of discretion due to misapplication of treatment outcome. | State asserts the court properly weighed treatment outcome against public interests. | No abuse of discretion; proper consideration and weighing occurred. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re M.A.C., 999 S.W.2d 442 (Tex.App.—El Paso 1999) (two-pronged sufficiency and discretion review for juvenile registration decisions)
- In re A.S., 954 S.W.2d 855 (Tex.App.—El Paso 1997) (sufficiency standard for implied findings under registration statute)
- In the Matter of J.D.G., 141 S.W.3d 319 (Tex.App.—Corpus Christi 2004) (discussion on whether findings must be present in the order)
- Bowie Memorial Hospital v. Wright, 79 S.W.3d 48 (Tex. 2002) (abuse of discretion standard for reviewing trial-court decisions)