M.A.M. v. Commonwealth, 2013 Ky. App. LEXIS 82

M.A.M. (12-year-old) was charged with beyond control of parents; JSOO entered Nov. 1, 2011 with numerous conditions.
Adjudication hearing on the JSOO was waived; court and counsel discussed potential hearings and consequences.
Dispositional hearing approved Cabinet-recommended conditions; court approved Cabinet services and curtailments.
May 15, 2012: contempt finding for leaving home after curfew; temporary Cabinet custody ordered.
May 23, 2012: contempt addendum and disposition; court found violation of JSOO and committed M.A.M. to Cabinet.
June 19, 2012: disposition order stating least restrictive means not required for contempt; two appeals consolidated.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Validity of the plea stipulation	M.A.M. alleges plea not knowingly, intelligently entered	Court properly accepted stipulation	Palpable error; plea reversed
Contempt based on original disposition	Contempt based on JSOO without disposition authority	Contempt supported by JSOO violation	Merit lacking; contempt based on invalid premise fails
Validity of JSOO as a court order	JSOO invalid due to lack of due process	JSOO valid and enforceable	JSOO not a valid order; cannot support contempt
Least restrictive alternative applicability	LOA should govern disposition	LOA not applicable to contempt	moot due to reversal on validity of contempt

Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (U.S. 1969) (must show plea was voluntary and intelligent)
D.R. v. Commonwealth, 64 S.W.3d 292 (Ky.App. 2001) (waiver of rights requires inquiry and record of understanding)
J.D. v. Commonwealth, 211 S.W.3d 60 (Ky.App. 2006) (Boykin rights apply to juveniles; no colloquy or voluntariness shown)
Laswell v. Frey, 45 F.3d 1011 (6th Cir. 1995) (no inquiry into voluntariness of admission; plea invalid)
Centers v. Commonwealth, 799 S.W.2d 51 (Ky.App. 1990) (plea validity requires understanding and record of consequences)