N.D. v. State
2012 Ark. 265
| Ark. | 2012Background
- N.D., a 15-year-old, was adjudicated delinquent in 2009 for aggravated robbery and possession of a weapon and placed in DYS custody.
- In early 2010, N.D. allegedly attacked a security guard, fled a detention facility, and committed thefts; he was arrested on February 1, 2010.
- In March 2010, the State charged N.D. as an adult in criminal court with capital murder, escape, aggravated robbery, theft, and second-degree battery; N.D. moved to dismiss or transfer to juvenile court without requesting EJJ.
- Criminal court denied transfer on August 31, 2010; this court reversed in N.D. I due to a discovery violation, with the opinion discussing no EJJ issue.
- On remand, the case was transferred to juvenile court in July 2011; the State moved for an EJJ designation in August 2011, and the juvenile court granted it on August 29, 2011.
- N.D. contends that the prior decision and remand law-of-the-case barred an EJJ hearing; the court rejects this and decides the merits of EJJ post-remand.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether law of the case bars EJJ designation. | N.D. argues law-of-the-case prevents EJJ on remand. | State contends law-of-the-case does not preclude EJJ; issue not decided in N.D. I. | Law-of-the-case did not bar EJJ; remand allowed EJJ hearing. |
| Whether EJJ designation violates double jeopardy. | N.D. claims potential life sentence as EJJ violates double jeopardy since adult life sentence was possible earlier. | State argues EJJ consequences are not yet a sentence and jeopardy standards do not attach until adjudication/sentencing. | Double jeopardy not violated; EJJ pending adjudication, not a second punishment. |
| Whether due process requires bar to EJJ or merits challenge. | N.D. asserts due process concerns with EJJ proceedings. | State asserts no due process violation; argument unsupported by authority. | Due process claim rejected for lack of supportive authority. |
Key Cases Cited
- N.D. v. State, 383 S.W.3d 396 (Ark. 2011) (reversed transfer denial; no explicit EJJ ruling discussed)
- Landers v. Jameson, 132 S.W.3d 741 (Ark. 2003) (law-of-the-case does not require ruling on alternative grounds)
- Lofton v. State, 321 S.W.3d 255 (Ark. 2009) (upon remand, court’s authority to apply EJJ remains subject to statutes)
- Kemp v. State, 983 S.W.2d 383 (Ark. 1998) (law-of-the-case doctrine limitations on rehearing)
- Camargo v. State, 987 S.W.2d 680 (Ark. 1999) (law-of-the-case principles and implicit determinations)
- Williams v. State, 268 S.W.3d 868 (Ark. 2007) (double jeopardy framework for state prosecutions)
- Avery v. State, 844 S.W.2d 364 (Ark. 1993) (jeopardy attaches in adjudicatory delinquency in juvenile court)