139 N.E.3d 284
Ind. Ct. App.2020Background
- In June 2018 a victim (T.C.) reported that her cousin, N.B., fondled her vagina about six years earlier when N.B. was 15–16; at the time of disclosure N.B. was about 21–22.
- On November 5, 2018 the State obtained authorization and filed a juvenile delinquency petition alleging acts that would be child molesting if committed by an adult, and later moved to waive juvenile jurisdiction to adult court.
- On November 13, 2018 N.B. pleaded guilty in an unrelated matter to criminal confinement (a Level 5 felony); the State relied on that conviction in an amended mandatory-waiver motion under Ind. Code § 31-30-3-6.
- N.B. moved to dismiss (May 24, 2019), arguing the juvenile court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction because he was over 21 when the petition was filed (citing M.C. v. State).
- The juvenile court granted dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction; the State appealed. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding the juvenile court has jurisdiction to entertain the delinquency petition and decide waiver to adult court, but not to adjudicate and dispose of a person over 21.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | N.B.'s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the juvenile court had subject-matter jurisdiction to entertain the delinquency petition and decide waiver to adult criminal court for a person over 21 at time of filing | Juvenile court may accept the petition and determine waiver; statutes and transfer provisions demonstrate jurisdiction to decide waiver (and if juvenile court lacked it, criminal court must have it) | Juvenile court lacks jurisdiction over persons older than 21 and thus must dismiss the delinquency petition (relying on M.C.) | Reversed dismissal: juvenile court has jurisdiction to accept/entertain the petition and rule on waiver, but cannot adjudicate a >21-year-old delinquent or enter disposition |
Key Cases Cited
- M.C. v. State, 127 N.E.3d 1178 (Ind. Ct. App. 2019) (held juvenile court lacks authority to adjudicate and dispose of a person over twenty-one as a delinquent)
- M.B. v. State, 815 N.E.2d 210 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (explains juvenile courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and jurisdictional prerequisites must be established)
- C.C. v. State, 907 N.E.2d 556 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (rejects statutory interpretation that would leave certain juvenile-origin crimes unpunished)