State v. Aldana Cardenas, 990 N.W.2d 915

Defendant Rodny Aldana (born Mar. 2005) was charged by information in district court on Dec. 5, 2022 with first-degree sexual assault arising from an incident in Sept. 2022.
Aldana (under 18 when charged) moved under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1816(3) to transfer the case to juvenile court; the State opposed transfer and bore the burden to show a sound basis for retention.
At the transfer hearing both sides presented evidence about the incident, potential juvenile treatment, likely treatment length, and juvenile probation supervision limits for offenders entering the system near age 18.
On Feb. 2, 2023 the district court denied transfer, making findings under the § 43-276 factors that several factors (including violence, motivation, amenability concerns, age/time remaining for juvenile jurisdiction, and ability to appreciate seriousness) supported retention.
Aldana appealed; during the appeal he turned 18 and the State argued the transfer issue was moot. The Nebraska Supreme Court held the issue was not moot and affirmed the district court’s denial of transfer.

Issue	Aldana (plaintiff)	State (defendant)	Held
Mootness of transfer after Aldana turned 18	Turning 18 during appeal does not moot transfer because he was a juvenile when charged and juvenile court jurisdiction can continue until 19	Moot because Aldana turned 18 and juvenile court cannot acquire jurisdiction over an adult	Not moot; controlling date is when charged (Dec. 5, 2022); juvenile jurisdiction may continue under § 43-247(12) until age 19
Abuse of discretion in denying transfer to juvenile court	District court misapplied burden, mischaracterized factors, and should have transferred	State showed a sound basis to retain under § 29-1816(3) and § 43-276 factors (e.g., alleged violence, motivation, limited time for treatment)	No abuse of discretion; district court made findings under § 43-276 and sufficient evidence supported retention

State v. Pauly, 311 Neb. 418 (Neb. 2022) (held relevant age for juvenile jurisdiction is age when charged, not age at offense in that case)
State v. Parks, 282 Neb. 454 (Neb. 2011) (discussed limits of juvenile jurisdiction upon reaching age of majority)
State v. Burris, 30 Neb. App. 109 (Neb. Ct. App. 2021) (Court of Appeals decision holding juvenile jurisdiction could depend on offense date; disapproved to the extent inconsistent with Pauly)
State v. Hunt, 299 Neb. 573 (Neb. 2018) (standard that transfer denial is reviewed for abuse of discretion; State bears burden to show sound basis to retain)
State v. Tyler P., 299 Neb. 959 (Neb. 2018) (explained that transfer is the general rule unless a sound basis for retention exists)