*1 Argued 6, March affirmed March STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v.
JANET LOUISE THORNTON,
Appellant. 425 2d 529 P. Dale Pierson, Salem, argued the cause and filed a brief for appellant. Attorney,
Gary District Salem, D. Gortmaker, respondent. argued a brief for the cause and filed Chief Justice, Before McAllister, Perry, Denecke Goodwin, Belloni, O’Connell, Sloan, *2 Justices. (Pro Tempore).
BELLONI, J. age by the 16, was indicted Louise Thornton, Jury County of the crime of Second Marion Grand allegedly killing Degree Murder her 13 month old daughter. arraignment of the Circuit Court
At upon being remanded of her the child advised County Juvenile Court. the Marion filed Court which A Petition was Juvenile alleged : jurisdiction of the
“2. The child is within following of facts: reason Said minor Court Oregon, of to- has violated law of state child intentionally of caused death another wit: County alleged being; it is in the human Oregon on or of about the 18th Marion, State by striking, day minor child said October, body bruising beating one Ann intentionally cause the death of said Thornton did Thornton.” Ann hearing of a the Juvenile Court the conclusion At following findings judge’s contained the order conclusions: my opinion not “In the evidence does establish intentionally Thornton com Louise that Janet alleged petition. However, in the the acts
mitted competent preponderance evidence received of the petition alleged within facts in the establishes of ORS 163.040 ‹ , (3) provisions of subsection degree defining the which is included in of homicide petition.” alleged greater allegations petition of the words, “In other certain acts Thornton committed that Janet Louise though in death of the even which resulted that the death were of such nature not intentional or excusable.” child was of the competent preponderance of the “I hold that allegations alleged of the acts evidence sustains Louise Thornton been committed to have Ann Thornton, which caused the death degree alleged than establishes lesser homicide (manslaughter in in the criminal if the matter were
court).” preponderance competent “I hold that the brings Janet Louise Thornton within the County jurisdiction of the Marion Juvenile Court.” Thornton made a “Janet Louise ward of the court.”
Subsequently, *3 she was committed to Hillcrest training girls’ the Girls, School school of the state Oregon. of appeal (1)
This the asserts Court erred in denying petition, (2) her motion to dismiss the in finding that she committed the acts which resulted in ‹ ORS I163.0401 23Manslaughtergenerally. (1) Any person who, express implied, upon deliberation, malice or without without provocation passion by apparently a heat a sudden of caused passion voluntarily irresistible, make the sufficient to kills an guilty manslaughter. other, is of (2) Any person who, any act, in the commission of unlawful circumspection, or a lawful act without due caution or involun- tarily guilty manslaughter. another, provisions kills is The of apply killing any person shall of this subsection to proximate negligent killing where cause of such is an act or omission defined as homicide in ORS il63.091. (3) Every killing being by procurement act, of a human culpable negligence killing another, or when the murder is not degree, in the first or second or or is not excusable or negligent provided T63.091, homicide as in ORS is man- slaughter. justifi- infant’s death and that the acts were not or excusable.
able question presented appeal for decision on is support sufficient whether the evidence is find- ing charged committed act in that the child causing being; the death of another human supports finding if if the evidence that such and, so, contrary death resulted from acts which were to law. juvenile proceeding brought This was a court un Chapter der the Juvenile Code contained in ORS provides the trier of the which is facts alleged petition showing “the facts and that jurisdiction › within to be of the court by pre . . must be established ., admitted, unless ponderance evidence.” court fi differing purposes juvenile of a
Whether › jurisdiction juvenile Children within ORS 419.476 court. (11) juvenile original jurisdiction any court has exclusive involving person years case who is under 18 and: (a) violation, has committed an act which is a Who or which violation, if an adult done would constitute a of a law or county city; state, ordinance of the United States or a or or n (b) beyond guardian parents, Who is control of his or person having custody; his or other (c) behavior, condition or circumstances are such Whose endanger others; own welfare his or welfare of or (d) dependent support public for care and Who or private child-caring agency that needs the services of court planning interests; for his best or n (e) parents any person having custody Either his or other him, provide support have abandoned education failed to him with the or required law, subjected cruelty depravity him to or provide guidance protection care, or failed him necessary well-being; physical, for his mental or emotional n (f) away run Who has from his home. fi (juvenile court) “The fundamental idea of law is that step guardianship the state must in and exercise over a child *4 found under such adverse social or individual de conditions as velop proposes plan may whereby crime ... It he be legally charged treated, criminal, crime, not as a but as practically state, care, custody, a ward of the to receive and
381 together and a criminal conrt with the lesser burden proof might required in the former alter test appellate applied testing anof court to be when sufficiency of the we need not here decide evidence, present because adduced was sufficient to question manslaughter of fact in a criminal trial. applied testing The test to be when the suffi ciency of circumstantial evidence is that the state must produce cogent convincing and evidence which must any theory be inconsistent with reasonable of inno sufficiency passing upon but in of the evi cence, appellate weigh dence the court does not the evidence appellate or resolve the court must ac conflicts. cept Dean, the state’s evidence as true. v. State (1965). P2d Or 124,
There was evidence from which the have determined that:
In Janet Louise was 16 Thornton years age. She was married 14 to Donald parents Thornton. Janet and Donald were the Angie Ann and Janet was several months Thornton, pregnant. years age; Donald was 20 Thornton although physically pro- able he had never work, family They vided for his in a normal manner. lived money on welfare assistance and from Janet’s mother, They a Mrs. Alexander. lived in a home which was occupied by also Mrs. Alexander and Mike Dietrich, a friend of Mr. Thornton’s who had a room in the occupied basement. The house was also from time to discipline neglected dependent child, that are accorded the approximate which, nearly may states, as the act ‘shall given by parents’.” be that which should be its Yearbook, Roscoe Pound: The Juvenile Court and the Law. pp. citing report Association, 1944, IS-14, National Probation Chicago committee of Bar Association in 1899. *5 step-father, by Lyle Mr. Thornton’s Mr. Bowman,
time came to visit Mrs. Alexander. who approximately Monday, 2:30 October at 18, 1965, Angie p.m., Ann was found Thornton, months, occupied crib in the bedroom of the house dead in her persons. The time of death was fixed these approximately examining pathologist at 11:00 a.m. ; early although could have been as 9:00 the time as p.m. fix late 2:00 No tests to the time a.m. greater were made. The child death with exactness severely body about the and head. had been beaten rupture cause of death was a of the The immediate body was with heart sack. The child’s covered contu- trunk and abrasions of the skin of the head, neck, sions upper extremities. There was a laceration of the body varying on The bruises found were of nose. ages. days, old as Some were as several and some were shortly apparently made before the death. time of largest origin which bruises were of recent were on pathologist head and on the back. The the back of the autopsy performed testified such heart origin injury traumatic in and is most often re- height, head-on in sult of falls from collisions motor impact injuries crushing vehicle and severe accidents, twisting injuries and distortion chest. Angie’s in There were some broken bones arms. One more calcium where break had the bone had healed than the break in the other arm. and was older judge, opinion, in described it as a trial classical syndrome. example the “battered child” hearing Thornton testified at the that Donald Thursday, go left on 1965 to to Portland army physical. nothing Thursday, an did She Saturday stay Friday except home and watch TV. Sunday, October Janet went to friends On over 17th, Angie returned with her. Janet and took slept Sunday evening. crib home bedroom. Janet’s up got a.m. on that she about 8:00
Janet testified Angie’s morning of the three death. Neither Angie up, got men were in house. She dwellers Angie was in fed her. dressed her and her, bathed About a.m. time. 9:00 normal condition this picked up her back to her crib take *6 process taking Angie the other In the to bedroom. toys says slipped floor, on some on the she Janet room, par- the and fell went or seven feet across room six tially her fell bedroom. with most in the Janet weight Angie. Angie to vomit. The fall caused on picked up, says Angie changed her clothes Janet she appeared uninjured. put and her in her she crib, up Janet then the house and watched tele- cleaned always being position in a where she could vision, might go. anyone see saw no one. come She got up mother about She TY until her watched got up, her 11:30 a.m. Sometime after mother went bathroom bathe and Her mother into the to dress. fixing something was kitchen to eat. About the p.m., Donald while Janet was bathroom, 12:45 spoke and He to Janet went to bed- came home. washing room. Mrs. Alexander was dishes. Janet and the bathroom went into the bedroom. came out of intercourse near Donald had on bed Janet and p.m. Angie’s About Donald where crib. 2:30 asked Angie taking was in crib and Janet said she was got up, Angie nap. looked at discov- her Donald and ered was dead. she that was the one who cared for
Janet stated she only that she one who had cared and was child for the in the last month. She testified she day, day every including bathed child and had not noticed the shown died, pictures bruises exception. specifically with one small large said had not she seen bruise in middle of large the child’s back or bruise on the child’s but- large A doctor that tocks. testified bruise on the days’ child’s buttocks was several old. Janet testified way other than the there she that, fall, was no knew injured. of that been have day gave On the of the child’s death, Janet state- police. gave ment On 20th she October similar police statement on 21st she read signed given. early the statement she had In this walking Angie statement Janet said she had been along, holding hand, had fallen story, down. told her She husband this same and then changed story given several weeks she later, hearing, falling top Angie. at the Janet’s respect got also time statements differ to the she up a.m. in 18th; on October from 10:30 the first state- baby a.m. claims to fed ment to 8:00 She also have cereal on the doctor 18th; however, testified *7 only thing baby’s in stomach milk. was argued points
Appellant evidence equal persons same force other had the access, ability opportunity upon injury to inflict the in agree, Ann Thornton. We do not but our fant, weight view of the of the evidence and the inferences important. therefrom are not to be trial drawn proved believed that the evidence defendant killing daughter unintentionally guilty of but was justification. excuse bound or We are without jury findings degree if to the same it were find ing. denying to dis motion error in was no
There finding Thorn Lonise that Janet or in miss finding that the acts were the acts or committed ton excusable. or Affirmed. dissenting.
GOODWIN, J., specifically no found evidence The trial court baby. intentionally juvenile There battered her baby battered no more evidence that she was injuries “culpable negligence.” The were an act of necessarily inflicted them such that whoever inflicted intentionally. connecting ju- them extremely death was thin, venile with the only suspicious circumstances. The and amounted juvenile’s explain happened refusal what baby or mean that she battered the that she wanted to protect person. baby, some other Someone battered only juvenile but the evidence that the before the court juvenile person did so the fact that the was was Any in exclusive control of the child when it died. negli- fatal that she inflicted the wounds, conclusion speculative. gently highly otherwise, I dissent.