Case Title: Sims v. State

Citation: 

Docket Number: CR97-157

State: arkansas

Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

Date: 1997-07-07T00:00:00Z

Document:
Albert SIMS v. STATE of Arkansas

CR 97-157                                          ___ S.W.2d ___

                    Supreme Court of Arkansas
                 Opinion delivered July 7, 1997


1.   Juveniles -- motion to transfer -- factors considered --
     standard of review. -- The trial court must consider those
     factors enumerated in Arkansas Code Annotated  9-27-318(e) in
     deciding a transfer motion; if the trial court decides to try
     the juvenile as an adult, its decision must be supported by
     clear and convincing evidence; however, in making its
     determination, the trial court does not have to give equal
     weight to the statutory factors; the serious and violent
     nature of an offense is a sufficient basis for denying a
     motion to transfer; the supreme court will not overturn the
     trial court's determination unless it is clearly erroneous.  

2.   Juveniles -- motion to transfer -- trial court properly
     evaluated statutory factors in denying motion -- trial court's
     denial not clearly erroneous. -- The record reflected that the
     trial court evaluated all three of the statutory factors in
     denying the transfer motion; the trial court recognized that
     appellant had been on probation for less than a month at the
     time the alleged aggravated robbery occurred; appellant was
     placed on probation for serious offenses: burglary and theft;
     the trial court also considered the testimony from a police
     officer that all of the intruders were armed with knives and
     that the victim was left "incapacitated" when the perpetrators
     left; based on the serious and violent nature of the
     aggravated-robbery charge, a Class Y felony, and the State's
     evidence tending to link appellant with the crime, the trial
     court was not clearly erroneous in denying the motion to
     transfer the aggravated-robbery charge to juvenile court.
     

     Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court, Fourth Circuit; John W.
Langston, Judge; affirmed.
     Montgomery, Adams & Wyatt, PLC, by:  James W. Wyatt, for
appellant.
     Winston Bryant, Att'y Gen., by:  Vada Berger, Asst. Att'y
Gen., for appellee.

     Annabelle Clinton Imber, Justice.
     This is an interlocutory appeal of the circuit court's order
denying the transfer of an aggravated robbery charge to juvenile
court.  We affirm the trial court's denial of the motion to
transfer.    
     The appellant, Albert Sims, was charged with aggravated
robbery, residential burglary, and theft of property in Pulaski
County circuit court.  At the time of the alleged offenses, Sims
was fourteen years of age.  Sims subsequently filed a motion to
transfer the case to juvenile court.
     At the transfer hearing, Cynthia Yvonne Mahomes, Sims's
juvenile court probation officer, testified on behalf of Sims.  She
testified that on February 13, 1996, Sims was placed on a one-year
period of probation for burglary and theft of property.  Prior to
Sims's involvement in juvenile court, he had lived in a shelter due
to his mother's inability to provide housing for him.  While at the
shelter, Sims was respectful and cooperative.  Mahomes added that
Sims did not receive recommended rehabilitative services due to the
fact that he was arrested again only weeks after his placement on
probation.  Mahomes testified that Sims was not a bad kid, and that
he would benefit from rehabilitative therapy and services.  She
concluded that Sims would not have much chance for rehabilitation
if he was convicted and sent to prison.
     The State called Little Rock police officer Jeffery Norman as
a witness.  Norman investigated the robbery of Mary O'Donald, which
occurred on March 6, 1996.  O'Donald was sitting in her kitchen
when three individuals entered her residence wielding large knives. 
The intruders demanded money, and O'Donald gave them approximately
$100.  The robbers also searched a bedroom and stole a watch
belonging to O'Donald's husband.  Afterwards, they taped O'Donald's
hands behind her back, one told her "not to try anything funny,"
and then left the residence.
     Norman testified that on March 26, other officers were
investigating the presence of suspicious persons in a neighborhood
when they encountered Sims.  The officers questioned Sims, who said
that he was there with an individual named Michael Johnson.  Both
Sims and Johnson were brought to the police station and questioned
by a Detective Tribble.  While Tribble questioned Johnson about
several burglaries that had occurred in the area, Johnson admitted
his involvement in the March 6 robbery.  Norman testified, without
objection, that Johnson informed Tribble that Sims was one of two
others who participated in the robbery.  Norman testified that Sims
ultimately confessed to his participation in the robbery to
Detective Bob Wortham.
     Following the hearing, the trial court transferred the
residential burglary and theft-of-property charges to juvenile
court, but declined to transfer the aggravated robbery charge. 
Sims brings this interlocutory appeal pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. 
9-27-318(h) (Supp. 1995), arguing that the trial court erred in
denying the motion to transfer the aggravated robbery charge to
juvenile court.
     We have often stated the factors the trial court must evaluate
in deciding a motion to transfer, and our standard of review on an
appeal of such a decision.  Arkansas Code Annotated  9-27-318(e)
requires the trial court to consider the following in deciding a
transfer motion:
(1) The seriousness of the offense, and whether violence
was employed by the juvenile in the commission of the
offense;

  (2) Whether the offense is part of a repetitive pattern
of adjudicated offenses which would lead to the
determination that the juvenile is beyond rehabilitation
under existing rehabilitation programs, as evidenced by
past efforts to treat and rehabilitate the juvenile and
the response to such efforts; and

  (3) The prior history, character traits, mental
maturity, and any other factor which reflects upon the
juvenile's prospects for rehabilitation.

If the trial court decides to try the juvenile as an adult, its
decision must be supported by clear and convincing evidence.  Ark.
Code Ann.  9-27-318(f).  However, in making its determination, the
trial court does not have to give equal weight to the statutory
factors.   Brooks v. State, 326 Ark. 201, 929 S.W.2d 160 (1996);
Booker v. State, 324 Ark. 468, 922 S.W.2d 337 (1996).  This court
has often said that the serious and violent nature of an offense is
a sufficient basis for denying a motion to transfer.  See, e.g.,
McClure v. State, 328 Ark. 35, 942 S.W.2d 243 (1997); Cole v.
State, 323 Ark. 136, 913 S.W.2d 779 (1996).  We will not overturn
the trial court's determination unless it is clearly erroneous. 
Ring v. State, 320 Ark. 128,