Title: In Interest of NJC

State: wyoming

Issuer: Wyoming Supreme Court

Document:

In Interest of NJC1996 WY 41913 P.2d 435Case Number: C-95-3Decided: 03/18/1996Supreme Court of Wyoming

In the Interest of NJC, a Minor. 

NJC, Appellant (Defendant),

v.

The STATE of Wyoming, Appellee 
(Plaintiff).

 

                            

  

Appeal from the District Court of Park County; The 
Honorable H.Hunter Patrick, 
Judge.

 

    Sylvia L. Hackl, State 
Public Defender; Deborah Cornia, Assistant Public Defender; Gerald M. Gallivan, 
Director, Defender Aid Program; and Teresa R. Nelson, Student Intern, for 
Appellant.

     
William U. Hill, Attorney General; Paul S. Rehurek, Deputy Attorney 
General; D. Michael Pauling, Senior Assistant Attorney General; and Kimberly A. 
Baker, Assistant Attorney General, for Appellee.

 

    Before GOLDEN, C.J., and 
THOMAS, MACY, TAYLOR and LEHMAN, JJ.

 

    TAYLOR, 
Justice. 

[¶1]          We are asked to consider the 
constitutionality of the venue provision of Wyoming's Juvenile Court Act. 
Appellant contends that the Act's venue provision is unconstitutional and that 
the district court erred in denying his motion to dismiss for lack of venue. We 
disagree. The venue provision is constitutional, and the district court 
correctly denied the motion to dismiss.

 

[¶2]          
Affirmed.

 

I. ISSUES
 

 [¶3]        Appellant, NJC, identifies the 
following issues:

 

ARGUMENT I

 

    The district court below was 
barred from hearing this matter over the objection of defense counsel 
under the provisions of Article I § 
10 of the Wyoming Constitution governing venue in criminal 
cases.

 

ARGUMENT II

 

    The failure to afford the 
defendant the proper venue, i.e. to bring the juvenile proceeding in the 
county where the delinquent act was 
committed is violative of due process under the 14th Amendment of the 
United States Constitution and of 
the Wyoming Constitution.

 

  

[¶4]          Appellee, State of Wyoming, 
identifies a single issue:

 

    Whether W.S. § 14-6-204, 
which allows venue in juvenile delinquency proceedings in either the 
county where the child is living or 
present when the proceedings are commenced or in the county where 
the alleged delinquent act occurred 
is constitutional, thereby making denial of appellant's motion 
to dismiss 
proper?

 

II. FACTS
 

[¶5]          In July of 1993, NJC was 
determined to be a child in need of supervision and he was placed in the custody 
of Park County Department of Family Services. After being transferred to several 
different facilities, NJC was admitted 
as a patient to Crestview Hospital in Casper, Wyoming. While in Crestview, NJC 
broke out a window and escaped. He was charged with destruction of property 
in a juvenile delinquency petition filed 
by the Park County prosecutor. NJC's counsel made an oral motion to dismiss for 
lack of jurisdiction and improper venue, arguing that the petition should have 
been filed in Natrona County, the site of the alleged delinquent act, rather 
than in Park County, the site of NJC's official residence. NJC entered a 
conditional plea of guilty, but reserved the right to challenge the 
constitutionality of the venue provision 
of Wyoming's Juvenile Court Act. This appeal followed.

 

III. DISCUSSION
 

    A. STANDARD OF 
REVIEW

 

[¶6]          In Wyoming, a statute is 
presumed to be constitutional and the party challenging the statute bears the 
burden of proving, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the statute is 
constitutionally defective. Wyoming Coalition v. Wyoming Game & Fish Com'n, 
875 P.2d 729, 732 (Wyo. 1994). Any reasonable doubts as to the validity of the statute are to be resolved by finding 
the statute constitutional. Worden v. Village Homes, 821 P.2d 1291, 1293 (Wyo. 
1991).

 

    B. CONSTITUTIONAL 
ANALYSIS

 

 [¶7]        Whether Wyo. Stat. § 14-6-204 
(1994) is unconstitutional is the primary question presented. NJC challenges the 
statute on two grounds. First, he contends the statute is violative of Wyo. 
Const. art. 1, § 10. Secondly, he challenges the statute as violative of his due 
process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution 
and under Wyo. Const. art. 1, § 6. These claims lack 
merit.

 

[¶8]          Wyo. Const. art. 1, § 10 
stands for the proposition that a criminal defendant is entitled to be tried in 
the same venue in which the crime is known to have occurred. NJC argues that 
juvenile delinquency proceedings are criminal proceedings and Wyo. Const. art 1, 
§ 10 requires all criminal proceedings be tried in the county or district in 
which the offense is alleged to have occurred.

 

[¶9]          NJC's claim fails because a 
juvenile delinquency determination is a special proceeding, not a traditional 
criminal proceeding.  State in 
Interest of C, 638 P.2d 165, 168 (Wyo. 1981). Thus, we disagree with NJC's central premise that juvenile 
delinquency proceedings are criminal for purposes of the venue provision in the 
Wyoming Constitution. We hold that the venue provision in Wyo. Const. art. 1, § 
10 does not apply to juvenile delinquency proceedings which are, instead, 
controlled by Wyo. Stat. § 14-6-204.

 

[¶10]       The Wyoming Constitution 
grants the legislature the authority to create juvenile courts and to define 
their jurisdiction. Wyo. Const. art. 5, § 29. The legislature has clearly 
exercised that authority under Wyo. Stat. §§ 14-6-201 through 14-6-244 (1994 
& Cum.Supp. 1995). The legislature's exercise of its authority cannot be deemed unconstitutional absent proof that 
the resulting legislation impairs a constitutional right. The venue provision of 
Wyo. Const. art. 1, § 10 is inapplicable to juvenile delinquency matters because 
these proceedings are deemed not to be criminal. See Wyo. Stat. § 14-6-208 
(1994). The venue provision in the Juvenile Court Act which allows a juvenile 
delinquency proceeding to be brought where the alleged delinquent act occurs or where the juvenile resides is not in 
conflict with the venue provision of Wyo. Const. art. 1, § 
10.

  

[¶11]       We next address NJC's claim 
that the venue provision found in Wyo. Stat. § 14-6-204 is unconstitutional 
because it impairs his right to due process. NJC argues that due process 
requires a finding of venue in criminal 
proceedings, juvenile matters are criminal proceedings, and a court must have 
venue to hear a juvenile delinquency case. As discussed above, juvenile 
delinquency determinations are special proceedings, not criminal proceedings. 
Venue is proper because it is vested in the district court through a statute which was passed by the 
legislature pursuant to a constitutional grant of authority. Since venue is 
proper, NJC's conclusion to the contrary fails. Accordingly, NJC's due process 
claim must also fail.

 

IV. CONCLUSION
 

[¶12]       The decision of the district 
court is affirmed.