Title: Jensen v. State

State: arkansas

Issuer: Arkansas Supreme Court

Document:

Matthew JENSEN v. STATE of Arkansas

CR 97-12                                           ___ S.W.2d ___

                    Supreme Court of Arkansas
                  Opinion delivered May 6, 1997


1.   Jurisdiction -- how subject-matter jurisdiction is determined
     -- juvenile-court assignment is based upon offense charged. -- 
     Jurisdiction is determined from the pleadings; subject-matter
     jurisdiction is tested on the pleadings and not the proof; 
     the General Assembly has not based court assignment in
     juvenile cases upon the nature of the offense "committed" but
     upon that which is charged. 

2.   Jurisdiction -- appellant charged with felony -- circuit court
     had jurisdiction. -- The information charging appellant with
     the commission of a class C felony, along with the evidence of
     his age, was sufficient to give the circuit court
     jurisdiction.  

3.   Juveniles -- trial court need not give equal weight to
     statutory factors considered in deciding whether to transfer
     a case to juvenile court -- decision to try juvenile as adult
     must be supported by clear and convincing evidence. -- The
     trial court is not required to give equal weight to each of
     the statutory factors given in Ark. Code Ann.  9-27-318(e)
     (Supp. 1995), that are to be considered in deciding whether to
     transfer a case to a juvenile court; if a trial court
     determines a juvenile should be tried in circuit court as an
     adult, its decision must be supported by clear and convincing
     evidence; clear and convincing evidence is "that degree of
     proof which will produce in the trier of fact a firm
     conviction as to the allegation sought to be established"; the
     court will not reverse the trial court's decision on transfer
     unless it determines the decision was clearly erroneous.    

4.   Juveniles -- juvenile transfer -- age of appellant relevant to
     prospects for rehabilitation -- age an important factor in
     reviewing denial of motion to transfer. -- The fact that
     appellant was eighteen was relevant to his prospects for
     rehabilitation as a juvenile and is a factor that the supreme
     court considers important in reviewing the denial of a motion
     to transfer.  

5.   Juveniles -- juvenile transfer -- appellant's age and juvenile
     record considered in review of denial of motion to transfer --
     trial court's decision to deny motion not clearly erroneous. -
     - Where appellant had been on probation or in rehabilitation
     programs since he was twelve, was seventeen at the time of his
     arrest, had since turned eighteen, and because of his age
     could not be committed to a youth-services center, the trial
     court's decision to deny the motion to transfer was not
     clearly erroneous.

     Appeal from Grant Circuit Court; John W. Cole, Judge;
affirmed.
     Robert N. Jeffrey, for appellant.
     Winston Bryant, Att'y Gen., by:  Gil Dudley, Asst. Att'y Gen.,
for appellee.

     David Newbern, Justice.
     Matthew Jensen was charged in circuit court with felony theft
of property in violation of Ark. Code Ann.  5-36-103 (Supp. 1995). 
He was seventeen at the time of the incident, so he moved to
transfer the case to the juvenile division of chancery court.  The
motion was denied.  Mr. Jensen brings this interlocutory appeal
challenging circuit court jurisdiction and the denial of the
motion.  We affirm because the information charged an offense of
which a circuit court may take jurisdiction and because the denial
of the motion was not clearly erroneous.
     The information charged Mr. Jensen with committing "THEFT OF
PROPERTY, A.C.A. 5-36-103, CLASS C FELONY."  It specifically
alleged that:

     The said defendant on or about the 7TH day of May, 1996
     in Grant County, Arkansas did unlawfully KNOWINGLY TAKE
     OR EXERCISE UNAUTHORIZED CONTROL OVER, OR MAKE AN
     UNAUTHORIZED TRANSFER OF AN INTEREST IN, THE PROPERTY OF
     ANOTHER PERSON, WITH THE PURPOSE OF DEPRIVING THE OWNER
     THEREOF; SAID PROPERTY BEING A CREDIT CARD all against
     the peace and dignity of the state of Arkansas.  
An accompanying probable cause affidavit alleged that on May 7,
1996, Mr. Simmons, the victim of the theft, stated to the police
that bank officials told him that someone had used an ATM machine
and "maxed out" his account.  The affidavit states that Mr. Simmons
identified Mr. Jensen from pictures which were taken of the
individual who used his card at an automatic teller machine.
     A hearing was held on the transfer motion.  Mikki Reagan, a
county juvenile officer, testified that she knew with Mr. Jensen. 
She said he was born on March 29, 1979, and she opened a juvenile
file on him in December 1991 after he was charged with shoplifting. 
He was placed on probation for six months, but he became the
subject of a truancy petition filed prior to completing his
sentence.  
     She further testified that Mr. Jensen was sent to a drug and
alcohol rehabilitation program in 1992 after he was charged with
felony theft of property.  After completion of the rehabilitation
program, he was sent to the Boy's Ranch in Harrison where he
remained "off and on" for about one year.  She said that "While at
the Boy's Ranch he did very well." 
     In the order denying the motion the Trial Court found:

     1.  That the testimony of the Juvenile Intake Officer
     indicates that the defendant has had numerous contacts
     with the Juvenile Court and rehabilitative measures have
     been made on behalf of the defendant.
     2.  That despite these measures the defendant has
     continued to come into contact with law enforcement and
     exhibit a repetitive pattern of adjudicated offenses
     which lead to the conclusion that the defendant is beyond
     rehabilitation under existing rehabilitation programs.

                        1.  Jurisdiction
     Theft of a credit card is a class C felony.  Ark. Code Ann. 
5-36-103(a)(2)(D) (Supp. 19950.  Mr. Jensen argues that  reference
in the probable cause affidavit to the stealing of an "ATM" card,
as opposed to a "credit" card, proves that the offense committed
was a misdemeanor.  He submits that Ark. Code Ann.  9-27-318(a)(3)
(Supp. 1995) gives exclusive jurisdiction to the juvenile court
when one under the age of eighteen "engages in conduct that, if
committed by an adult, would be any misdemeanor."
     Jurisdiction is determined from the pleadings.  Walker v.
State, 309 Ark. 23,