NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION.

UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL

AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.

IN THE

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION ONE

IN RE BRYAN D.

No. 1 CA-JV 20-0212 

Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No. JV601520

The Honorable Keelan J. Bodow, Judge Pro Tempore

VACATED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Public Advocate, Mesa

By Suzanne W. Sanchez

Counsel for Appellant

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix

By Andrea L. Kever

Counsel for Appellee

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Chief Judge Peter B. Swann delivered the decision of the court, in which 

Presiding Judge Jennifer B. Campbell and Judge Lawrence F. Winthrop 

joined.

FILED 1-28-2021
IN RE BRYAN D.

Decision of the Court

2

S W A N N, Chief Judge:

¶1 Bryan D. appeals the juvenile court’s order requiring him to 

register as a sex offender. For the following reasons, we vacate the court’s 

order.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

¶2 In May 2018, Bryan, then fifteen years old, admitted to one 

count of sexual abuse. The juvenile court sentenced Bryan to probation and 

ordered that his potential sex offender registration be deferred until Bryan 

completed a rehabilitative program at Youth Development Institute and his 

probation terms. Bryan participated in treatment at the Youth 

Development Institute, but the discharge summary indicated Bryan did not 

successfully meet his treatment goals.

¶3 The juvenile court eventually held a hearing to review Bryan’s 

status and determine if sex offender registration was appropriate. The

hearing was held in June 2020, and the court was aware Bryan’s eighteenth 

birthday was the following day. At the hearing, the court ordered Bryan to

register as a sex offender until the age of twenty-five. The court signed the 

registration order on Bryan’s eighteenth birthday but filed the order three 

days later. Bryan appeals.

DISCUSSION

¶4 A juvenile court has subject matter jurisdiction over juvenile 

adjudication, including over ordering sex offender registration, while the 

juvenile is under eighteen. State v. Espinoza, 229 Ariz. 421, 427, ¶ 24 (App. 

2012); see A.R.S. §§ 8-202, -246. A final order of the juvenile court “shall be 

by minute entry or separate written order.” Ariz. R.P. Juv. Ct. 104(A); In re 

Michelle G., 217 Ariz. 340, 344, ¶ 14 (App. 2008) (finding a juvenile court 

order becomes final “when it [i]s signed by the judge and filed by the clerk 

of the court”).

¶5 Bryan argues, and the State concedes, the juvenile court did 

not have subject matter jurisdiction to enter the order requiring Bryan to 

register as a sex offender because the order was filed after Bryan’s 

eighteenth birthday. Though the court orally pronounced the order to file 

as a sex offender before Bryan turned eighteen, the court did not file the

written order until three days after Bryan’s birthday. Because the order was 

not final under the Rules of Procedure for the Juvenile Court until it was 

filed, the court no longer had subject matter jurisdiction over Bryan at the 

time it was filed. Espinoza, 229 Ariz. at 426, ¶¶ 20, 23.
IN RE BRYAN D.

Decision of the Court

3

CONCLUSION

¶6 We vacate the juvenile court’s order requiring Bryan to 

register as a sex offender.