I N TH E CO UR T OF A PP EALS S T AT E OF AR I Z ONA D I V I S I O N T WO

I N RE HI LL ARY C. ) ) ) ) ) 2 C A
- J V 2008- 0121

DEPA RTM ENT B O P I N I O N

APPEAL FROM THE SUPERI OR CO UR T OF PI M A C OU NTY

C aus e N o. 18772001 H onor abl e C har l es S. Sabal os , J udge

REM AN DED
B arbar a LaW al l , Pi m a C ount yA t t orney B yJa m e s M . C o u g h lin
R o b ert J. H ir sh , P im a C o u n tyP u b li c D ef en d er B yJ ul i e M
. L evi t t - G ur en T ucs on A tto rn e y s f

o r S tate
T ucs on A t t orney s forM i nor
E C K E R S T R O M , Pr es i di ng J udge. ¶1 T h e so le i ssu e ra ised in this ap p ea l bythe s tat e is w h e th e r th e ju v en il e c o u rt abus ed i t s di s cr et i on i n decl i ni ng t o not i fyt he M ot orV ehi cl e D i vi s i on ( M V D ) of the A r i zona D epart m entof Tra ns por t at i on ( A D O T ) t hatH i l l ary C
. had bee n adj udi cat ed del i nquentfor vi ol at i ng A
. R
. S. § 4- 244( 33) , w hi ch pr ohi bi t s a per s on undert he age of tw enty - one fr om “dr i v[i ng] orbe[i ng] i n p h y sical c o ntr ol of a mot orvehi cl e w hi l e ther e i s anys pi r i tuous l i quor i n [hi s or her ] body
. ” A ccor di ng t o t he s t at e, s uch not i fi cat i on i s m andat ed bys t atut e. A PR - 3 200 9 

### F I L E D BY CLE RK

C OU RTOF A PP E A LS DI VIS ION TWOH i l l aryw as s event een y ear s ol d att he t i m e of he rarr es t , ad jud icat i on, and 1 di s pos i t i on. She has s i nce tur ned ei ght een. 2 ¶2 A l t ho ug h w e gen eral l yrevi ew a j uv enil e cou rt ’s dis po si t i on order for an abu se
o f d is c re tio n , w e re v ie w d e n o v o a s ta tu to ry c h a lle n g e to th e c o u rt ’s d is p o s itio n . See In re Sh e r e e M. , 1 9 7 Ar i z . 5 2 4 , ¶ 4 , 4 P
. 3 d 1 0 6 7 , 1 0 6 8 ( Ap p . 2 0 0 0 )
. F o rt h e r e a s o n s t h a tf o l l o w,
w e con cl ud e a j uv enil e cou rthas a st atutoryob l i gati on t o n oti fyA D O T w hen ever i tfi nd s a j uveni l e has vi ol at ed § 4- 244( 33)
. B eca us e the courtt her efor e abus ed i t s di s cr et i on i n fai l i ng t o r epor tH i l l ary ’ s del i nquency , w e r emand. Backg r ound ¶3 H ill a ryw a s a d ju d ica ted d e lin q u e n t af

ter sh e a d m itt e d h a v in g d riv e n a v e h icle

w h il e sh e h ad alco h o l i n h er sy stem in v iolati o n o f § 4 -2 4 4 (3 3 ), a class o n e m isde m ea n o r. See A
. R
. S. § 4- 246( B )
. B efor e her di s pos i t i on hear i ng, H i l l aryfi l ed a mot i on s ugges t i ng t he j uveni l e court had di s cr et i on t o deci de w hether t o not i fy M V D of the adj udi cat i on and as ki ng the j uveni l e courtt o r efr ai n fr om s endi ng s uch not i ce. T he s t at e oppos ed the mot i on on t he gr ound t hatt he courtw as s t atut or i l yr equi r ed t o not i fyM V D of a j uveni l e’ s vi ol at i on of § 4- 2 4 4 (33 ). ¶4 A t th e d isp o sitio n h e a rin g , the ju v e n ile c o u rt p lac e d H ill a ry o n p ro b a tio n u n til herei ght eenth b ir thd ay and or der ed, as a condi t i on of herpr obat i on, t hatherdr i vi ng 1 p ri v il eg es b e re str ict ed to tra v e l to a n d fro m sch o o l or w o rk. T h e c o u rtalso stat ed , “I’m goi ng t o exer ci s e mydi s cr et i on i n notr equi r i ng t he mi nut e en tr y t o be s entt o [M V D ] , but [ M V D ] m a yg e t w o rd s o m e o th e r w a y .”Sect i on 28- 3320( A ) ( 1) al s o r equi r es A D O T t o r efus e i s s uance of a l i cens e or 2 pr i vi l ege t o dr i ve i n t he event a j uveni l e found i n vi ol at i on of § 4- 244( 33) does not have s uch pr i v i l e g e s . Ba s e d o n t h e r e c o r d , i t a p p e a r s Hi l l a r y was a l i c e n s e d d r i v e r a t t h e t i m e of he r a rre st. 3 Juv e ni l e C our t ’ s R e por t i ng O bl i ga t i ons ¶5 Th e s t a t e a n d Hi l l a r y a g r e e t h a t A. R. S. § 2 8
- 3 3 2 0 , e n t i t l e d “ Su s p e ns i on of lice n se f o r p e rso n s u n d e r e ig h tee n y e a rs o f a g e ; n o tice ; d e f

in iti o n ,” re q u ir e s A D O T to “i m m edi at el ys us pend” a dr i ver ’ s l i cens e orpr i vi l ege t o dr i ve “on r ece i vi ng t he r ecor d of [the j uv enil e]’ s conv i ct i on for a viol at i on of § 4-24 4, paragraph 3 3” o r other speci fi ed st atutes
. 2 § 2 8-332 0(A )( 1). S ect i on 28 -3320 (E) further provides:

F or the p urpose s o f thi s sect i on , “con vict i on ” m eans a f in a l co n v ictio n o r ju d g m e n t, in c lu d in g a n o rd e r o f th e ju v e n ile c o u rt f in d in g th a t a ju v e n ile v io late d a n yp ro v is io n o f th is titl e o r c o m m itt e d a d e li n q u e n t a c t th a t if c o m m itt e d b ya n a d u lt w o u ld c o n s titu te a c ri m in a l o f f e n s e . H i l l arydoes notdi s put e thatherdel i nquencyadj udi cat i on fal l s w i t hi n t hi s defi n it i on of convi ct i on. ¶6 Instea d , sh e a rgu es, as sh e d id b elow , that § 2 8 -33 2 0 im p li es a juv en il e c o u rt has di s cr et i on t o deci de w hethert o not i fyA D O T of a vi ol at i on of § 4-244( 33) , beca us e § 28- 3 3 2 0 (A )(1) o n lyau tho ri ze s A D O T to susp en d a j u v en il e’s l icen se a fter “re ce iving the re co rd of .
. . convi ct i on” and i m pos es no obl i gat i on on t he courtt o forw ar d thatr ecor d. A l t hough H i l l aryacknow l edges t hata r el at ed s t atu te, A
. R
. S. § 28- 3305, r equi r es cour t s t o not i fy A D O T aboutconvi ct i ons orj udgm ent s “i n s om e ci r cumst ance s , ” s he not es t hat , unl i ke § 28-S e c tio n 2 8 -3 3 0 5 , en tit led “ C o u rt a c tio n o n c o n v ictio n ,” p ro v id e s, in re lev a n t p a rt: 3 B . A c o u rt w ith ju risd ictio n o v e r o f f e n se s o r c iv il tra f

f ic v io latio n s c o m m itt e d u n d e r th is c h a p ter , an y o th e r la w o f th is s t at e ora muni ci pal or di nance r egul at i ng the oper at i on of m ot or vehi cl es on hi ghw ay s s hal l forw ar d a r ecor d of the convi ct i on of or j udgm ent agai ns ta per s on i n the court , exce ptfora vi ol at i on r el at ed t o s t andi ng orparki ng, t o [A D O T ] and mayr ecomm end t he s us pens i on of the dr i verl i cens e of the per s on. 4 33 20 , § 2 8-330 5 d oes no t exp res sl y define “con vict i on ” t o incl ud e j uv enil e adjudi cat i on s. 3 A ccordi ng t o H i l l ary , t his differ ence in st atutoryl ang uag e evinces l egis l at i ve i ntentt o v est j uveni l e court s w i t h di s cr et i on ei t hert o r epor tt he vi ol at i on or“t o i ncl ude dr i vi ng r es t r i ct i ons underthe i m m edi at e contr ol of the courtas a condi t i on o f p r obat i on, ” i n keepi ng w i t h t he
re h a b ili tativ e f

u n c tio n o f d e lin q u e n c y p ro c e e d in g s a n d th e in d iv id u a lize d n a tu re o f ju v e n ile d is p o s itio n s . S e e I

n r e Mig u e lR. , 204 A r i z. 328, ¶¶ 35- 36 , 63 P. 3d 1065, 1074- 75 ( A pp. 2 0 0 3 ) (n o tin g re h a b ili tativ e p u rp o se o f ju v e n ile d isp o sitio n ). A d d iti o n a lly , sh e su g g e sts th a t, beca us e § 28- 3320 i s t he m or e spec i fi c st atut e and appl i es onl yt o j uveni l es , t he more gener al pr ovi s i ons found i n § 28- 3305, w hi ch s he as s ert s ar e l i m i t ed t o “tr aff i c- r el at ed off

ens es and
c iv il m o v in g v io latio n s,” a re “ o f n o m o m e n t.” H ill a ryth u s m a in tai n s th e c o u rt p ro p e rly
e x e r c i s e d i t s d i s c r e t i o n i n d e c l i n i n g t o r e p o r th e ra d j u d i c a t i o n t o AD OT. ¶7 T he s t at e ar gu es a juv en i l e court ’ s not i fi cat i on t o M V D thata j uveni l e has vi ol ated § 4- 244( 33) “i s m andat or y [, ] notdi s cr et i onary , ” and the courtther efor e exc eede d i t s author i ty i n not forw ar di ng t he re cor d of H i l l ary ’ s adj udi cat i on. T he s t at e poi nt s outt hat § 28- 3320 aff

or ds t he court d i s cr et i on t o or derthatA D O T r es t r i cta j uveni l e’ s dr i vi ng pr i vi l eges t o t r av el b etw ee n hom e, s chool , and w or k dur i ng s peci fi ed t i m e per i ods , i n l i euSect i on 28- 101 s et s for t h defi ni t i ons appl i cabl e thr oughoutt i t l e 28 “u n less t he 4 cont extot h erw ise r equi r es . ” I tpr ovi des , as one def i ni t i on of convi ct i on, “A n unvaca t ed adj udi cat i on of gui l tora det erm i nat i o n that a per s on vi ol at ed orfai l ed t o compl yw i t h t he la w in a c o u r t o f o ri g in a l ju ri s d ic tio n o r b ya n a u th o ri z e d a d m in is tr a tiv e tr ib u n a l.” § 28- 101( 12) ( a)
. T hi s defi ni t i on i s al s o i ncorpor at ed by r efe r ence fors peci fi c us e i n t i t l e 28, c h a p te r 8 (“ M o to r V e h ic le D ri v e r L ic e n s e s ” ), w h ic h in c lu d e s § § 2 8 -3 3 0 5 a n d 2 8 -3 3 2 0
. See A .R .S . § 2 8 -3 0 0 1 (4 ). 5 o f s u s p e n d in g h e r l ic e n s e , s ee § 2 8 -3 3 2 0 (B ); I n r e B r a n d o n H. , 195 A r i z. 387, ¶ 13, 988 P. 2d 619, 621 ( A pp. 1999) , and cont ends s uch a s peci fi c except i on t o s us pens i on w oul d be

u n n ec essa ryif th e c o u rtco u ld sim p lyfo reg o rep o rti n g the o ff en se a n d av o id A D O T ’s in v o lv e m e n t en tirely . A c c o rd in g to th e sta te, § 2 8 -3 3 2 0 th u s im p licitlyre q u ire s th e ju v e n ile
c o u r tt o r e p o r ta v i o l a t i o n o f § 4
- 2 4 4 ( 3 3 ) t o AD OT. ¶8 I n addi t i on, t he s t at e mai nt ains a del i nquencyadj udi cat i on fora vi ol at i on of § 4 -24 4 (33 ) m u st be rep o rt ed to A D O T p u rsua n t to § 2 8 -33 0 5 (B ), w h ich req u ir es a n yco u rt havi ng j ur i s di ct i on t o det erm i ne vi ol at i ons of anyA r i zona l aw “r egul at i ng the oper at i on of

m ot orvehi cl es on hi ghw ay s ” t o not i fyA D O T of a pe r s on’ s convi ct i on for s uch an off ens e. T he s t ate rea so n s t hat§ 4- 244( 33) r egul at es the oper at i on of a ve hi cl e and thata vi ol at i on
o f th i s l a w w o u ld re s u lt in a “ c o n v ic tio n ” a s d e f in e d in re le v a n t s ta tu te s . See A
. R. S. § 28- 101( 12) ( a)
. W e agr ee. 4 ¶9 A s an i ni t i al m att er , w e s ee no bas i s for H i l l ary ’ s as s ert i on t hatthe r eport i ng
r equi r ement s found i n § 28- 3305 do not encompas s § 4- 244( 33) , w hi ch makes i ti l l egal for
a p e rso n u nd er tw enty -one “t o d ri ve o r be i n p hy si cal con t rol of a m otorveh i cl e” w ith al cohol i n hers y s t em. A l t hough § 4- 244(33 ) is found among ot hers t atut es r egul at i ng
a lc o h o lic b e v e ra g e s in title 4 , it c o u ld a s e a s ily h a v e b e e n p la c e d in title 2 8
. See, e. g. , A
. R. S.6

§ 2 8 -1 3 8 1 (A )(3 ) (u n law f u l f o r p e rso n to d riv e w ith “ a n yd ru g d e f in e d in § 1 3 -3 4 0 1 o r its

m e ta b o lite in th e p e rs o n ’s b o d y ” ). ¶10 W e a lso a g re e w ith th e s ta te th a t th e d e f in iti o n o f

c o n v ictio n in tit le 2 8 is
su f f icie n tlyb ro a d to e n c o m p a ss a ju v e n ile’s a d ju d ica tio n o f

d e lin q u e n c y , an d w e d e c lin e to inf er the m ea n ing H il lary su g g ests fro m the leg isl ature ’s ex p ress inc lusion o f ju v en il e c o u rt adj udi cat i ons as convi ct i ons i n § 2 8 -3320( E ) butnoti n § 28- 3305. T he s t atut es s erve differ ent purposes. ¶11 B ot h s t atut es ar e found i n t i t l e 2 8 , c hapt er8, ar t i cl e 6, w hi ch governs r egul at i on of A r i zona dr i ver ’ s l i cens es . Sect i on 28- 3320( A ) author i zes and re qui r es A D O T t o s us pend a j uveni l e’ s dr i ver ’ s l i cens e bas ed on an adj udi cat i on of del i nquency . T hi s i s an exc ept i on t o the gene r al rul e thata del i nquencyadj udi cat i on “s h all notbe dee m ed a c onvi ct i on of
cr i m e, [or ] i m pos e any ci vi l di s abi l i t i es or di nar i l y r es ul t i ng fr om a convi ct i on. ” A
. R
. S. § 8- 20 7(A ). B ecause “[t] he co nti nu ed p ossess i on of a v al i dlyi ssued dri ver’ s l i cense i s a
c o n s titu tio n a lly p ro te c te d in te re s t” im p lic a tin g d u e p ro c e s s , Knapp v. Mi l l er , 165 A r i z. 527, 5 3 2 , 7 9 9 P .2 d 8 6 8 , 8 7 3 (A p p . 1 9 9 0 ), th e leg isla tu re m a y h a v e m a d e § 2 8 -3 3 2 0 e x p re ss ly appl i cabl e t o del i nquencyadj udi cat i ons t o ens ur e j uveni l es had not i ce t hat a vi ol at i on of one of the s t atut es enumer at ed i n t hats ect i on w oul d r es ul t in s us pens i on of thei rdr i vi ng p ri v ile g e s . C o m

p a re T h o m so n v. Mil ler ex rel. A riz. High w a y D ep ’t , 163 A r i z. 461, 462, 788 P. 2d 1212, 1213 ( A pp. 1989) ( del i nquencyadj udi cat i on pr oper l ytr eat ed as c onvi ct i on for purpos e of l i cens e r evoca t i on w i t hout hear i ng w her e r evoca t i on s t atut e def i ned convi ct i on
a s in c lu d in g d e lin q u e n c ya d ju d ic a tio n ), w ith W

ebb v. R ose , 20 A r i z. A pp. 450, 452- 53, 513Sect i on 28- 1559 i s found i n chapt er 5, ar t i cl e 3 of t i t l e 28 and pr ovi des pr ocedur es 5 rel at i ng t o cri m i nal vi olat i on s and tr affic com plai nts
. 7 P
. 2d 98 8, 99 0- 91 ( 19 73 ) ( de l i nq ue nc ya dj ud i c a t i on no tc on vi c t i on fo rpu rpo s e of l i c e nse
rev o ca ti o n w ith o u t hea ri n g w h ere p ri o r st atutes d id n o t so p rov ide). ¶12 In cont r as t , § 28- 3305 does not confe r exce pt i onal author i t y t o im p air a
c on st i tuti on al l y prot ect ed i nter est , bu t i den t i fi es a gen eral , m i nis t eri al du t y of al l co u rts h a v in g ju risd ictio n o v e r tra f f ic o f f e n se s o r vio latio n s. T h e leg isla tu re ’s a p p a re n t in ter e st in pr ovi di ng s peci fi c not i ce of A D O T ’ s author i t yt o i m pos e a mandat orys anct i on i n § 28- 3320 d o e s n o t h a v e th e sa m e re lev a n c e in § 2 8 -3 3 0 5 , w h ich sim p lyse ts f o rth c o u rt p ro c e d u re s to be fol l ow ed. ¶13 Fi nal l y , had w e anydoubtt hatt he r epor t i ng r equi r ement s found i n § 28- 3305
a p p ly to ju v e n ile d e lin q u e n c ya d ju d i c a t i o n s , it w o u ld b e d is p e lle d b yA .R .S . § 2 8 -1 5 5 9 , a
s t atut e nei t her part yci t es i n t hi s appea l
. L i ke § 28- 3305, § 28- 1559 i m pos es an obl i gat i on 5 t o r epor tconvi ct i ons forcert ai n offe ns es found i n t i t l e 28 and “ anyotherl aw r egul at i ng the oper at i on of veh icl es on hi ghw ay s . ” § 28- 1559( B ) , ( H )
. I n contr as tt o § 28- 3305, w hi ch

r efe r s t o the r eport i ng dut i es of court s , § 28- 1559 des cr i bes the dut i es of “[ e] ach magi s tr at e, j udg e o r h e a r i n g o f

f i c e r o f a c o u r t , ” a s wel l a s t h e “ c l e r k o f t h e c o u r t o f r e c o r d
. ” § 28- 1559( A ) , ( B ). I n addi t i on, § 28- 1559 s peci fi cal l ydefi nes t he r epor t i ng obl i gat i ons of j uveni l e courtoffi cer s i n pr ovi di ng t hat“[e ] ach j udge, r efe r ee, hear i ng offi cer , pr obat i on
o f f ic e r o r o th e r p e rs o n re s p o n s ib le f o r th e d is p o s itio n o f c a s e s in v o lv in g tr a f f ic o f f e n s e s . . .“[A ] r eporti s notr equi r ed forparki ng vi ol at i ons or i f i t i s found thatt he off ens e or 6 civil violati o n w as n o t com m itted.” § 2 8 -15 5 9 (H )(2). G iv e n th e c o m p lex itya n d v a rie tyo f sta tu tes in v o lv e d , an d th e p a rtie s ’ f a ilu re to 7 di r ect the j uveni l e j udge t o t he m os t r el evant s t atut es addr es s i ng that ques t i on, w e do notfi nd o r su g g e st th a t th e ju v e n ile ju d g e , an e x p e rie n c e d ju rist, co m m itt e d a n ym isc o n d u c t in err oneous l yfai l i ng t o not i fyA D O T of H i l l ary ’ s adj udi cat i on. 8 com m i t t ed by pe rs ons underei ght een y ears of

age s hal l ” re por t vi ol at i ons t o A D O T
. § 28- 6 1 559( H ) ( 2) ( emphasi s added)
. Pur s uantt o § 28- 1559( J ) , “[f ] ai l ur e, r efus al ornegl ectof a j udi ci al offi cert o compl yw i t h [§ 28- 1559] i s m i s conduct i n offi ce and grounds forr emoval f ro m o f f ic e .” 7 ¶14 Fort he for egoi ng r eas ons , w e conc l ude the j uveni l e courtabus ed i t s di s cr et i on
w hen i tdeci ded nott o not i fy A D O T of H i l l ary ’ s adj udi cat i on and di s pos i t i on forvi ol at i on
o f § 4 -2 4 4 (3 3 ). S ee § § 2 8 -15 59( I ) , 28- 3305( B )
. W e r emand t he ca s e forfur t heract i on
cons i s t entw i t h t hi s deci s i on.

____________________________________ PE T E R J
. E C K E R ST R O M , Pr es i di ng J udge CO NC UR RI NG:

____________________________________ J
. W I L L I A M B R A M M E R , J R
. , J udge

____________________________________ PH I L I P G
. E SPIN O SA , J udge