In other words, Nelson's potential for rehabilitation met the lower standard, but not the higher. Concluding that the higher standard should govern, the district court found that Nelson's prospects for rehabilitation supported transfer to adult status. The other statutory factors become relevant principally because of the relationship they have to the prospects of rehabilitation. Nelson now appeals, arguing only that the court improperly applied the likelihood standard to evaluate his chances of rehabilitation. Permeating the transfer decision and the six-factor inquiry is the notion of rehabilitation.
Rehabilitation clearly is one of the primary purposes of the juvenile delinquency provisions.
As the district court correctly perceived, the statutory factors have been identified primarily because of their impact on the juvenile's rehabilitative potential. Thus, the district court's assessment of the juvenile defendant's potential for rehabilitation is a crucial determinant in the transfer decision. A likelihood standard strikes the appropriate balance. That is perhaps why several other circuits have essentially endorsed the likelihood standard. See , e.g. , United States v.