Title: Bragg v. State
Citation: 416 So. 2d 715
Docket Number: N/A
State: Alabama
Issuer: Alabama Supreme Court
Date: June 25, 1982

416 So. 2d 715 (1982)
Culley Max BRAGG
v.
STATE of Alabama.
81-371.

Supreme Court of Alabama.
June 25, 1982.
*716 Jake B. Mathews, Jr. of Merrill, Merrill, Mathews &amp; Allen, Anniston, for appellant.
Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen., and P. David Bjurberg, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
JONES, Justice.
The sole issue raised by this appeal is the propriety, vel non, of the juvenile court's transfer of Culley Max Bragg, a juvenile 14 years of age, to the circuit court for criminal prosecution as an adult. The complaint filed against Bragg charged that he was delinquent in that he did intentionally cause the death of another person in violation of Code 1975, § 13A-6-2.
Because our affirmance mandates a subsequent trial of this cause before the Calhoun Circuit Court, we deem a full recitation of the facts untimely and improvident. It is sufficient for the purposes of this review to set out a portion of the juvenile court's order effecting the transfer:
"The Court considering the results of that report, testimony taken on December 8, 1981, and the other matters as set out above, finds as follows:
Transfer hearings are "probable cause" hearings, and the transferring court should not be reversed unless its ruling is clearly erroneous. Duncan v. State, 394 So. 2d 930 (Ala.1981); Terrell v. State, 379 So. 2d 1238 (Ala.1980); Williams v. State, 361 So. 2d 1157 (Ala.1978).
*717 Probable cause, in the context of transfer hearings, has been defined as "that which would warrant a man of reasonable prudence and caution in believing that the offense has been committed and that the person in question is the offender." Duncan, supra, quoting Vincent v. State, 349 So. 2d 1145 (Ala.1977). The trial court's ruling may be found to be clearly erroneous if the order issued does not recite that the court has considered the six factors outlined in Code 1975, § 12-15-34(d). The objective of § 12-15-34(d) is to provide a "meaningful review" as mandated by Kent v. United States, 383 U.S. 541, 86 S. Ct. 1045, 16 L. Ed. 2d 84 (1966). The mere recital in the transfer order, however, that the trial court has considered the six statutory factors is sufficient, Brown v. State, 353 So. 2d 1384 (Ala.1978), where there is evidence to support the order.
Close analysis of the record shows what we believe to be more than sufficient evidence to uphold the juvenile court's order of transfer. Consequently, the judgment appealed from is due to be, and it hereby is, affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
TORBERT, C. J., and MADDOX, SHORES and BEATTY, JJ., concur.