Opinion ID: 2169510
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Automatic Transfer

Text: On the merits, the appellate court first addressed the automatic-transfer question. The court observed that, until recently, section 5-410(2)(c)(v) stated that persons 17 years of age and older who have a pending delinquency petition  shall be confined in an adult detention facility. (Emphasis added.) See 705 ILCS 405/5-410(2)(c)(v) (West 2002). Clearly, this language was mandatory and required the minor to be transferred to the county jail on his or her seventeenth birthday. 374 Ill.App.3d at 814, 313 Ill.Dec. 356, 872 N.E.2d 116. In 2004, however, section 5-410(2)(c)(v) was amended to state that persons 17 years of age and older  may be confined in an adult detention facility, provided certain factors are considered. (Emphasis added.) See 705 ILCS 405/5-410(2)(c)(v) (West 2006). Clearly, this new language is discretionary and leaves no room for an automatic transfer on the minor's seventeenth birthday. 374 Ill. App.3d at 814, 313 Ill.Dec. 356, 872 N.E.2d 116. Consequently, the court held that any policy providing for automatic transfer is invalid. 374 Ill.App.3d at 814, 313 Ill. Dec. 356, 872 N.E.2d 116. The court then added that it was uncomfortable with the lack of procedural safeguards in section 5-410, most especially that Randall had to initiate a proceeding to prevent his transfer to the county jail. 374 Ill.App.3d at 814, 313 Ill.Dec. 356, 872 N.E.2d 116. The court compared section 5-410 with section 3-10-7 of the Unified Code of Corrections (730 ILCS 5/3-10-7 (West 2006)), which governs the transfer of minors prosecuted as adults from the Department of Juvenile Justice to the Adult Division of the Department of Corrections. Specifically, the court noted that section 3-10-7 provides for a formal notice requirement, an evidentiary hearing, the right to counsel, and a statement from the trial court setting forth the bases for its transfer ruling. 374 Ill.App.3d at 814-15, 313 Ill.Dec. 356, 872 N.E.2d 116. Section 5-410, by contrast, contains no procedural guidelines whatsoever. Accordingly, the court held that, in the interests of due process, a procedure similar to the one outlined in section 3-10-7 of the Code should be employed in applying the transfer provision set forth in section 5-410(2)(c)(v) of the Act, albeit in an expedited manner. 374 Ill.App.3d at 815, 313 Ill.Dec. 356, 872 N.E.2d 116.