Opinion ID: 2322573
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Juvenile Certification[12]

Text: At the time of the commission of the Meier murder, appellant was 17 years of age. He argues that he was not certified by the Juvenile Court to the Court of Oyer and Terminer as required by law, and points to the Juvenile Court Law of Allegheny County, Act of June 3, 1933, P.L. 1449, art. II, § 202, as amended, 11 P.S. § 269-202(f): The court [Juvenile Court] hereby created shall have jurisdiction  (f) To inquire, under oath or affirmation, of all crimes, misdemeanors and offenses whatsoever against the laws of this Commonwealth, which shall be triable in the county, wherein the person charged is a child under eighteen years of age. The Commonwealth in answer cites § 413 of the same statute, as amended, 11 P.S. § 269-413: If, during the pendency of a criminal charge, other than murder, against any person in the court of quarter sessions or oyer and terminer, it shall be ascertained that the person charged with the offense was under the age of sixteen years at the time the alleged offense was committed, it shall be the duty of such court to transfer such case immediately, together with all the papers, documents and testimony connected therewith, to the juvenile court. If such child is sixteen years of age or over and less than eighteen years of age, such court may, at its discretion, transfer such cases to the juvenile court in the same manner. Because the trial court was aware of Schmidt's age, the Commonwealth argues, and because it chose not to transfer Schmidt to the Juvenile Court, the court was exercising a power given it by the legislature. We have held in construing the general Juvenile Court Law, Act of June 2, 1933, P.L. 1433, as amended, 11 P.S. § 243-268, that the juvenile court judge's sole responsibility in a case involving murder is to determine if the Commonwealth has made out a prima facie case in the juvenile court proceedings. [13] If so, then he must hold the juvenile for further proceedings in the criminal courts. Gaskins Case, 430 Pa. 298, 244 A. 2d 662 (1968); Commonwealth v. McIntyre, 435 Pa. 96, 254 A. 2d 639 (1969); Commonwealth v. James, 440 Pa. 205, 269 A. 2d 898 (1970). The juvenile court judge in cases of felonious homicide, in other words, does not possess the discretion whereby he may certify a case for prosecution in normal criminal channels if in his opinion, the interests of the State require a prosecution of such case on an indictment. Juvenile Court Law of Allegheny County, § 416, 11 P.S. § 269-416. His function is thus that of a magistrate holding a preliminary hearing in a murder case charging a non-juvenile, with the exception that should the Commonwealth not establish a prima facie case, the confidentiality of the juvenile court certification proceeding will protect the interests of the child. Schmidt was not brought before the Juvenile Court at any stage of this proceeding, but was bound over to the grand jury by a coroner's inquest at which he was represented by his court-appointed attorneys and at which the Commonwealth established a prima facie case to the satisfaction of the six coroner's jurors. The coroner thus properly performed the committing function, and we fail to see that Schmidt's interests were in any way prejudiced by the procedure actually followed. [14]