Opinion ID: 1516756
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Uniformity of Treatment

Text: The final issue raised in this appeal is the juvenile appellant's claim that the State failed to treat him in a manner substantially uniform to persons in like situations. [4] The parties stipulated that eight juveniles participated in the incident at the school and that Michael was the only juvenile to be adjudicated of having committed an offense as a result. Given the multiplicity of factors appropriately to be considered by (1) the police, (2) the intake worker, (3) the prosecutor and (4) the juvenile judge relative to the dispositions of juveniles accused of offenses, mere listing of disparate dispositions provides no basis for reversal. The entry is: Judgment of the Superior Court affirming the finding of the District Court that the juvenile committed the offenses of burglary and theft is affirmed. Judgment of the Superior Court affirming the finding of the District Court that the juvenile committed the offense of criminal mischief is reversed. Remanded to the Superior Court for remand to the District Court with instructions to dismiss the juvenile petition alleging criminal mischief. McKUSICK, C. J., and NICHOLS and WATHEN, JJ., concurring.