Opinion ID: 2462877
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Denial of transfer

Text: In examining the denial of Hamilton's motion to transfer, the standard of review in such juvenile-transfer cases is whether the circuit court's denial of the motion was clearly erroneous. Davis v. State, supra ; Bell v. State, supra ; Beck v. State, supra ; Vickers v. State, 307 Ark. 298, 819 S.W.2d 13 (1991). However, we do not reach the merits of Hamilton's hearsay argument, as there is no indication that the trial court's findings were based on anything other than the information filed with the trial court. The circuit court denied the motion to transfer, obviously referring to the criminal information. We have said that the serious and violent nature of an offense is a sufficient basis for denying a motion to transfer and trying a juvenile as an adult, and that a criminal information, on its own, is sufficient to establish that the offense charged is of a serious and violent nature. Id.; See also Walker v. State, supra . Here, the information alleged that Hamilton committed first-degree murder by unlawfully, feloniously, and with the purpose of causing the death of another person, did cause the death of Shadrick Flemons. In short, the charge by way of the criminal information alone was clear and convincing evidence which supported the circuit court's denial of the motion to transfer; accordingly, we cannot say that its ruling was clearly erroneous. Affirmed. NEWBERN and ROAF, JJ., dissent.