Opinion ID: 2588728
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: under the facts presented, failure to release the adult's juvenile court and law enforcement records was an unauthorized application of judicial power.

Text: ¶ 21 Rotramel, an adult, is charged not only with the most serious of crimes against society  murder  but also with the kidnapping, sexual molestation and rape of minors. Even were there no express statutory provision mandating the release of Rotramel's records, under the facts presented, failure to release the documents constitutes an unauthorized use of judicial force. [39] ¶ 22 Juvenile judges may release records upon a determination that a compelling reason exists for disclosure and that the release is necessary for the protection of a legitimate public or private interest. [40] The Legislature has recognized that if the Juvenile Code's rehabilitative goals fail, juvenile records may be utilized in subsequent adult proceedings for sentencing purposes, even if those records have been sealed. [41] Further, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals has held that the juvenile history of an adult offender may be included in a presentence investigation and report used to facilitate the trial court's determination of the appropriate sentence to be imposed. [42] Other jurisdictions have allowed the release of juvenile records in a variety of situations. [43] ¶ 23 Just as it is clear that an adult with a previous juvenile adjudication should not be concerned that those records will be released merely because of a routine traffic stop, it is also unquestionable that once an adult is charged with the serious crimes outlined in 10 O.S. Supp.1997 § 7306-1.1, the general presumption of privacy growing out of hopes for rehabilitation have failed. [44] Under the facts presented, the balance of privacy versus the protection of the public weighs heavily in favor of disclosure. [45]