Court Opinion

ID: 9736097
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 18:43:42.172173+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:27:04.339269
License: Public Domain

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING
Wiltrout, P. J.
Appellee has filed its petition for rehearing, unsupported by a brief, in which it claims that the original opinion in this case erroneously holds that juvenile courts are bound by strict rules of criminal procedure as prescribed by law for the prosecution of adults. We do not find this subject discussed in the opinion. We gather that appellee is complaining of our statement to the effect that in an adversary proceeding such as this the trial judge may not properly serve both as judge and as .advocate for one of the adversaries. We perceive no reason to alter this statement.
Appellee correctly points out that the Acts of 1945, ch. 356, p. 1724; Burns’ 1942 Replacement (1951 Supp.), §§9-3201 et seq., does not contain a provision that it is to be construed as supplemental to and in furtherance of the laws affected thereby, but that this provision is *222contained in the Acts of 1947, ch. 241, §2, p. 983, which amends §19 of the 1945 Act.
Petition for rehearing denied.
Note. — Reported in 101 N. E. 2d 819.