THE ADJUDICATION HEARING PowerPoint Presentation, PPT - DocSlides

THE ADJUDICATION HEARING PowerPoint Presentation, PPT - DocSlides

2017-05-30 69K 69 0 0

Description

(PLEAS AND COURT TRIAL) . JOHN REED. ATTORNEY AT LAW. SEABROOK, TEXAS. SOURCES OF JUVENILE LAW. I. U.S. Supreme Court.  . . A. . In re Gault. , 387 U.S. 1 (1967). . . -Fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination. ID: 553978

Direct Link: Embed code:

Download this presentation

DownloadNote - The PPT/PDF document "THE ADJUDICATION HEARING" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.

Presentations text content in THE ADJUDICATION HEARING

Slide1

THE ADJUDICATION HEARING (PLEAS AND COURT TRIAL)

JOHN REED

ATTORNEY AT LAW

SEABROOK, TEXAS

Slide2

SOURCES OF JUVENILE LAW

I. U.S. Supreme Court

 

A.

In re Gault

, 387 U.S. 1 (1967)

-Fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination

-Right to counsel

-Confrontation and cross-examination of witnesses

-Due process right to notice of charges pending

 

B.

In re

Winship

, 397 U.S. 358 (1970)

-Required proof beyond a reasonable doubt

 

C.

Breed v. Jones

, 421 U.S. 519 (1975)

-Gave children double jeopardy protection

 

D.

McKeiver

v. Pennsylvania

, 403 U.S. 528 (1971)

-A trial by jury is not constitutionally required

 

E.

Roper v. Simmons

, 543 U.S. 551 (2005)

-Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments forbid imposition of the death penalty on

offenders who

were under the age of 18 when their crimes were committed

Slide3

SOURCES OF JUVENILE LAW

F

.

J.D.B. v. North Carolina

, 564 U.S. ____ (2011)

-a child’s age properly informs Miranda’s custody analysis

G.

Miller v. Alabama

, 567 U.S. ____ (2012)

-mandatory life without parole for those under the age of 18 at the time of their crimes violates the Eighth Amendment

Slide4

SOURCES OF JUVENILE LAW

II. Title 3 Texas Family Code

 

A. Jury Trial 54.03(c)

-Trial shall be by jury unless jury is waived in accordance with 51.09.

-No jury on disposition except for Determinate Sentence cases. 54.04(a)

 

In the Matter of S.G.

, 304 S.W.3d 518 (

Tex.App

.- Waco 2009): reversed and remanded because record contained no affirmative waiver of a jury trial

 

V.C.H. v. State

, 630 S.W.2d 787 (

Tex.App

.- Houston [1 Dist.] 1982;

In the Matter of

C.D.F.

, 852 S.W.2d 281 (

Tex.App

.- Dallas 1993): child and attorney must waive right to jury trial

Slide5

SOURCES OF JUVENILE LAW

B. Privilege against self-incrimination 54.03(e)

C. Extrajudicial statement must be corroborated 54.03(e):

R.C.S. v. State

, 546 S.W.2d 939 (

Tex.Civ.App

. – San Antonio 1977)

 

D. Right to Counsel 51.10(b

)

-child cannot waive counsel

-

including effective assistance of counsel

In re K.J.O.

, 27 S.W.3d 340 (

Tex.App

.- Dallas, 2000, rev. denied)

Slide6

SOURCES OF JUVENILE LAW

E. Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt 54.03(f)

 

F

. Presumed Innocent 54.03(f)

Slide7

OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

Double Jeopardy

 

A

. Jury trial: jeopardy attaches when jury is empaneled and sworn

In re C.J.F.

183 S.W.3d 841 (

Tex.App

.-Houston [1

st

Dist.] 2005,

no.pet

.)

B

. Court trial: jeopardy attaches when both sides have announced ready and the

defendant

has pled to the charging instrument

State v. Torres

, 805 S.W.2d 418 (

Tex.Crim.App

. 1991)

C

. Plea Bargain: 54.03(j): If the court accepts the agreement, the court

shall

make a disposition in accordance with the terms of the agreement between the state and the child.

In re J.H

., No. 04-07-00208-CV (

Tex.App

. - San Antonio 2007)

 

Slide8

OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

Speedy Trial

 

Barker v.

Wingo

, 407 U.S. 514 (1972

)

-the length of delay

-the reason for the

delay

-the child’s assertion of his right to a speedy trial

and

-the

prejudice to the child from the delay

 

J.W.G.

, 988 S.W.2d 318 (

Tex.App

.- Houston [1

st

Dist.] 1999)

 

Grayless

v. State

, 567 S.W.2d 216 (

Tex.Crim.App

. 1978)

 

In the Matter of D.M.

, 611 S.W.2d 880 (

Tex.App

.- Amarillo 1980)

Slide9

Admonishments 54.03(b)(1-6)

 

(

1) the allegations

(

2) possible consequences

(

3) privilege against self-incrimination

In the Matter of J.G.M

., No. 13-13-00704-

CV

(

Tex.App

–Corpus Christi, 1/8/15)

(

4) right to trial and to confrontation of witnesses

right

to

counsel

right

to trial by jury

 

Slide10

Mandatory Compliance

In re D.L.E.

, 531 S.W.2d 196 (

Tex.Civ.App

. – Eastland 1975)

Slide11

Judge Must Personally Explain To Respondent

In the Matter of N.S.D

., 555 S.W.2d 807 (

Tex.Civ.App

. – El Paso 1977): asking bailiff or secretary not sufficient

W.J.M.A. v. State

, 602 S.W.2d 397 (

Tex.Civ.App

. – Beaumont 1980): inquiring of counsel not sufficient

In the Matter of B.J

., 960 S.W.2d 216 (

Tex.App

. – San Antonio 1997): insufficient explanation of nature of the offenses

 

In the Matter of J.D.P

., Jr., 691 S.W.2d 106 (

Tex.App

. – San Antonio 1985)

 

In the Matter of K.L.C

., 990 S.W.2d 242 (Tex. 1999)

 

In the Matter of A.L.S

., 915 S.W.2d 114 (

Tex.App

. – San Antonio 1996)

Slide12

Judge Must Personally Explain To Respondent

54.03(j) If the court decides not to accept a plea agreement, the court shall give the child an opportunity to withdraw the plea.

 

In the Matter of M.D.G

., 180 S.W.3d 747 (

Tex.App

.-Eastland 2005)

 

In the Matter of J.H

., No. 04-07-00208-CV (

Tex.App

.- San Antonio 2007)

 

In the Matter of E.Q

., 839 S.W.2d 144 (

Tex.App

.- Austin 1992)

 

In the Matter of R.S

., No. 01-98-00939-CV (

Tex.App

.-Houston [1 Dist.] 1999)

Slide13

Judge Must Personally Explain To Respondent

54.034 If a plea agreement is followed, child can only appeal if given permission or if it was a matter raised by written pretrial motion.

 

54.04(c): No disposition

 

In the Matter of M.A.M

., No. 04-97-00795-CV (

Tex.App

. – San Antonio 1998): no duty to admonish on “no disposition”.

 

54.03(

i

) Contemporaneous objection required if court fails to properly admonish the child.

 

In the Matter of C.O.S

., 988 S.W.2d 760 (Tex. 1999);

In the Matter of S.A

., No. 06-14-00055-CV (

Tex.App

. – Texarkana, 12/31/14)

Slide14

Judge Must Personally Explain To Respondent

Lesser included offenses

-The court should admonish on lesser included offenses.

A.E.M. v. State

, 552 S.W.2d 952 (

Tex.Civ.App

.- San Antonio 1977, no writ);

In the Matter of A.N

., 683 S.W.2d 118 (

Tex.App

. – San Antonio 1984)

-

But is not required to admonish on every possible lesser included offense.

In re

D.L.K.

, 690 S.W.2d 654 (

Tex.App

.- Eastland 1985, no writ).

Slide15

Judge Must Personally Explain To Respondent

No duty to admonish on sex offender registration.

In re B.G.M.

, 929 S.W.2d 604 (

Tex.App

.- Texarkana 1996, no writ).

 

 

No

duty to admonish on immigration consequences.

In re E.J.G.P.

, 5 S.W.3d 868 (

Tex.App

.- El Paso 1999, no pet.); but see

Padilla v. Kentucky

, 130

S.Ct

. 1473 (2010) and

Ex parte

Tanklevskaya

, 361 S.W.3d 86, (Houston-1

st

Dist. 2011);

Aguilar v. State

, No. 14-11-00227-CR (

Tex.App

. - Houston [14

th

Dist.] 2012);

Martinez v. State

, No. PD-1338-11 (

Tex.Crim.App

. 2012).

 

Slide16

THE ADJUDICATION HEARING

54.03(a): A child may be found to have engaged in delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision only after an adjudication hearing conducted in accordance with the provisions of this section.

 

What constitutes a hearing?

 

R.E.M. v. State

, 569 S.W.2d 613 (

Tex.Civ.App

. – Waco 1978): R filed an answer with a no contest plea and argued double jeopardy at the certification hearing

 

State of Texas v. L.J.B.

, 561 S.W.2d 547 (

Tex.Civ.App

.-Dallas 1977): Summary Judgment inappropriate

Slide17

THE ADJUDICATION HEARING

Which Judges Can Preside Over Adjudication Hearings?

 

54.10 An associate judge or referee may preside over adjudication hearings (even jury trials), except in determinate sentencing cases. The referee must, however inform the child that he has a right to a hearing before the juvenile court judge and provide each party an opportunity to object.

 

In re M.A.V.

, 40 S.W.3d 581 (

Tex.App

.- San Antonio 2001, no pet.): child can also object to a visiting judge.

 

Can the State object to the associate judge?

Slide18

THE ADJUDICATION HEARING

Juvenile’s Presence at Hearing

 

In the Matter of C.T.C.

, 2 S.W.3d 407 (

Tex.App

.- San Antonio 1999)

 

 

Parental

Participation in the Adjudication Hearing

 

Adair and Adair v.

Kupper

, 890 S.W.2d 216 (

Tex.App

.- Amarillo 1994)

Slide19

THE ADJUDICATION HEARING

Summons and Service of Summons 53.06, 53.07

 

53.06(a): The juvenile court shall direct issuance of a summons to: (1) the child named in the petition…

53.06(b): A copy of the petition must accompany the summons.

-provides notice

 

In

the matter of M.D.R.

, 113 S.W.3d 552 (

Tex.App

.- Texarkana 2003);

In the Matter of D.W.M

., 562 S.W.2d 851 (Tex. 1978)-cases reversed solely on lack of proof of service;

In the Matter of X.B

., 369 S.W.3d 350 (

Tex.App

. - Texarkana 2012): VOP reversed due to no proof of service in original case.

 

In

the Matter of D.B

., No. 06-14-00053-CV, (

Tex.App

.- Texarkana 1/28/15): no service on victim in transfer hearing affirmed

Slide20

THE ADJUDICATION HEARING

53.04(d)(1) The petition must state: (1) with reasonable particularity the time, place, and manner of the acts alleged and the penal law or standard of conduct allegedly violated by the acts…

 

In re T.L.K.

, 316 S.W. 3d 701 (

Tex.App

.- Fort Worth 2010)

 

 

53.07(c

): Service of the summons may be made by any suitable person under the direction of the court.

 

In the Matter of A.B.

, 938 S.W.2d 537 (

Tex.App

.- Texarkana 1997): service on Respondent’s attorney held not effective

 

Chandler v. State

, 695 S.W.2d 248 (

Tex.App

.- Austin 1985): service on Respondent by Juvenile Probation Officer held effective

Slide21

THE COURT TRIAL

Scrutinize Petition

 

Quintuple

Hearsay

 

Typo

 

Variance

In the Matter of J.S.R

., No. 07-11-00009-CV (

Tex.App

. - Amarillo 2011);

L.G.R. v. State

, 724 S.W.2d 775 (Tex. 1987);

In the Matter of B.P.C

., No. 03-03-00057-CV (

Tex.App

. – Austin 2004)

Slide22

THE COURT TRIAL

Proof of Age

 

51.042 Must object at time of hearing

 

In re E.D.C.

, 88 S.W.3d 789 (

Tex.App

.- El Paso 2002, no pet.)

Slide23

THE COURT TRIAL

Opening Statement

 

 

 

51.17(c

) Rules of Evidence Apply in Court Trials

 

A. 54.03(d)

B. CCP 38.23 (the exclusionary rule)

C. CCP 38.37

D. 54.03(e) accomplice witness testimony

In re J.R.R.

, 696 S.W.2d 382 (Tex. 1985);

In

the Matter of D.A.A., No. 13-06-00538-CV (

Tex.App

. – Corpus Christi 2009);

In the

Matter of J.A.F.R

., 752 S.W.2d 216 (

Tex.App

. – El Paso 1988);

In the Matter of K.B

., 143 S.W.3d 194 (

Tex.App

.- Waco 2004).

E. TRE 609(d) Impeachment with prior juvenile adjudications

F. 54.03(d) Social history report cannot be viewed by the judge before the adjudication decision (except for detention hearings and discretionary transfer hearings)

Slide24

THE COURT TRIAL

Closing

Argument

A. Permitted argument

1

. Summation of the evidence

2

. Reasonable deductions from the evidence

3

. Answer to argument of opposing counsel, and,

4

. A plea for law enforcement.

Melendez v. State

, 194 S.W.3d 641 (

Tex.App

.- Houston [14

th

Dist.] 2006)

Slide25

THE COURT TRIAL

B. Prohibited argument

 

1. Comment on Respondent’s failure to testify.

Hicks v. State

, 815 S.W.2d

299 (

Tex.App

.- Houston [1 Dist.] 1991)

2. Striking at the Respondent over the shoulders of his attorney.

Gomez v. State

, 704

S.W.2d

770 (

Tex.Crim.App

. 1985)

3

. A prosecutor cannot suggest that it render a verdict against a child in

order to

remove a child from a bad or dangerous household and not even consider whether the child committed the charged offense.

In the Matter of C.L.

, 930

S.W.2d

935 (

Tex.App

.- Houston [14

th

Dist.] 1996, no pet.).

Slide26

THE COURT TRIAL

C. Time

Limit

 

Dang

v. State

, 154 S.W.3d 616 (

Tex.Crim.App

. 2005) factors:

1

. The quantity of evidence

2

. The duration of the trial

3

. Conflicts in the testimony

4

. The seriousness of the offense, and

5

. The complexity of the case.

Slide27

THE COURT TRIAL

Law of Parties

 

In the Matter of L.A.S

., 135 S.W.3d 909 (

Tex.App

. – Fort Worth)

 

Lesser Included Offenses

 

54.03(f):

In the Matter of S.D.W

., 811 S.W.2d 739 (

Tex.App

.- Houston [1 Dist.] 1991);

In the Matter of A.E.B

., 255 S.W.3d 338 (

Tex.App

.- Dallas 2008)


About DocSlides
DocSlides allows users to easily upload and share presentations, PDF documents, and images.Share your documents with the world , watch,share and upload any time you want. How can you benefit from using DocSlides? DocSlides consists documents from individuals and organizations on topics ranging from technology and business to travel, health, and education. Find and search for what interests you, and learn from people and more. You can also download DocSlides to read or reference later.