In the Interest of G.L.B.

The evidence did not support the juvenile's delinquency adjudication on a charge that the juvenile influenced a witness by using threats with the intent to prevent the victim from communicating an assault to a law enforcement officer.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Following an adjudication of delinquency on two charges, G. L. B. appeals, challenging only the sufficiency of the evidence as to the charge that alleged he threatened a person to hinder that person from communicating a criminal offense to a law enforcement officer.1 Because no evidence in the record reflects any threat to hinder any communications whatsoever, let alone communications of a crime to a law enforcement officer, we must reverse. The standard of review is clear. “When reviewing the sufficiency of evidence supporting a juvenile court’s adjudication, we apply the same standard of review used in criminal cases. We construe the evidence in favor of the court’s adjudication and determine if a rational trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that the juvenile committed the acts charged.” Citation omitted. In the Interest of D. T. 2 See In the Interest of A. A. 3

So construed, the evidence which consisted only of the testimony of the victim shows that a few weeks following an earlier altercation with a fellow middle-school student on the school bus, G. L. B. confronted that same student in the hallway at school, grabbing his shoulder, ripping his jacket, and reminding the student, “Remember, I’m still going to kill you and your family.” The State petitioned the juvenile court for an adjudication of delinquency, charging that G. L. B. had violated three criminal statutes: i terroristic threats4 threatening to beat and kill the student, simple battery5 grabbing and pushing the student, and influencing witness6 using threats against the student with the intent to prevent his communicating the simple-battery crime to Robby Walker, a law enforcement officer. The juvenile court found insufficient evidence to sustain the charge of terroristic threats but found G. L. B. had committed the other two crimes. An adjudication of delinquency and resulting disposition were entered.

In the Interest of G.L.B.

The evidence did not support the juvenile's delinquency adjudication on a charge that the juvenile influenced a witness by using threats with the intent to prevent the victim from communicating an assault to a law enforcement officer.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report