In the Interest of A. S.

The trial court's statement that ' "there is clear and convincing evidence" ' to adjudicate the juvenile delinquent on a charge of child molestation raised a question of whether the juvenile was deprived, to some extent, of a fair trial.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Following a hearing in the Juvenile Court of Bryan County, the trial court adjudicated A. S. delinquent for acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the offense of child molestation. A. S. appeals. Since the juvenile court applied a lesser standard than proof beyond a reasonable doubt in adjudicating A. S. delinquent, we reverse and remand for further findings. 1. A. S. first claims that the trial court erred in denying his motion to dismiss because his case was not scheduled for an adjudication hearing in accordance with OCGA § 15-11-39 a and because the length of his pre-trial detention violated his constitutional right to due process. We disagree.

A. S. was arrested and placed in detention on June 26, 2007, and he was ordered to remain in detention following a June 27, 2007 hearing. A delinquency petition charging that A. S. had committed child molestation in violation of OCGA § 16-6-4, was filed on June 29, 2007. The parties appeared in juvenile court on July 19, 2007. At the start of the hearing, the State asked that the case be continued because it had not received a forensic evaluation. A. S.’s counsel stated that she was not opposed to a continuance, adding that “we still need to get the results of the forensic evaluation before we proceed anyway.” The trial court ordered that A. S. undergo a psychosexual evaluation and required that A. S. remain in detention pending completion of the evaluation, stating that “I’m not comfortable releasing him right now into the home, especially since he did require hospitalization after having declared he was going to kill himself.” The trial court directed that the case be placed on the calender for August 16, 2007. A. S. did not object.

In the Interest of A. S.

The trial court's statement that ' "there is clear and convincing evidence" ' to adjudicate the juvenile delinquent on a charge of child molestation raised a question of whether the juvenile was deprived, to some extent, of a fair trial.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report