In Re the Welfare of K.A.P.
1996 WL 330538, 1996 Minn. App. LEXIS 720, 550 N.W.2d 9 (1996)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
When a juvenile is charged with an offense that creates a statutory presumption of certification to adult court, the juvenile bears the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that retaining the case in the juvenile system serves public safety. A court may find the juvenile has failed to meet this burden if the offense is sufficiently serious and the time remaining for punishment and supervision in the juvenile system is inadequate compared to the potential adult sentence.
Facts:
- K.A.P., age 17, had an argument with Ronderiek Dewayne Skipper.
- Following the argument, K.A.P. entered his apartment building, and Skipper followed him shortly after.
- Inside his apartment, K.A.P. retrieved a kitchen knife for what he described as his own protection.
- K.A.P. heard Skipper in the hallway, opened his apartment door, and stabbed Skipper once in the chest.
- K.A.P. admitted to police that Skipper had not made a move towards him at the moment he was stabbed.
- Skipper died as a result of the stabbing.
- At the time of the stabbing, K.A.P. had two pending fifth-degree assault petitions for allegedly striking two different women.
- K.A.P. had been accepted into two residential treatment programs for serious juvenile offenders.
Procedural Posture:
- The state filed a delinquency petition against K.A.P. in juvenile court.
- The state then filed a motion to certify K.A.P. to stand trial as an adult.
- The trial court found probable cause that K.A.P. committed the offense and ordered psychological and certification studies.
- After a hearing, the trial court granted the state's motion and ordered K.A.P. certified to adult court.
- K.A.P. (appellant) appealed the trial court's certification order to the Minnesota Court of Appeals.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a trial court abuse its discretion by certifying a juvenile to stand trial as an adult when, despite favorable psychological evaluations, the court finds the juvenile failed to rebut the statutory presumption of certification due to the seriousness of the alleged murder and the inadequacy of the punishment available in the juvenile system?
Opinions:
Majority - Harold W. Schultz, Judge
No. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in ordering the certification. Under Minnesota statute, a 17-year-old charged with second-degree murder is presumed to be certified to adult court. The burden then shifts to the juvenile to prove by clear and convincing evidence that retaining the case in juvenile court serves public safety. In making this determination, courts must give greater weight to the seriousness of the offense and the juvenile's prior record. Here, the court properly weighed the extreme seriousness of murder against mitigating factors. It was not an abuse of discretion for the court to conclude that the three and one-half years of potential supervision remaining in the juvenile system was an inadequate punishment and period of supervision compared to the 306-month presumptive adult sentence, and therefore K.A.P. had failed to rebut the statutory presumption.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the high bar juveniles face in rebutting a statutory presumption of certification to adult court for serious offenses. It clarifies that even with positive psychological evaluations and availability of treatment programs, a court can find the presumption unrebutted by heavily weighing the seriousness of the crime and the perceived inadequacy of the juvenile system's timeline for punishment. The ruling validates a trial court's comparison between the short duration of juvenile jurisdiction (even as an Extended Jurisdiction Juvenile) and a lengthy presumptive adult sentence. It also affirms that courts may consider a pattern of prior, unadjudicated conduct when assessing a juvenile's overall risk to public safety.
