APPELLATE COURT: JUVENILE CONVICTIONS CAN NEVER BE USED AS STRIKES!
The California 6th District Court of Appeal has ruled that NO juvenile priors can be used as strike priors! (People v. Nguyen; 2007 DJ DAR 9965; DJ, 7/3/07; C/A 6th)
The Court of Appeal states that US Supreme Court case law compels this result. The Court held that the role of the jury is diminished and eroded in violation of the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments by the use of juvenile adjudications to increase the maximum punishment for an offense, in light of the U.S. Supreme Court's opinions in Apprendi and Blakely.
Initially, this California Court of Appeal held that juvenile wardship findings could not be used as strike priors unless the minor admitted the juvenile petition. They granted rehearing and ultimately decided that ALL juveniles priors must be banned for future use.
Here is what they said: "Today we hold that a juvenile adjudication is not a prior conviction within the meaning of Apprendi because the juvenile offender does not have the right to a jury trial. Therefore, a juvenile adjudication cannot be used, pursuant to the Three Strikes law, to impose on an adult a sentence in excess of the maximum sentence that could have been imposed on the basis of a trial or a defendant's admission."
Seth Flagsberg, Santa Clara Public Defender, filed and won the appeal. Now the problem is whether this will stand up if the California Supreme Court grants review?
Practice Pointer: If you're handling an adult case with juvenile strike priors, run in quickly and try to get rid of them with this opinion... before it gets vacated. Don't just assume that your clients now have a free ride, assume the worst: that we will ultimately lose this.
