Carroll v. State

Terry Lynn CARROLL v. STATE of Arkansas

96-650                                             ___ S.W.2d ___

                    Supreme Court of Arkansas
               Opinion delivered November 18, 1996


1.   Juveniles -- juvenile transfer -- factors to be considered. --
     The factors to be considered in ruling on a juvenile-
     transfer motion are set forth in Ark. Code Ann.  9-27-318
     (Supp. 1995), which provides that, in making the decision to
     retain jurisdiction or to transfer the case, the court must
     consider the seriousness of the offense, and whether violence
     was employed by the juvenile in the commission of the offense;
     whether the offense is part of a repetitive pattern of
     adjudicated offenses that would lead to the determination that
     the juvenile is beyond rehabilitation under existing
     rehabilitation programs, as evidenced by past efforts to treat
     and rehabilitate the juvenile and the response to such
     efforts; and the prior history, character traits, mental
     maturity, and any other factor that reflects upon the
     juvenile's prospects for rehabilitation.

2.   Juveniles -- juvenile transfer -- serious and violent nature
     of offense is sufficient basis for denying motion. -- The
     trial court is not required to give equal weight to each of
     the statutory factors pertaining to juvenile-transfer motions;
     the serious and violent nature of an offense is a sufficient
     basis for denying a motion to transfer and trying a juvenile
     as an adult.

3.   Juveniles -- juvenile transfer -- information alone will
     support order denying motion. -- The information alone is
     sufficient evidence of the serious and violent nature of the
     crime to support an order denying the motion to transfer.

4.   Juveniles -- juvenile transfer -- strong evidence of extreme
     violence presented -- trial court did not err in denying
     motion. -- The supreme court does not reverse a decision
     overruling a motion to transfer unless the decision was
     clearly erroneous; aggravated robbery, Ark. Code Ann.  5-12-
     103 (Supp. 1995), is a class Y felony, a serious offense;
     under the circumstances presented, including strong evidence
     of extreme violence, the trial court did not err in denying
     the juvenile-transfer motion.


     Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court; John Langston, Judge;
affirmed.
     William R. Simpson, Jr., Public Defender, by:  C. Joseph
Cordi, Jr., Deputy Public Defender, for appellant.
     Winston Bryant, Att'y Gen., by:  Vada Berger, Asst. Att'y
Gen., for appellee.

     David Newbern, Justice.
     Terry Lynn Carroll appeals from an order of the Pulaski
Circuit Court overruling his motion to transfer charges against him
to the Juvenile Division of the Chancery Court.  Mr. Carroll was
charged with aggravated robbery and theft of property.  The
information accused Mr. Carroll and an accomplice of using a
shotgun to take property valued in excess of $200 from the victim,
Willie Chism, on May 25, 1995, when Mr. Carroll was sixteen years
old.
     The State opposed the transfer motion on the ground that three
counts of capital murder were pending against Mr. Carroll and the
crime charged here was serious and involved an act of violence.
     At a hearing on the motion, Mr. Carroll presented testimony by
his grandmother, who had raised him, to the effect that he had been
well behaved but got "off track" with friends in junior high
school.  He also presented evidence of intelligence and
psychological testing which apparently had occurred in connection
with the other charges pending.  The essence of the reports was
that Mr. Carroll was functioning at a rather low level of
intelligence but was not retarded and suffered no other mental
disease or defect.
     The State presented testimony of a detective with the Little
Rock Police Department who said Mr. Carroll admitted that he
pointed a shotgun at Mr. Chism and another person, "racked the
slide on the shotgun," and demanded keys in order to steal an
automobile.  
     Another LRPD detective testified that an investigation he
conducted led to Mr. Carroll being charged with three counts of
capital murder.  Mr. Carroll allegedly entered a residence armed
with a shotgun where he held the mother of three children at bay
while accomplices killed the children.
     While we do not discount Mr. Carroll's argument that the
evidence indicated he might be a prospect for rehabilitation, we
cannot say the Trial Court erred in overruling his motion.  The
factors to be considered in ruling on such a motion are set forth
in Ark. Code Ann.  9-27-318(b) (Supp. 1995), which provides:

     (b) A circuit court and a juvenile court have concurrent
     jurisdiction and a prosecuting attorney may charge a
     juvenile in either court when a case involves a juvenile:
     (1) At least sixteen (16) years old when he engages in
     conduct that, if committed by an adult, would be any
     felony;
                             * * * 
     (d) In making the decision to retain jurisdiction or to
     transfer the case, the court shall consider the following
     factors:
     (1) The seriousness of the offense, and whether violence
     was employed by the juvenile in the commission of the
     offense;
     (2) Whether the offense is part of a repetitive pattern
     of adjudicated offenses which would lead to the
     determination that the juvenile is beyond rehabilitation
     under existing rehabilitation programs, as evidenced by
     past efforts to treat and rehabilitate the juvenile and
     the response to such efforts; and
     (3) The prior history, character traits, mental maturity,
     and any other factor which reflects upon the juvenile's
     prospects for rehabilitation.

     The Trial Court is not required to give equal weight to each
of the factors.  Brooks v. State, 326 Ark. 201, ___ S.W.2d ___
(1996);  Ring v. State, 320 Ark. 128, 894 S.W.2d 944 (1995).  The
serious and violent nature of an offense is a sufficient basis for
denying a motion to transfer and trying a juvenile as an adult. 
Sims v. State, 320 Ark. 528, 900 S.W.2d 508 (1995);  Holland v.
State, 311 Ark. 494, 844 S.W.2d 943 (1993).  
     The information alone is sufficient evidence of the serious
and violent nature of the crime to support an order denying the
motion to transfer.  Lammers v. State, 324 Ark. 222, 920 S.W.2d 7
(1996);  Cole v. State, 323 Ark. 136, 913 S.W.2d 779 (1996).
     We do not reverse a decision overruling a motion to transfer,
such as the one considered here, unless the decision was clearly
erroneous.  Ring v. State, 320 Ark. 128, 894 S.W.2d 944 (1995);
Vickers v. State,  307 Ark. 298, 819 S.W.2d 13 (1991).  Aggravated
robbery, Ark. Code Ann.  5-12-103 (Supp. 1995), is a class Y
felony, a serious offense.  In the circumstances presented,
including strong evidence of extreme violence, the Trial Court did
not err.
     Affirmed.
     Roaf, J., concurs.