Judge's refusal to certify as an adult affirmed

In my last post, I blogged about a ruling in a juvenile case, which is just as applicable in a criminal case. I wonder if a lot of juvenile cases go under my radar? (Like with states' appeals, the answer is probably). Anyway, I did a search of 2006 juvenile cases in the COA and found three related cases that I thought worth mentioning.

James T. Yoakum represented C.E., Patricia Kalb represented, B.A.M., and William Mahoney represented B.M.J., each juveniles charged in Wyandotte County with felony murder and aggravated robbery. The state sought prosecution as adults, but the district court held that the presumption in favor of prosecuting juveniles charged with such crimes had been rebutted and refused to certify (which is an appealable order). The COA affirmed in In re C.E., No. 95,623 (Kan. App. Sept. 8, 2006), and In re B.A.M., No. 95, 624 (Kan. App. Sept. 8, 2006), and In re B.M.J., No. 95,625 (Kan. App. Sept. 8, 2006), (all unpublished), holding that the evidence supported Judge Boal's decision.

What huge wins. I've had more than one juvenile client who will likely be imprisoned their entire adult lifes under a felony murder sentence for an act committed while a teenager.

Keep me up to date if there are any good juvenile cases that could impact adult criminal cases.

[Update: the state did not petition for review and the mandate issued in each of these cases on October 12, 2006].