A.M. v. State, COCA Case No. J-2010-788 (January 19, 2011)
(Youthful Offender; Sentence, Abuse of Discretion) Trial court abused its
discretion in ordering sentencing as adult. Findings were that defendant could
complete rehabilitation plan and public could be protected. Reversed for
sentencing as a Youthful Offender if convicted.
A.B.H. v. State,
COCA Case No. J-2002-247 (June 5, 2002)
(State did not meet its burden of showing the public would not be adequately
protected if Appellant were sentenced as a Youthful Offender. Trial court's
order treating Appellant as adult reversed and remanded.)
Carpenter, Jeffrey Leroy v. State, COCA Case No.
RE-2006-1322 (March 18, 2008)
(Youthful Offender; Sentence, Excessive) Appellant charged as a Youthful
Offender but sentenced as an adult. Failure to sentence as a Youthful Offender
was plain error and constituted an illegal sentence. Remanded with instructions
to vacate because defendant was too old to be treated in the Youthful Offender
programs and because jeopardy had attached.
C.J. v. State, COCA Case No.
J-2004-1117 (March 2,
(Youthful Offender; Information, Defective) Defendant improperly charged in
Amended Information as an Adult for three counts of Assault/ Shooting with
Intent to Kill. Bind over order reversed with instructions to modify to show
that defendant is to be tried as a Youthful Offender.
D.H.D. v. State, COCA Case No.
J-2004-305 (June 23, 2004)
(Youthful Offender) Appellant met his burden to overcome presumption that he
should be treated as adult and to prove he should be certified as a Youthful
Offender in 1st Degree Murder case.
D.N.H. v. State,
COCA Case No.
J-2005-1078 (January 26, 2006)
(Youthful Offender) Motion to sentence defendant as an adult was not heard
before trial began, as required by statute. Remanded with instructions that
defendant be sentenced as a youthful offender
J.C.T. v. State, COCA Case No. J-2013-87
(November 22, 2013)
(Youthful Offender; Excessive Sentence) Youthful offender guilty plea received
12 year suspended sentence if did not complete treatment program. After new
charges, defendant bridged to DOC for 12 years. Appeal argued that sentence
should have remained suspended pending further charges. Sentence modified to
J. F. v. State,
J-1999-105, (Oct. 1, 1999)
(Juvenile Adjudication, Accomplice Corroboration, accomplices may not be used
to corroborate each other)
J.F.M. v. State, COCA Case No. J-2005-549
(September 2, 2005)
(Youthful Offender; Ineffective Assistance of Counsel) Counsel representing
14-year-old for first degree murder rendered ineffective assistance of counsel
for failing to have an expert prepared to assist in meeting the juvenile’s
burden of proof of amenability for treatment as Youthful Offender. Reversed for
J. F. v. State, J-1999-105, (Oct. 1, 1999)
L.M.P. v. State, COCA Case No. J-2008-02
(May 6, 2008)
(Youthful Offender) Trial court erred in ordering youth to stand trial as
adult for Murder I; she demonstrated by preponderance of evidence at trial court
that she should be treated as a youthful offender.
M. C. E. v. State, J-1998-1194, (July 16, 1999)
State v. M.H., COCA Case No. J-2008-800
(January 16, 2009)
(Youthful Offender) State failed to rebut evidence that Defendant should
receive treatment as a Youthful Offender
S.H. v. State, COCA Case No. J-2005-542
(October 25, 2005)
(Youthful Offender) State failed to present clear and convincing evidence that
Appellant would not reasonably complete the plan of rehabilitation or the public
would not be protected if the accused were to be sentenced as a youthful
offender. Order for Defendant to stand trial as adult reversed.
Tillman, Tashiro Rudy v. State,
COCA Case No. F-2001-465
(June 4, 2002)
(Youthful Offender. Record does not reflect Appellant effected a knowing
waiver of his statutory right to be sentenced under the Youthful Offender Act.
Conviction for possession of CDS AFC vacated for resentencing.)
Webb, Jason Lee v. State, COCA Case No.
RE-2010-10 (April 5, 2011)
(Revocation/Acceleration Decisions; Sentence, Excessive; Youthful Offender)
Based on State’s agreement that sentence must be modified because revocation of
five years failed to take into consideration the three years and twenty-one days
previously served as a Youthful Offender; thus only four years and forty-four
days could be revoked.