State v. Roberts

Citations

• 2026 Ohio 1790

Syllabus

The juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that the 15-year-old appellant was not amenable to the juvenile justice system and transferring jurisdiction to the adult court. The juvenile court considered and weighed all the required statutory factors in R.C. 2152.12(D) and (E). The juvenile court was not required to follow the recommendation of the guardian ad litem or expert opinion, which were both in favor of appellant remaining in the juvenile system. The juvenile court disagreed with the ultimate conclusions of the GAL and expert witness. The evidence presented to the juvenile court was sufficient and supported the court's conclusions by a preponderance of the evidence that appellant was not amenable to remaining in the juvenile system. Appellant was 15 years old, had a history with firearms, and was noncompliant with supervised probation for 17 months before the shooting. There was probable cause supporting the charge of attempted aggravated murder. Though the juvenile court determined that appellant was not emotionally or psychologically mature for the transfer to adult court, the factors of R.C. 2152.12(D) favoring transfer outweighed maintaining appellant in the juvenile justice system. Judgment affirmed.