In the Interest of J. N. B

8 Citing cases

  1. In re Interest of D. M

    299 Ga. App. 586 (Ga. Ct. App. 2009)   Cited 7 times
    Holding that the record supported the juvenile court's conclusion that the community's interest in a transfer outweighed the child's interest in remaining in the juvenile court when, inter alia, the escalating nature of the criminal conduct authorized a finding that the child posed a serious threat to the community

    Faced with this evidence, we cannot say that the juvenile court abused its discretion in concluding that D. M. was not amenable to treatment in the juvenile court. See In the Interest of J. N. B., 263 Ga. 600, 600-601 (1) ( 436 SE2d 202) (1993) (finding of non-amenability supported by juvenile court's conclusion that the juvenile system did not have the resources to provide the child the appropriate treatment for the necessary period of time); In the Interest of W. N. J., 268 Ga. App. 637, 640-641 (2) ( 602 SE2d 173) (2004) (child determined non-amenable to treatment based in part upon the repetition of her reckless behavior despite her involvement in the juvenile court); In the Interest of K. S. K., 216 Ga. App. 257, 259 (2) ( 454 SE2d 165) (1995) (non-amenability based upon the child's "habitual acts of delinquency"). We agree that D. M.'s performance in school is honorable and strongly encourage him to continue along that path.

  2. In the Interest of J. D

    452 S.E.2d 105 (Ga. 1995)   Cited 2 times

    In the Interest of J. H., 260 Ga. 447, 449 ( 396 S.E.2d 885) (1990). Whether the child is amenable to treatment in the juvenile system is a factor to consider in balancing the interests of the child and community. Inthe Interest of J. N. B., 263 Ga. 600 ( 436 S.E.2d 202) (1993). The state is not required to show, nor is the transfer order required to explain, why the child is not amenable to treatment when that factor is not relied on as the basis for the transfer.

  3. In re D. C

    303 Ga. App. 395 (Ga. Ct. App. 2010)   Cited 8 times

    2 (a) (3) (C) may be met solely through evidence establishing the number and severity of the crimes committed by the juvenile, the juvenile court may still consider the severity of the offenses committed when determining the weight of the community's interests in having a juvenile transferred to superior court. In the Interest of J. N. B., 263 Ga. 600, 601 (2) ( 436 SE2d 202) (1993). Further, in this case, the record shows that the State presented substantial evidence in addition to evidence showing that D. C. and his fellow gang members shot randomly into a large crowd and wounded five innocent bystanders. For example, the evidence showed that the offenses presented a significant risk of serious injury to numerous other innocent bystanders, many of them juveniles; that adult gang members participated in the crimes; that D. C. was a member of the offending gang; that the gang specifically targeted the party because of an earlier altercation involving D. C. and because of the neighborhood's alleged association with a rival gang; that D. C. actively participated in the crimes as an instigator, coordinator, and shooter; and that gang activity in Newton County has increased significantly in the last few years.

  4. In re Interest of C. G

    291 Ga. App. 743 (Ga. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 1 times

    2 (a) (3) were met, which C. G. has not challenged, the superior court was authorized to exercise jurisdiction over the matter. In the Interest of J. N. B., 263 Ga. 600 (1) ( 436 SE2d 202) (1993); In the Interest of J. H., 260 Ga. 447, 449 (1) ( 396 SE2d 885) (1990); In theInterest of S. K. K., 280 Ga. App. 877, 878-880 (1), (2) ( 635 SE2d 263) (2006). 2. C. G. contends that, because the case had been transferred from the superior court to the juvenile court, the doctrine of res judicata prohibited the subsequent transfer of the case from the juvenile court back to the superior court. Pretermitting whether the doctrines of res judicata or collateral estoppel apply in this context, the record establishes that the only issue that was necessarily determined when the superior court transferred the matter to the juvenile court was that transfer was required under OCGA ยง 15-11-30.

  5. In the Interest of S. K

    280 Ga. App. 877 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 7 times

    Accordingly, the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in ordering the transfers.In the Interest of J. N. B., 263 Ga. 600, 600-601 (1) ( 436 SE2d 202) (1993) (transfer to superior court proper based upon juvenile court's conclusion that child could not receive appropriate treatment in a secure juvenile facility for the necessary period of time); see also In the Interest of D. W. B., supra at 663 (3). See In the Interest of J. B. H., 241 Ga. App. 736, 739 (2) ( 527 SE2d 18) (2000).

  6. In the Interest of R.T

    628 S.E.2d 662 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006)

    "Therefore, the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in ordering transfer." In the Interest of J.N.B., 263 Ga. 600, 601 (1) ( 436 SE2d 202) (1993) (transfer warranted because juvenile court concluded appropriate treatment in secure facility not available). "Unless otherwise provided by law, when a child who has been adjudicated as delinquent or unruly reaches 21 years of age all orders affecting him or her then in force terminate and he or she is discharged from further obligation or control."

  7. In the Interest of D.W.B

    259 Ga. App. 662 (Ga. Ct. App. 2003)   Cited 5 times

    Whether the child is amenable to treatment in the juvenile justice system is a factor to consider in balancing the interests of the child and community . In the Interest of J. N. B., 263 Ga. 600 ( 436 S.E.2d 202) (1993). The state is not required to show, nor is the transfer order required to explain why the child is not amenable to treatment when that factor is not relied on as the basis for the transfer order.

  8. In the Interest of A. F

    448 S.E.2d 11 (Ga. Ct. App. 1994)   Cited 3 times

    In fact, "[a] juvenile court may, but is not required, to consider the severity of the crimes committed when determining the weight to be given the community's interest in trying a juvenile in superior court." In the Interest of J. N. B., 263 Ga. 600, 601 (2) ( 436 S.E.2d 202). "The juvenile court properly relied on the heinous nature of the offense[s] in determining that the community's interest in treating [appellant] as an adult outweighed [appellant's] interest in being treated in the juvenile system." In the Interest of J. H., 260 Ga. 447, 449 (1) ( 396 S.E.2d 885); M. M., supra at 640 (3).