Opinion
No. 59953-4-I.
April 21, 2008.
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Skagit County, No. 05-8-00514-3, Susan K. Cook, J., entered August 24, 2006.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
A.D.M. appeals his juvenile court conviction for first degree reckless burning. He contends that he was entitled to a jury trial under recent United States Supreme Court decisions and the Washington State Constitution. But our supreme court recently rejected essentially identical contentions in State v. Chavez, ___ Wn.2d ___, ___ P.3d ___, 2008 WL 732736 (Wash. Mar. 20, 2008) (juveniles charged with violent and serious violent offenses do not have a state constitutional right to a jury trial); see also State v. J.H., 96 Wn. App. 167, 978 P.2d 1121 (1999) (1997 amendments to Juvenile Justice Act did not change juvenile proceedings sufficiently to create right to jury trial); State v. Tai N., 127 Wn. App. 733, 113 P.3d 19 (2005), review denied, 156 Wn.2d 1019 (2006) (recent United States Supreme Court Sixth Amendment decisions, including Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S. Ct. 2531, 159 L. Ed. 2d 403 (2004), do not apply to juvenile proceedings).
A.D.M. also contends that his disposition must be reversed because the juvenile court failed to enter findings of fact and conclusions of law as required by JuCR 7.11(d). But the juvenile court has now entered written findings of fact and conclusions of law. The findings and conclusions are consistent with the court's oral ruling, and A.D.M. has not alleged that the findings were improperly tailored or that he suffered any other prejudice. Accordingly, the belated entry of findings under JuCR 7.11 does not warrant reversal. See State v. Smith, 82 Wn. App. 153, 167, 916 P.2d 960 (1996); State v. Moore, 70 Wn. App. 667, 671-72, 855 P.2d 306 (1993).
The juvenile court's disposition order is affirmed.