IN THE MATTER OF: Northampton County
No. 90-J-10
K.W.
Attorney General Roy A. Cooper, III, by Assistant Attorney
General Harriet F. Worley, for the State.
Ligon and Hinton, by Lemuel W. Hinton, for juvenile-appellant.
HUNTER, Judge.
Juvenile appeals from an order of Level 3 disposition by the
trial court committing him to the Department of Juvenile Justice
for placement in a training school for a period of six months.
Juvenile contends the State presented insufficient evidence that he
had four or more prior adjudications of delinquency, and that the
trial court therefore erred in finding that Level 3 disposition was
authorized. We affirm the order of the trial court.
On 12 November 2004, a juvenile petition alleging that
juvenile committed misdemeanor larceny was filed in Bertie County
District Court. On 7 December 2004, juvenile admitted to the
allegations contained in the petition, and the trial court
subsequently adjudicated him delinquent. The trial court then
transferred the case to Northampton County for purposes ofdisposition. The trial judge in Northampton County found that
juvenile had four or more previous adjudications of delinquency and
that Level 3 disposition was therefore appropriate. The trial
court entered an order accordingly. Juvenile appeals.
Juvenile argues the trial court lacked sufficient evidence to
support its finding that juvenile had been adjudicated delinquent
on four or more previous occasions.
Prior adjudications of delinquency may be proven by (1)
stipulation of the parties; (2) an original or copy of the court
record of the prior adjudication; (3) a copy of records maintained
by the Division of Criminal Information or by the Department of
Juvenile Justice; or by (4) any other method found by the court to
be reliable. See N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-2507(f) (2005). “The State
bears the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence,
that a prior adjudication exists and that the juvenile before the
court is the same person as the juvenile named in the prior
adjudication.” Id. Section 7B-2507(f) further provides in
pertinent part that:
The original or a copy of the court records or
a copy of the records maintained by the
Division of Criminal Information or of the
Department, bearing the same name as that by
which the juvenile is charged, is prima facie
evidence that the juvenile named is the same
person as the juvenile before the court, and
that the facts set out in the record are true.
For purposes of this subsection, “a copy”
includes a paper writing containing a
reproduction of a record maintained
electronically on a computer or other data
processing equipment, and a document produced
by a facsimile machine. The prosecutor shall
make all feasible efforts to obtain and
present to the court the juvenile's fullrecord. Evidence presented by either party at
trial may be utilized to prove prior
adjudications.
Id.
Dispositional hearings
may be informal, and the court may consider
written reports or other evidence concerning
the needs of the juvenile. The court may
consider any evidence, including hearsay
evidence as defined in G.S. 8C-1, Rule 801,
that the court finds to be relevant, reliable,
and necessary to determine the needs of the
juvenile and the most appropriate disposition.
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-2501(a) (2005). “'In juvenile proceedings,
trial courts may properly consider all written reports and
materials submitted in connection with said proceedings.'” In re
Ivey, 156 N.C. App. 398, 402, 576 S.E.2d 386, 390 (2003) (quoting
In re Shue, 63 N.C. App. 76, 79, 303 S.E.2d 636, 638 (1983),
modified and affirmed, 311 N.C. 586, 319 S.E.2d 567 (1984)).
Moreover, the trial court may take judicial notice of the juvenile
file before it. In re Isenhour, 101 N.C. App. 550, 553, 400 S.E.2d
71, 73 (1991).
In the present case, Clarence High, Jr., Chief Court Counselor
for the Department of Juvenile Justice (“Counselor High”),
testified on behalf of the State. Counselor High stated that his
agency had supervised juvenile since August of 2001 and that:
On July 17th of 2001, [juvenile] was
adjudicated delinquent for the offenses of
felonious breaking, entering, and larceny in
Martin County. He was dispositioned on August
21st of 2001 in Northampton County. On
January 31st of 2002, he was adjudicated
delinquent for the offense of attempted
breaking and entering in Wayne County and was
dispositioned in Northampton County onFebruary 19th of 2002. He was adjudicated
delinquent on . . . January 16th of 2003 in
Onslow County for simple affray. He was
dispositioned in Northampton County on August
19th of 2003. On February 12th of 2004, he
was adjudicated delinquent in Onslow County
for the offense of misdemeanor larceny and was
dispositioned in Northampton County on
September 21st of 2004. And then, [on the 7th
of] December of 2004, he was adjudicated
delinquent in Bertie County for the offense of
misdemeanor larceny.
Counselor High identified a copy of the predisposition report
prepared by his agency, which stated that juvenile had four prior
adjudications of delinquency. Based on juvenile's history of
delinquency, Counselor High recommended that juvenile be committed
to the Department of Juvenile Justice for placement in a Youth
Development Center.
Juvenile also testified to the existence of four prior
adjudications of delinquency. Specifically, juvenile agreed that
he had been adjudicated delinquent: (1) in Martin County in 2001
for felonious breaking and entering; (2) in Wayne County in 2002
for attempted breaking and entering; (3) in Onslow County in 2003
for simple affray; and (4) in February 2004 for misdemeanor
larceny.
At the request of the State, the trial court took judicial
notice of the contents of juvenile's court file for the purpose of
finding the dates of the previous offenses and the adjudications of
delinquency against juvenile. Juvenile's court file included
copies of three of the four prior orders of adjudication.
We conclude the State presented sufficient evidence of
juvenile's four prior adjudications of delinquency. Although thetrial court did not have a copy of juvenile's fourth adjudication
in the court file, the testimony given by juvenile, along with the
testimony by Counselor High and the predisposition report,
constituted a “reliable” method of proof of the fourth adjudication
pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-2507(f)(4).
The order of disposition of the trial court is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Judges WYNN and JACKSON concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***