Georgia Court of Appeals, 1972

J. E. v. State

Georgia Court of Appeals · Decided November 17, 1972 · Hall

127 Ga. App. 589; 194 S.E.2d 288; 1972 Ga. App. LEXIS 965

Cases that cite this one

10 later published cases cite this decision.

JWA v. State of Ga. (Ga. 1975)
J. W. A. v. State (Ga. 1975)
J. W. A. v. State (Ga. 1975)
J. W. A. v. State (Ga. Ct. App. 1974)
J. W. A. v. State (Ga. Ct. App. 1974)
Mathis v. State (Ga. 1973)
JWA v. State of Ga. (Ga. Ct. App. 1974)
State in Interest of Mc (Utah Ct. App. 1996)
In re Doe (N.M. Ct. App. 1974)
JE v. State (Ga. Ct. App. 1972)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Hall, Presiding Judge.

A person under 17 years of age appeals from an order of the juvenile court transferring to the superior court a "matter and offense” brought up by a petition alleging his delinquency. The alleged offense is a homicide.

1. The juvenile contends that since the original petition alleged an act of delinquency, the court erred in calling the act a "crime” for the purpose of transfer; that the superior court has no jurisdiction over delinquency; and therefore there was no basis for transfer at all. The contention is without merit. The Juvenile Court Code defines a delinquent act as one "designated a crime by the laws of Georgia.” Code Ann. § 24A-401 (e) (1). It ceases to be a "crime” only for proceedings in the juvenile court *590and the resultant effects of its adjudication. See Code Ann. § 24A-2401. A petition designating the act by another name does not destroy its essence so as to preclude legitimate proceedings elsewhere.

Submitted November 7, 1972 Decided November 17, 1972. Robert J. Evans, for appellant. F. Larry Salmon, District Attorney, Robert D. Engelhart, for appellee.

2. The juvenile contends the court erred in failing to comply with the requirements of Code Ann. § 24A-2501 concerning transfer. We agree that the record shows the court did not make the necessary determinations. However, the record also shows that the child has been indicted by a Grand Jury for murder. The superior court has constitutional jurisdiction to try a person accused of a felony if he has reached the age of criminal responsibility. Nothing in the Juvenile Court Code or in the proceedings of a juvenile court can abrogate this jurisdiction. See Code Ann. § 2-3901; Jackson v. Balkcom, 210 Ga. 412 (80 SE2d 319); Armstrong v. State, 90 Ga. App. 173 (82 SE2d 51). Therefore, a reversal of the juvenile court for erroneous transfer would be a useless act since the superior court has independently exercised its constitutional jurisdiction in receiving the indictment for trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Pannell and Quillian, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.