In re K. G.
| Docket Number: | 2004-CA-01797-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 06-05-2007 Opinion Author: ISHEE, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Adjudication of delinquency - Adjudicatory hearing - Section 43-21-557 - Sufficiency of evidence - Section 43-21-603(3)(a) - Ineffective assistance of counsel Judge(s) Concurring: LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., GRIFFIS, BARNES, ROBERTS AND CARLTON, JJ. Dissenting Author : IRVING, J. Dissent Joined By : KING, C.J. AND CHANDLER, J. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - JUVENILE JUSTICE |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 07-27-2004 Appealed from: Holmes County Youth Court Judge: James Robert Gilfoy, IV Disposition: MINOR CHILD FOUND TO BE A DELINQUENT CHILD AND COMMITTED TO TRAINING SCHOOL. Case Number: 26YC04 D0072 0099 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | IN THE INTEREST OF K. G., A MINOR |
JENNIFER ALICIA COLLINS |
||
| Appellee: | Unknown | JOHN M. GILMORE |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Adjudication of delinquency - Adjudicatory hearing - Section 43-21-557 - Sufficiency of evidence - Section 43-21-603(3)(a) - Ineffective assistance of counsel |
| Summary of the Facts: | K. G. was adjudicated to be a delinquent child. K. G. was committed to the Columbia Training School and was placed on probation until her eighteenth birthday. K. G. appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Adjudicatory hearing K. G. argues that the court failed to follow the provisions of section 43-21-557 which mandates that, at the beginning of each adjudicatory hearing, the youth court must inform the parties of the purpose of the hearing, the possible dispositions that may result, and that they have the right to counsel, the right to remain silent, the right to subpoena witnesses, the right to cross-examine adverse witnesses, as well as the right to appeal. The record shows that the youth court failed to inform the parties of the purpose of the hearing and the possible dispositions that may result. The youth court further failed to inform K. G. that she had the following rights: the right to counsel, the right to remain silent, the right to subpoena witnesses, the right to cross-examine adverse witnesses, and the right to appeal. Even though the youth court clearly failed to follow the mandates of section 43-21-557, K. G. has failed to demonstrate any resulting prejudice or unfairness in the proceeding. She was represented at the adjudicatory hearing by her appointed counsel, and K. G. and her mother were served with a summons informing them that K. G. was being charged with the simple assault and that K.G. had the right to be represented by counsel and to subpoena witnesses. Therefore, the error was harmless. K. G. also argues that the youth court erred in its failure to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that K. G. committed a delinquent act. During her testimony at the adjudicatory hearing, K. G. admitted that she pushed the desk in front of her teacher. K. G. never claimed that her actions were accidents or that she did not mean to injure the teacher. Given K.G.’s own admission, there is no merit to her claim that her delinquency was not established beyond a reasonable doubt. She also argues that the youth court erred by failing to consider factors set forth in section 43-21-603(3)(a). The record does not support her claim. Issue 2: Ineffective assistance of counsel K. G. argues that she received ineffective assistance of counsel because her attorney did not file any pretrial motions, or subpoena witnesses, or compel or exclude production of evidence. However, K. G. fails to establish that the result of the proceeding would have been different if he had done so. K. G. has failed to overcome the rebuttable presumption that an attorney’s performance falls within a wide range of reasonable professional assistance. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
