Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:T.A.W. was born on Aug. 22, 1986. On April 15, 2001, the date of the alleged offense, T.A.W. was 14 years old. The state filed its petition alleging delinquent conduct on May 21, 2004, when T.A.W. was 17 years old. T.A.W.’s delinquency trial began in March 2005, when he was 18 years old. A jury found that appellant committed aggravated sexual assault and sentenced him to commitment at the Texas Youth Commission with a transfer to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) for a term of 14 years. In its charge, the trial court presented the jury with the following question (question two): “Do you find by a preponderance of the evidence that the Juvenile Respondent, [T.A.W.], in the Juvenile Respondent’s home, cannot be provided the quality of care and level of support and supervision that the Juvenile Respondent needs to meet the conditions of probation?” The jury answered: “We do not.” T.A.W. appealed his conviction for delinquent conduct on the grounds that: 1. the trial court lost jurisdiction over the case when T.A.W. turned 18; and 2. the jury’s finding in favor of probation supercedes its conflicting finding of commitment to the Texas Youth Commission. HOLDING:Affirmed. A juvenile court, the court stated, has exclusive, original jurisdiction over all proceedings involving a person who has engaged in delinquent conduct as a result of acts committed before the age of 17. Although a juvenile court does not lose jurisdiction when a juvenile turns 18, such jurisdiction is generally limited to either transferring the case under Texas Family Code �54.02(j) or dismissing the case. A person charged with juvenile delinquency who reaches the age of majority must raise the objection at the adjudication hearing. A person who does not so object waives any right to object on that ground at a later hearing or on appeal. In this case, the court stated, T.A.W. made no objection to the jurisdiction of the trial court over him, and therefore waived that point of error. T.A.W. then argued that the jury in its answer to question two made a finding of probation that superseded the jury’s finding that committed T.A.W. to TYC for 14 years, because it was a finding that T.A.W.’s home was an appropriate place to meet the conditions of probation. The court found, however, that the juvenile court’s charge on disposition authorized the jury to either sentence T.A.W. to commitment in the TYC or to place him on probation. An affirmative response to question two, the court stated, would have been required in order for the jury to place T.A.W. on probation outside his home, but was not a decision whether to place him on probation. The court found that the jury’s answer to question two was not dispositive, because it related only to a choice between probation inside the home versus probation outside the home. The court found the question did not apply to the choice between probation and TYC commitment. If probation is found to be wholly inappropriate, the court stated that the fact that probation could have been provided in T.A.W.’s home is immaterial. OPINION:Edelman, J.; Anderson, Edelman and Frost, J.J.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.