Chapter 9: Trials in Delinquency Proceedings
In this chapter. . .
This chapter outlines the general procedural requirements for delinquency trials or “adjudicative hearings.” Section 9.1 distinguishes between delinquency adjudications and criminal convictions and contains a discussion of the common-law “infancy defense.” For discussion of demands for trial by jury or by judge, See Sections 2.18 and 7.12.
9.1Purpose and Definition of Delinquency Adjudications
The rehabilitative purpose of proceedings under the Juvenile Code is set out in MCL 712A.1(3):
“This chapter shall be liberally construed so that each juvenile coming within the court’s jurisdiction receives the care, guidance, and control, preferably in his or her own home, conducive to the juvenile’s welfare and the best interest of the state. If a juvenile is removed from the control of his or her parents, the juvenile shall be placed in care as nearly as possible equivalent to the care that should have been given to the juvenile by his or her parents.” See also MCR 3.902(B).
For purposes of delinquency proceedings, a “trial” is “the fact-finding adjudication of an authorized petition to determine if the minor comes within the jurisdiction of the court.” MCR 3.903(A)(27). To find a juvenile within the jurisdiction of the court, the factfinder must find that the juvenile has violated a criminal law or committed a civil infraction or status offense. MCL 712A.2(a)(1)-(4). See also In re Alton, 203 Mich App 405, 407 (1994) (when a criminal offense is alleged as a basis for the court’s jurisdiction, the “critical issue” is whether the juvenile violated a substantive criminal law). The verdict in a delinquency proceeding must be guilty or not guilty of the offense charged or a lesser-included offense. MCR 3.942(D).
If a juvenile is found not to be within the court’s jurisdiction (i.e., “not guilty” of the alleged offense), the court must dismiss the petition. MCL 712A.18(1). If a juvenile is found to be within the court’s jurisdiction, the court must “order the juvenile returned to his or her parent if the return of the juvenile to his or her parent would not cause a substantial risk of harm to the juvenile or society.” Id. The court may also enter any order of disposition “that [is] appropriate for the welfare of the juvenile and society in view of the facts proven and ascertained[.]” Id.1
Before the advent of the juvenile court, the common law “infancy defense” was applied to minors charged with crimes. The infancy defense consists of three presumptions regarding a minor’s capacity to form a criminal intent. If a minor is under seven years old, he or she is conclusively presumed incapable of forming a criminal intent and therefore cannot be criminally punished. Allen v United States, 150 US 551, 558 (1893). If a minor is between the ages of seven and 14, a rebuttable presumption arises that the minor is incapable of forming a criminal intent. Id. at 558. Minors over the age of 14 are conclusively presumed to have the capacity to form a criminal intent. Id.
The Michigan Supreme Court has held that a child under 7 years of age is incapable of committing a crime. Queen Ins Co v Hammond, 374 Mich 655, 657-658 (1965). However, Michigan appellate courts have not addressed the applicability of the infancy defense to criminal or delinquency proceedings.