## Facts

- A nine-year-old, Cameron R. Kocher, was arrested and charged with criminal homicide in adult criminal court after the fatal shooting of seven-year-old Jessica Ann Carr.
- On a snow day, children had been at neighbors’ home; after being told to stop playing, some children went outside to ride snowmobiles while Kocher returned home.
- Kocher obtained a key to his father’s locked gun cabinet, removed a scoped hunting rifle, loaded it, opened a window, removed the screen, and pointed the rifle outside.
- The rifle discharged and struck Carr in the back, killing her; the recoil/scope struck Kocher’s forehead and left a visible wound.
- Kocher returned the rifle to the cabinet and hid the spent casing.
- Kocher petitioned to transfer the case to juvenile court under 42 Pa. C.S. § 6322(a); the trial court held multi-day hearings with competing psychiatric/psychological testimony and denied transfer.
- The trial court credited the Commonwealth’s expert testimony supporting competency and capacity for criminal responsibility over defense testimony stressing limited appreciation of consequences and asserted lack of specific intent.

## Issues

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion under 42 Pa. C.S. § 6322(a) in denying transfer of a juvenile murder prosecution from adult criminal court to juvenile court.
2. Under § 6322(a), which party bears the burden to show that transfer is warranted based on amenability to treatment and related statutory considerations.
3. Whether the trial court could resolve conflicting expert testimony and rely on offense circumstances and post-incident conduct in deciding transfer.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania affirmed the order denying transfer to juvenile court.
- The Court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in applying § 6322(a) and weighing the evidence.
- The Court accepted that the juvenile bore the burden to establish that transfer was warranted.
- The Court deferred to the trial court’s credibility determinations among competing experts and its findings regarding capacity, amenability to treatment, and public safety considerations.

## Legal Principles

- In Pennsylvania, a juvenile charged with murder is initially subject to adult criminal court jurisdiction; transfer to juvenile court under 42 Pa. C.S. § 6322(a) is discretionary.
- The juvenile seeking transfer bears the burden to demonstrate that statutory criteria favor transfer, including amenability to treatment, supervision, or rehabilitation within the juvenile system and consistency with public safety.
- Appellate review of a § 6322(a) transfer ruling is for abuse of discretion; a trial court does not abuse its discretion merely because expert testimony conflicts.
- In assessing transfer, the court may consider the nature and circumstances of the offense, the juvenile’s maturity and mental condition as found by the court, and post-offense conduct bearing on awareness of wrongdoing and risk.
- The limited duration of juvenile court jurisdiction may be considered in determining whether juvenile treatment and supervision can adequately address rehabilitative goals and public safety.

## Conclusion

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court upheld the denial of transfer of a nine-year-old’s homicide prosecution to juvenile court, ruling that § 6322(a) places the burden on the juvenile to justify transfer and that the trial court acted within its discretion in crediting the Commonwealth’s expert evidence and weighing offense seriousness, amenability to treatment, and public safety.


Commonwealth v. Kocher, 602 A.2d 1308 (Pa. 1992)