## Facts

- P.M., a juvenile about 14 years and 11 months old, engaged in sexual contact with M.C., a neighbor about 8 years and 11 months old.
- P.M. kissed and hugged M.C. and rubbed his genital area against M.C.’s genital area for sexual gratification.
- M.C. initially acquiesced, then told P.M. to stop; P.M. stopped.
- The State filed a juvenile delinquency petition alleging P.M. committed conduct that would be criminal if committed by an adult: lewd and lascivious conduct upon a child under 16.
- P.M. moved to dismiss, arguing the statute was designed to protect children under 16 and therefore could not be applied to him because he was also under 16.
- The juvenile court treated the “protected class” argument as irrelevant at the delinquency stage, found the statutory elements satisfied, and emphasized the approximately six-year age gap.
- The court adjudicated P.M. delinquent and ordered participation in a sex-therapy/education program and juvenile probation.

## Issues

1. Whether a juvenile under 16 may be adjudicated delinquent based on a lewd-and-lascivious-conduct statute intended to protect children under 16, when the statute does not specify a minimum age for the actor or an age differential.
2. Whether membership in the statute’s protected class categorically bars use of the statute as the predicate offense for a delinquency adjudication.

## Decision

- The Vermont Supreme Court affirmed the delinquency adjudication.
- The court held the lewd-and-lascivious statute may serve as the predicate offense for delinquency even when the respondent is under 16.
- The court declined to read into the statute an exclusion for under-16 actors or a required age differential.
- The court relied on the statute’s text, the juvenile system’s rehabilitative purposes, and the significant age disparity indicating exploitative potential.

## Legal Principles

- A protective statute aimed at safeguarding minors may be applied in juvenile delinquency proceedings against an older minor within the protected class when the statute’s text contains no exemption for juvenile actors.
- In delinquency proceedings, the central inquiry is whether the juvenile committed an act that would be a crime if committed by an adult, within a rehabilitative framework distinct from adult criminal conviction.
- Courts generally will not add offender-age limitations or age-differential elements absent legislative direction, especially where the legislature expressly defined the victim’s age but remained silent on the actor’s age.

## Conclusion

The court concluded that Vermont’s lewd-and-lascivious-conduct statute can ground a delinquency adjudication against a juvenile under 16 for sexually motivated conduct with a substantially younger child, and that the statute’s protective purpose does not automatically immunize an older minor from accountability in the juvenile system.


In re P.M., 156 Vt. 303, 592 A.2d 862 (Vt. 1991)