## Facts

- J.C.N.-V. was 13 years and eight months old when he participated in a violent robbery and murder.
- Because of his age, the matter began in the exclusive jurisdiction of the juvenile court.
- The state petitioned for discretionary waiver to adult (circuit) court under ORS 419C.352.
- At the waiver hearing, experts testified that J.C.N.-V. had only average sophistication and maturity for his age.
- Experts also testified more generally that 13-year-olds have limited abstract reasoning and may have reduced ability to experience or express empathy and remorse compared with older adolescents and adults.
- Evidence showed J.C.N.-V. had a history of violent behavior beginning around age nine.
- Evidence was also introduced that J.C.N.-V. was amenable to treatment.
- The juvenile court considered that juvenile-court treatment and supervision generally extend only until age 25, while adult-court supervision and services can continue beyond that age.
- The juvenile court granted the state’s petition, finding J.C.N.-V. had average to above-average maturity for his age and understood his actions and their consequences, and concluding waiver served the best interests of the youth and society.
- J.C.N.-V. appealed; the Court of Appeals affirmed, rejecting his argument that ORS 419C.349(3) requires above-average maturity for a 12- to 14-year-old.
- The Oregon Supreme Court allowed review.

## Issues

1. Under ORS 419C.349(3), must the state prove that a 12- to 14-year-old has greater sophistication and maturity than a typically developing youth of that age to permit waiver, or is it enough to show the youth had sufficient sophistication and maturity (even if “average”) to appreciate the nature and quality of the conduct?
2. Did the juvenile court apply ORS 419C.349(3) correctly in finding that J.C.N.-V. met the statute’s threshold requirement and could therefore be considered for waiver under the remaining statutory factors?

## Decision

- The Oregon Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals and the juvenile court’s waiver judgment.
- The court held ORS 419C.349(3) does not require proof that a youth’s sophistication and maturity exceed that of an average 12- to 14-year-old.
- The court treated ORS 419C.349(3) as a threshold mental-capacity finding; once satisfied, the juvenile court may weigh the additional ORS 419C.349(4) factors to decide whether waiver serves the best interests of the youth and society.

## Legal Principles

- ORS 419C.349(3) requires a predicate finding that, at the time of the alleged act, the youth had sufficient sophistication and maturity to appreciate the nature and quality of the conduct involved.
- The statute does not impose an “above-average maturity” requirement for youths ages 12 to 14; “sufficient” may be shown even when the youth’s development is described as average for age.
- “Appreciate the nature and quality of the conduct involved” functions as a capacity screen focused on whether the youth could understand what he was doing and grasp the meaning of that conduct, including its wrongfulness and foreseeable consequences, without demanding adult-like abstract reasoning.
- After the ORS 419C.349(3) threshold is met, ORS 419C.349(4) directs the court to evaluate broader considerations (including public safety and the youth’s treatment needs) to decide whether retaining juvenile jurisdiction is justified.
- In applying ORS 419C.349(4), the court may consider the practical limits of juvenile-court jurisdiction (including that it generally ends at age 25) as part of deciding whether waiver better serves the interests of the youth and society.

## Conclusion

In the Matter of J.C.N.-V. holds that discretionary waiver under Oregon law does not depend on showing that a 12- to 14-year-old is unusually mature; instead, the juvenile court must first find the youth had sufficient sophistication and maturity to appreciate the nature and quality of the charged conduct, and then determine—based on the remaining statutory factors—whether adult-court prosecution better serves the interests of the youth and society; applying that framework, the Oregon Supreme Court affirmed the waiver of J.C.N.-V. into adult court.


In the Matter of J.C.N.-V., 380 P.3d 248 (2016)