A child advocacy group is eyeing legislation to expand judges’ say on where to try a minor — whether in juvenile or adult court.
The Children’s Action Alliance says it wants to build on gains made last session, when the Legislature passed and the governor signed a bill permitting youngsters accused of certain non-violent sexual offenses to avoid trial in an adult court.
A major provision of the new law states that if a juvenile is being prosecuted as an adult, the defendant can ask the court to hold a hearing to determine if jurisdiction should be transferred to a juvenile court. The court must also hold a hearing if the offense was committed more than a year before the date that criminal charges were filed. The court can also initiate such a hearing on its own.
Beth Rosenberg of alliance said her group wants this concept, called reverse remand, to apply to other cases involving a juvenile.
“Certainly, when we discussed the issue of reverse remand with the Legislature last year, we would like that to be available to many more youth who are being sent to the adult court by county attorneys for other offenses, not just sexual offenses,” Rosenberg said such legislation is an option for her group next session.
It could be a tough sell, she said, because there is resistance to the idea of easing penalties for sexual offenses. She summed up a prevailing view this way: “We all think that protecting the community means locking people up.”
In 1996, Arizona voters amended the state Constitution to permit defendants who are 15 years or older to be tried as adults if accused of certain violent crimes, such as murder, rape or armed robbery. The Legislature subsequently gave county attorneys the discretion to prosecute as adults defendants as young as 14 who are accused of a certain felony offenses.
That included consensual sex between youths.
Yet research has shown that recidivism rates are lower for youths who are treated in the juvenile justice system than those who go through the adult criminal justice system, the group said; hence, the push to transfer young offenders to the juvenile justice system.  
The group might have a sympathetic ear in Sen. Karen Johnson, R-18, who authored S1628, the new law on youthful sexual offenders.   
“I think that that option should be there,” Johnson said, referring to reverse remand. “I mean hopefully, the judges would have enough wisdom to say well, ‘Hey, no, this is a bad kid,’ or, ‘You know, I think that this kid has some real possibilities down the road. Let’s help him get some help.’ ”
Johnson added, however, she does not want to minimize offenses committed by youngsters. But there could be mitigating circumstances that could affect how judges rule, she said.  
Rosenberg’s group said the passage of S1628 was a “significant victory because it does open the knowledge base of legislators and the community that our adult system does not necessarily work for treating juveniles.”
Johnson said she was surprised to learn that few legislators had any idea that a youth found guilty of minor sexual offenses ends up in therapy classes with adults who are “hard core perverts.” One provision of S1628 is to require young sex offenders to be placed in a treatment program if group treatment is prescribed for peers with similar offenses. The treatment must also comply with certain ethical requirements and not include the use of obscene images, the law states.
“When that was made known to them, and they understood that, the resistance just went away,” Johnson said. “I don’t know that there was any legislator that didn’t agree that their therapy should be different and geared to them and their age group as opposed to putting them in with older people.”
S1628 received unanimous votes in both houses.