Other Cases Affecting Children

People v. Fowler (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 581 [84 Cal.Rptr.2d 874]. Court of Appeal, Fifth District.

In an adult criminal proceeding, a defendant was convicted of engaging in an act of oral copulation while confined to a detention facility. In addition, it was found true that he had suffered two prior serious felony convictions (including a juvenile rape adjudication) and that these fell under the three-strikes law of Penal Code section 667(b)–(i). As noted by the appellate court in the published portion of its opinion, the defendant appealed, claiming that the three-strikes law is unconstitutional in so far as it allows a prior juvenile adjudication to be used as a strike even though the offender was not afforded a jury trial for the juvenile adjudication.

The Court of Appeal rejected defendant’s contention, holding that an express finding of fitness is not required for a juvenile conviction to constitute a strike. The court started by reiterating the well-established distinction between juvenile wardship and adult criminal proceedings and the basis for children not receiving the due process protections afforded to adults, including the right to a jury trial. The court also noted that it is well established that a trial court can consider prior juvenile adjudications in sentencing an adult. Analyzing the three-strikes law, the court noted that applying this law to juvenile adjudications affects only the length of sentence, not the finding of guilt. Therefore, "[s]ince a juvenile constitutionally—and reliably [citation]—can be adjudicated a delinquent without being afforded a jury trial, there is no constitutional impediment to using that juvenile adjudication to increase a defendant’s sentence following a later adult conviction."