41
Certification
|
Before a United States Attorney may certify a juvenile to be
proceeded
against in a court of the United States, an investigation must
occur. In cases
of exclusive United States jurisdiction, the United States Attorney
should, at
a minimum, research the applicable case and statutory law. It is
also advisable
to obtain the concurrence of the local prosecutor in a finding of
exclusivity of
jurisdiction. It should be noted that local juvenile prosecution
based upon
in loco parentis jurisdiction may be available and
preferable even if the
offense took place on a federal enclave. A release to state
authorities of
juveniles who are alleged to have committed an act of juvenile
delinquency on a
United States military base or other federal enclave is not
precluded by the fact
of the enclave's "exclusive jurisdiction" status. As long as the
state is
willing to accept jurisdiction over the juvenile and has available
programs and
services adequate for the needs of juveniles, a juvenile may
properly be turned
over to the state for non-criminal juvenile treatment. When a
juvenile is
charged with committing a violation of federal law on an exclusive
jurisdiction
enclave, the United States Attorney should determine whether the
state is willing
to assume jurisdiction over the juvenile and has adequate juvenile
programs
available. Such a determination may be made on a case-by-case
basis after
consultation with the local prosecutor, or it may be based on a
general
understanding reached with the local prosecutor regarding the
state's willingness
to assume jurisdiction over juveniles who commit offenses on
federal enclaves.
As to Indian juveniles, jurisdictional questions may be directed to
Ezra Friedman
of the Office of Enforcement Operations.
In cases of concurrent jurisdiction, the appropriate local
prosecutor
should be briefed on the facts of the case, and a determination
made as to
whether he/she is accepting or refusing prosecutorial
responsibilities in the
matter. If a local prosecutor refuses to assume jurisdiction over
the juvenile,
federal prosecutors may wish to consider whether it would be
helpful to attach
a confirming letter from the local prosecutor to the certification
filed with the
court.
With regard to the adequacy of state juvenile programs and
services, the
United States Attorney should request that the Chief Probation
Officer in the
judicial district conduct periodic investigations into the state
juvenile
corrections system to determine whether there are available
programs and services
adequate for the needs of juveniles. Federal prosecutors may wish
to consider
whether it would be helpful to attach to the certification a
statement from the
probation officer addressing the adequacy of local programs.
The Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984 allows
certification for
federal juvenile prosecution in felony crimes of violence, or an
offense
described in 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(x), 924(b),(g), or (h), or 21
U.S.C.
§§ 841, 952(a), 953, 955, 959, or 960(b)(1), (2), or (3)
where there is
a "substantial federal interest in the case or offense to warrant
the exercise
of federal jurisdiction." The federal government will continue to
defer to state
authorities for less serious juvenile offenses. See S.Rep.
No. 98-225,
98th Cong., 1st Sess. 389 (1983). The determination of a
"substantial federal
interest" is based on a finding by the United States Attorney that
the nature of
the offense or the circumstances of the case give rise to federal
concerns.
Id. Examples include assault on or assassination of a
federal official;
aircraft hijacking; interstate kidnaping; espionage or sabotage
activity;
large-scale drug trafficking; and willful destruction of United
States property.
If, after investigation, any one of the above factors are
found to exist,
the United States Attorney shall proceed with the certification.
The
certification should state that an investigation was made and, as
a result of the
investigation, which of the factors allowing federal jurisdiction
was found to
exist.
[cited in USAM 9-8.230] | |