When your child is dragged into the California legal system, panic, confusion, and anxiety of the unknown may leave you stranded. There is the juvenile justice system, which California has utilized for many years, with the primary aim of rehabilitation rather than punishment. Conversely, the adult criminal court is much more punitive and unforgiving. The distinction between these two systems is not simply procedural, which can shape your child's future.

The California juvenile system maintains that juveniles are not fully developed, but with the proper interventions, they can be transformed. In some cases of serious offenses, however, the law allows prosecutors to request the transfer of minors to adult court, subjecting them to more severe punishment and a criminal record that will follow them throughout their lives. In the article below, you learn about these distinct instances: age, serious crime commission, and transfer hearing.

The Age at Which Minors Can Be Tried as Adults in California

In juvenile court, children under 18 are usually handled in a system that rehabilitates and redirects them. However, when the crime is severe enough, the law creates an exception and allows prosecutors to request a transfer for minors 16 or 17 years old when the crime was committed.

This implies that when your child is between 16 and 17, they can be subjected to a transfer hearing to decide whether the adult court should take jurisdiction. The law offers far more, almost absolute, protection against being tried as an adult to children under 16.

This protection was entrenched in 2018 when California enacted Senate Bill 1391, which became law in 2019. This bill was a groundbreaking reform that directly challenged past decades' "tough on crime" policies. It barred prosecutors in any circumstances, regardless of the severity of the offense, from seeking the transfer of 14- and 15-year-olds into adult criminal court. There are only narrow exceptions, which include rare instances where the minor committed a qualifying offense at 14 or 15 years of age but was not caught until after their 18th birthday.

The logic of SB 1391 is firmly embedded in contemporary developmental science. Neurological and psychological studies have overwhelmingly demonstrated that young teenagers lack the maturity, impulse control, and judgment of older adolescents and adults. The prefrontal cortex, the brain region involved in executive functions, such as long-term planning, risk assessment, and moderation of social behavior, does not reach full maturity until the mid-20s.

Teenagers are thus more vulnerable to peer pressure, more prone to impulsivity, and less able to understand the long-term effects of their actions. More importantly, their brains are also more plastic, i.e., more prone to change and rehabilitation. The California Legislature acknowledged this scientific consensus and stated that justice and the safety of the community are best served by retaining these younger teens within the juvenile system, where education, therapy, and actual rehabilitation are the focus of the mission.

If your child was under 16 when the alleged offense occurred, you can experience a deep sense of relief because the specter of adult prison is no longer on the table, courtesy of SB 1391. However, when your child is 16 or 17, the threat of transfer is very real, and this is where the process becomes particularly critical. The necessity of professional advocacy comes to the fore.

Juvenile Transfer Hearing Process

When your child is 16 or 17 and is accused of a serious crime, the prosecutor can request what is known as a juvenile transfer hearing, or fitness hearing. This hearing is not a trial to ascertain guilt or innocence. Instead, it decides if your minor navigates the juvenile court system or is sent to adult criminal court. It is the most significant hearing in the case of your child because the result of this hearing will determine the rules, stakes, and possible outcomes of everything that will follow.

It starts with the prosecutor formally motioning the court to seek the transfer. At that stage, the juvenile court judge has to set a hearing during which the prosecution and the defense can provide evidence, summon witnesses, and argue the case legally. The judge is then left to balance a set of legally defined factors to determine whether the minor fits the rehabilitative emphasis of the juvenile system or whether the case is so severe that the adult criminal court is the more suitable place.

The statute that governs this hearing is Welfare and Institutions Code 707. This act provides five factors the judge should consider and clearly state on the record when ruling. A judge cannot simply have a gut feeling; they must explain how their decision is made based on an analysis of this evidence.

The five factors include:

  1. The Degree Of Minor's Criminal Sophistication

This aspect compels the judge to dig deeper into the apparent crime and examine the extent of planning, preparation, and execution of the minor. Was the crime a spur-of-the-moment, ill-conceived act, or was it a planned crime that demonstrated a maturity and sophistication beyond the minor's age?

A prosecutor could claim that by turning off a security system, one can show that he is sophisticated. Meanwhile, a defense lawyer would point to the signs of immaturity, including the absence of an escape plan or being under the guidance of an older person.

  1. The Possibility Of Rehabilitation Before The Expiry Of The Jurisdiction Of The Juvenile System

The juvenile court's jurisdiction over a minor usually ceases at 25. This factor inquires whether there is sufficient time between the current time and the 25th birthday of the minor to allow the rehabilitative programs of the juvenile system to make a significant impact.

The prosecutor may state that a 17-year-old who committed a heinous crime can never be rehabilitated within a few years. A competent defense counsel will provide a detailed rehabilitation plan, with testimony of psychologists on the amenability of the minor to treatment and particular programs that can help the minor with their underlying problems.

  1. The Previous Delinquent Record Of The Minor

The judge will also examine the history of minors in the juvenile justice system. A juvenile with no record is much better off than one with a lengthy and increasing delinquency record. The prosecutor will present a long history to prove that the minor is not rehabilitable and that previous efforts have failed.

The role of a defense attorney is to put things in perspective. Maybe the earlier crimes were petty and connected to an unstable home life or unrecognized trauma. The defense can state that these previous problems were never adequately resolved.

  1. The Effectiveness Of The Earlier Rehabilitation Efforts

This aspect is directly connected with the previous history of the minor, but is more specific regarding the results of the earlier interventions. Were the minor already on probation or in a group home? Did they improve or worsen?

The prosecution will use any previous failures as evidence that rehabilitation is pointless. The defense should be ready to refute this story by claiming that the earlier programs provided were insufficient or unsuitable to the child's particular needs. This does not imply that the child cannot change, but that the system failed the child.

  1. The Situation And Severity Of The Crime

This is usually the most weighted factor. The judge should take into consideration the gravity of the supposed crime, the degree of violence, and the degree of damage done to the victims. Did a weapon come into play? Was the victim especially susceptible?

The prosecutor will concentrate on the most harmful aspects of the crime to claim that the crime is just too severe to be handled by the juvenile system. The defense does not aim to justify the crime but rather to place the minor in context and point out mitigating circumstances, such as peer influence or intimidation.

This hearing is not a formality. It is an out-and-out evidentiary contest, and the judge must decide the case on clear and convincing evidence. A parent should realize that their child's attorney is also critical in this case because they will collect school records, schedule psychological tests, and find character witnesses. An effective defense can convince the court that, though the charge is serious, the child should be given the opportunity of rehabilitation that can only be offered by the juvenile system.

Severe Crimes Which May Result in Adult Court Under WIC 707(b)

Not all crimes, or even all felonies, qualify a child to be subject to a transfer hearing. The California law restricts such hearings to a list of serious and violent crimes as listed in Welfare and Institutions Code 707(b). Such are the crimes that the legislature has considered to be of so serious a character as to justify their being regarded as prosecution in the adult courts, even though committed by a 16- or 17-year-old.

The WIC 707(b) offenses are:

  • Murder and attempted murder

  • Arson that causes serious physical harm

  • Robbery, particularly when a dangerous or deadly weapon is used

  • Forcible rape and other serious sex offenses

  • Kidnapping for ransom or robbery

  • Carjacking, particularly when a firearm is used

  • Torture

  • Assault with a firearm or using force likely to cause great bodily injury

  • Voluntary manslaughter

  • Any felony committed in furtherance of a criminal street gang

The Legislature has singled out these crimes in particular due to the high level of violence, a significant risk to the safety of the population, or a significant lack of respect for human life. When your 16- or 17-year-old child is accused of these crimes, the prosecutor can file a motion to transfer the hearing.

It is necessary to know that before the enactment of Proposition 57 in 2016, a charge of one of these offenses would tend to give rise to a "presumption" that the minor was not fit to be tried in juvenile court. This implied that it was the responsibility of the defense to show that the child ought to remain in the juvenile system.

The current situation is that the prosecutor has to prove that the child is unfit for the juvenile system. This decisive change emphasised the child's ability to be rehabilitated instead of the offense itself. Nevertheless, the seriousness of the offense is a strong element, and a WIC 707(b) charge is the key that opens the door to a transfer hearing.

California Law Changes on Juvenile Transfers

The legal environment of juvenile transfers in California has been subject to a succession of radical changes in the last few decades, as society has struggled to find a way to balance accountability, community safety, and the possibility of rehabilitating the youth. To comprehend the existing rules, viewing them as the most recent episode of a long-term and developing narrative is critical.

The pendulum returned very hard to punishment in 2000, when voters passed Proposition 21. This resulted from the tough-on-crime 1990s, which was driven by the fear of the people that juvenile crime rates were increasing. Proposition 21 radically increased the discretion of prosecutors by allowing them to file some juvenile offenders in adult court directly.

This implied that a prosecutor could unilaterally choose to prosecute a minor as an adult without the review, approval, or a fitness hearing by a judge. The judges' discretion was eliminated, and the elected district attorneys were given enormous power.

This process sent thousands of minors to adult court over sixteen years. By the 2010s, however, an emerging body of research on adolescent brain science, combined with the high costs and low results of adult incarceration of youth, resulted in a potent reform movement.

This movement peaked in 2016 when Proposition 57, a landmark initiative, was passed, which changed the system entirely. Proposition 57 overturned the direct filing practice conclusively. It provided that a juvenile court judge hold a fitness hearing and make the final determination before any minor could be tried as an adult.

This reform reinstated judges as the impartial decision-makers so that each child would have their case evaluated individually according to the five fitness factors. Proposition 57 was a major philosophical change in the direction of automatic punishment and returning to judicial control and rehabilitation.

Riding on this momentum, the Legislature enacted Senate Bill 1391 in 2018. As mentioned above, this law made the next logical step to increase the minimum transfer age to 16 in nearly all cases. This reform was a direct recognition that 14- and 15-year-olds are too young and not developed enough to face the adult criminal justice system. SB 1391 was challenged in court but affirmed by the California Supreme Court, cementing its status as a pillar of the state's modern philosophy of juvenile justice.

Such legislative developments are part of a continuing transformation in how California perceives juvenile justice. The state has shifted more and more towards a more evidence-based approach to the problem and has abandoned the punitive policies of the past in favor of the realization that children are not adults and that a chance at rehabilitation is beneficial to both the child and society at large.

Juvenile Court vs. Adult Court Sentencing

The result of the transfer hearing is life-changing since the two systems are in completely different worlds with very different objectives and outcomes.

When your child is tried and sentenced in adult court, it is all about punishment and incapacitation. The possible harsh sentences may comprise decades of imprisonment in a state prison or even a life sentence. Your child would be jailed in adult prisons run by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, where rehabilitation efforts are frequently limited and where they would be subjected to a hardened and frequently violent adult prison population.

A hardened adult would lead to a criminal record that is permanent and public and follows them throughout their life. This felony baggage sets up lifelong barriers, and getting a job, a place to live, a professional license, or even a student loan is extremely hard. It is a sentence that extends way beyond the prison term served.

In sharp contrast, when your child is in juvenile court, all the emphasis is on rehabilitation. The aim is not to punish but to discover the causes of the behavior and give the child the tools and support to become a productive member of society. A disposition may consist of probation, a requirement to attend counseling, placement in a group home, or commitment to a secure juvenile facility.

These institutions are not similar to adult prisons; they must offer education, vocational training, and intensive therapeutic services. More importantly, the juvenile record is normally confidential. It can be sealed when the probation or parole is completed. This will enable your minor to start afresh into adulthood without the stigma of a criminal record that will follow them throughout their life.

This contrast reveals why the transfer hearing is so deeply crucial. One decision by a judge can spell the difference between a second chance and a life of misery—between counseling and prison, between a confidential record that can be sealed and a public record that never disappears.

Find a Juvenile Criminal Defense Lawyer Near Me

The California juvenile justice system is based on the premise that youths can reform, and society is better off assisting them in reforming. Although the law continues to permit the transfer of 16- and 17-year-olds to adult court in the most serious cases, landmark reforms such as Proposition 57 and Senate Bill 1391 indicate a new and strong emphasis on rehabilitation rather than retribution. These legislations ensure that a prosecutor does not determine a child's future, but a judge does after considering their situation critically in a transfer hearing.

As a parent, the most significant thing you can do is ensure your child has the best defense possible at the earliest stage. The distinction between juvenile and adult court is between counseling and prison, between a confidential and lifelong criminal record. Our qualified juvenile defense lawyers at Los Angeles Criminal Lawyer can defend your child's right to a future outside the justice system. Contact our office at 310-502-1314 for a free case review.