FROM THE PULASKI COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, FOURTH DIVISION [NO.
60CR-17-537] HONORABLE HERBERT THOMAS WRIGHT, JUDGE
Fernando Padilla, Public Defender Conflicts, for appellant.
Rutledge, Att'y Gen., by: Jason Michael Johnson,
Ass't Att'y Gen., for appellee.
W. GRUBER, Chief Judge
Adrian Clinkscale appeals from the Pulaski County Circuit
Court's August 1, 2017 order and August 23, 2017 amended
order, which denied his motion to transfer to juvenile court.
He argues that the circuit court's denials of his motion
to transfer the case to juvenile court are clearly erroneous.
February 15, 2017, appellant was charged in the criminal
division of the Pulaski County Circuit Court with nine counts
of committing a terroristic act and one count of criminal
mischief in the first degree. Because he was sixteen years
old at the time of the alleged offenses and seventeen years
old at the time of the hearing, appellant filed a motion to
transfer to the juvenile division of the circuit court on
June 19, 2017.
investigating officer, Det. Roy Williams, testified that on
January 7, 2017, he was contacted to investigate a shooting
that occurred at 2705 Lewis Street. During the investigation,
Detective Williams made contact with the resident of the home
who had reported the shooting. The resident said that she
"had not seen anything because she was inside during the
shooting." Detective Williams stated that he met with
two individuals who witnessed the shooting and that they had
seen a red Dodge Avenger being driven down Lewis Street with
a man known as "Adawg" hanging out of the
passenger-side window firing at the residence with a
semiautomatic handgun with an extended clip. One of the
individuals told him that "Adawg" was a former
friend named Adrian Clinkscale. Detective Williams testified
that at the time of the shooting, several people had been
inside the home and at least three individuals had been
outside the home. He further testified that no one had been
injured by appellant's bullets but that the residence and
several nearby vehicles had been damaged.
asked about his prior knowledge of appellant, Detective
Williams testified that appellant had been known as both a
victim and a suspect in previous cases. Detective Williams
also testified that he was familiar with appellant's
involvement with "the West Side Bloods of John Barrow,
" a street gang.
James, appellant's science instructor, testified on his
behalf. She testified that appellant had been a very good
student, had achieved As and Bs in her classes, and had
attended her lunchtime-tutoring program. She testified that,
although appellant is immature, she "never had any
problems with him, he's salvageable, a very smart young
man." However, James also testified that she was not
acquainted with appellant's home life or gang activity.
Tanner, coordinator of the Juvenile Ombudsman Division
through the Public Defender Commission, testified on behalf
of appellant and discussed generally the programs and
facilities available in the juvenile court and in extended
juvenile jurisdiction. He testified that he did not know
appellant and had not previously evaluated him.
the July 24, 2017 hearing on appellant's motion, the
circuit court entered an order denying the transfer. On
August 10, 2017, appellant filed a motion for
reconsideration, noting objections to the language of the
original order. Following a hearing on appellant's
motion, the circuit court entered an amended order again
denying the transfer. Appellant now timely appeals.
prosecuting attorney has the discretion to charge a juvenile
sixteen years of age or older in either the juvenile or
criminal division of circuit court if the juvenile has
allegedly engaged in conduct that, if committed by an adult,
would be a felony. Ark. Code Ann. § 9-27-318 (Repl.
2015). On the motion of the court or any party, the court in
which the criminal charges have been filed shall conduct a
hearing to determine whether to transfer the case to another
division of circuit court having jurisdiction. Id.
The court shall order the case transferred to another
division of circuit court only upon a finding by clear and
convincing evidence that the case should be transferred.
Id. Clear and convincing evidence is proof that will
produce in the trier of fact a firm conviction as to the
allegation sought to be established. McClure v.
State, 328 Ark. 35, 942 S.W.2d 243 (1997). On review,
the circuit court's denial of a transfer is not reversed
unless the decision is clearly erroneous. Beulah v.
State, 344 Ark. 528, 42 S.W.3d 461 (2001). A finding is
clearly erroneous when, although there is evidence to support
it, the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with a
firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.
Johnson v. State, 356 Ark. 534, 157 S.W.3d 151
to Arkansas Code Annotated section 9-27-318(g), the circuit
court must consider the following factors at a transfer
(1) the seriousness of the alleged offense and whether the
protection of society requires prosecution in the criminal
division of circuit court;
(2) whether the alleged offense was committed in an
aggressive, violent, premeditated, or willful manner;
(3)whether the offense was against a person or property, with
greater weight being given to offenses against persons,
especially if personal injury resulted;
(4)the culpability of the juvenile, including the level of
planning and participation in ...