Cross References.
Transition provisions, tenure of present justices and judges, and jurisdiction of present courts, Ark. Const. Amend. 80, § 19.
Case Notes
Possession of Handgun.
Regardless of an adult's immunity from prosecution for the mere possession of a handgun, the General Assembly has clearly made the possession of a handgun a misdemeanor offense for juveniles; the juvenile court has jurisdiction of a juvenile charged with possession of a handgun. Lucas v. State, 319 Ark. 752, 894 S.W.2d 891 (1995).
Cited:
Nance v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 316 Ark. 43, 870 S.W.2d 721 (1994).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases, 1994–2008 · leading case: Rosario v. State, 894 S.W.2d 888 (Ark. 1995).
Rosario v. State, 894 S.W.2d 888 (Ark. 1995). · cites it 4דWe reasoned in Lucas that, regardless of whether or not an adult is vulnerable to prosecution for mere possession of a handgun, the General Assembly clearly made possession of a handgun a misdemeanor offense for a minor, and placed jurisdiction of the offense in the juvenile…”
Porter v. Arkansas Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 286 S.W.3d 686 (Ark. 2008). · cites it 2ד” Ark. Code Ann. § 9-27-305 . Further, a juvenile is defined as “an individual who is [f]rom birth to eighteen (18) years of age, whether married or single.”
Nance v. Arkansas Dep't of Human Servs., 870 S.W.2d 721 (Ark. 1994). · cites it 4דSection 9-27-334(a)(2) allows a juvenile court, pursuant to a finding that a juvenile is dependent-neglected, to transfer custody to DHS, another licensed agency, "or to a relative or other individual.”
Baptist Health v. Circuit Court of Pulaski Cnty., 284 S.W.3d 499 (Ark. 2008). · cites it 2ד2 Ark. Code Ann. § 9-27-305 (Repl. 2008) provides that “[a]ny juvenile within this state may be subjected to the care, custody, control, and jurisdiction of the circuit court.”
Lucas v. State, 894 S.W.2d 891 (Ark. 1995). · cites it 3דUnder the plain language of Ark. Code Ann. § 9-27-305 (Repl. 1993), any juvenile may be subjected to the care, custody, control, and jurisdiction of the juvenile court.”
Jones v. State, 894 S.W.2d 591 (Ark. 1995). · cites it 2ד2d 891 , we held we would not construe the Arkansas Juvenile Code of 1989 to achieve absurd results patently contrary to the clear legislative intent expressed in Ark. Code Ann. § 9-27-305 (Repl. 1993) to subject any juvenile to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.