4 Ways a Juvenile Conviction Can Impact You if You Get Arrested Again as an Adult
When it comes to juvenile offenders, the goal of the criminal justice system is to rehabilitate – not punish.[i] Which is why, ordinarily, a person’s prior juvenile adjudication[ii] can’t be used against them when they become an adult. Still, there are instances when the mistake(s) of one’s youth can come back to bite them.
If you have a prior juvenile adjudication and get arrested again – this time, as an adult – your prior juvenile adjudication could affect your criminal case. Here are four ways how.
1. If You’re Arrested for DUI, Your License Can Be Suspended for Four Times as Long
Normally, an adult DUI conviction results in a six-month license suspension.[iii] However, if you suffered a prior DUI adjudication as a juvenile, your license will be suspended for two years.[iv] This will apply if you are convicted of DUI as an adult up to 10 years after you received your prior juvenile DUI adjudication.[v]
The good news is that the prior DUI adjudication cannot be used to enhance your punishment if you are later convicted of DUI as an adult[vi] – so you won’t receive the mandatory 90 days’ jail time[vii] associated with a second-time DUI. And if you received a prior juvenile adjudication for DUI with injury, that prior adjudication cannot be used to elevate a routine DUI misdemeanor into a felony.[viii]
2. It May Be Used Against You if You Testify
Rarely is it a good idea to testify in your own trial. You may feel that testifying demonstrates that you have nothing to hide. But jurors often base their assessment of a defendant’s credibility not on what the defendant says, but how the defendant says it.
If you choose to testify, you can be sure that there will be certain factors – your anxiety over being judged by others, the knowledge that your liberty is at risk, a dogged prosecutor peppering you with questions – that will affect your demeanor when you testify. And how you testify will, in turn, influence how the jury perceives you.
On top of all that, if you have a prior juvenile adjudication for a crime that involved “moral turpitude,” that prior adjudication may be used against you.[ix] The courts have defined “moral turpitude” crimes as those that demonstrate a “readiness to do evil.” So, if your prior juvenile adjudication involved violence,[x] theft,[xi] lying,[xii] sexual misconduct,[xiii] or the like, you can expect that the prosecutor will ask you about it and then point to it as yet another reason why you are not a person who should be believed.[xiv]
3. It Can Prevent You from Owning a Firearm
Depending on what your juvenile misconduct was for, you may not be able to own a gun – ever.
If you received a juvenile adjudication for certain offenses involving guns, drugs, or violence,[xv] then you cannot possess a firearm until you turn 30 years old.[xvi] If you ignore this prohibition, you can face up to a year in jail for a first-time offense.[xvii]
However, if: (1) you were prosecuted not as a juvenile, but as an adult in adult court; and (2) you were convicted for any felony or for a prohibited firearm-related offense,[xviii] then you can never own a firearm.[xix] If these parameters apply to you and you are found with a gun in your possession, you will be guilty of being a felon in possession of a firearm, an offense that is punishable by up to three years in prison.[xx]
4. It Can Extend Your Prison Sentence by Several Years
Some may consider it unfair to punish a person more severely because they committed a crime in their youth, especially when the criminal justice system’s position on juvenile offenders is to rehabilitate rather than punish.[xxi]
But the courts and the Legislature have weighed in on the matter and have reasoned that sentencing enhancements are not a continuing punishment for a past crime, but a stricter penalty imposed because a person has re-offended once more. Harsher penalties in the form of sentencing enhancements, they say, are necessary to protect the public from habitual criminal offenders.
Here are some instances of when a prior juvenile adjudication can be used to enhance a person’s prison sentence as an adult.
The ‘Aggravation’ of a Felony Sentence. When a person has at least two prior juvenile adjudications, they are at risk of receiving an enhanced or “aggravated” sentence should they receive a felony conviction as an adult.[xxii]
Though the prosecution cannot use a person’s prior juvenile adjudications to suggest that they were predisposed to commit an alleged crime, the prosecution can point to the person’s prior adjudications to enhance or “aggravate” their sentence.[xxiii]
For instance, second-degree robbery[xxiv] is punishable by either 2, 3, or 5 years in prison.[xxv] A person convicted of second-degree robbery would likely receive the lower term of the sentencing triad, or 2 years’ prison. That, of course, assumes that the person has no prior criminal history. However, if that same person sustained at least two juvenile adjudications during their youth, those adjudications may justify sentencing the person to prison for 3 or 5 years instead of 2.[xxvi]
The Sentence-Doubling, ‘Strike’ Prior Enhancement. California’s Three Strikes Law[xxvii] authorizes prosecutors and the courts to double a person’s sentence if they previously suffered a conviction for a “serious”[xxviii] or “violent”[xxix] felony, also known as a “strike.” “Serious” and “violent” felonies are a category of crimes that encompass more aberrant criminal behavior, such as first-degree burglary,[xxx] arson,[xxxi] rape,[xxxii] and carjacking.[xxxiii]
The strike prior enhancement applies when a person is arrested for a felony – any felony, not just a “serious” one[xxxiv] – and that person has a prior “serious” or “violent” felony conviction on their record.[xxxv]
The Legislature and the courts have determined that “serious” or “violent” felonies committed when a person was between the ages of 16 and 17 will qualify as a strike prior should the youth commit a new felony offense as an adult.[xxxvi]
So, if a person has a prior juvenile adjudication for a “serious” or “violent” felony and is then convicted of another felony as an adult, the prison sentence they receive will be doubled.[xxxvii] To be clear, it will be a prison sentence. The Three Strikes Law mandates that persons with strike priors must go to prison if convicted again of a felony.[xxxviii]
Justification for the Death Penalty. Capital punishment cases are broken up into two phases: the guilt phase (where the accused is put on trial for murder) and the penalty phase (where, if convicted, the accused is sentenced to death or to life in prison).[xxxix]
During the penalty phase, prosecutors may introduce evidence of a person’s prior criminal activity that involved threats or violence; this includes such activity from when the person was a youth,[xl] even if that activity occurred years or even decades prior.
So, if a person’s prior juvenile adjudication involved threats or violence, the prior adjudication can be presented as one reason in support of meting out the death penalty.[xli]
Contact a Professional
If you’ve been arrested and are wondering if your prior juvenile adjudication will affect your case, help is available. Michael J. Ocampo is a skilled criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor. Michael can discuss with you the impact that your juvenile prior will have on your sentencing exposure as well as how to achieve the best outcome for your unique case. Contact former prosecutor Michael J. Ocampo at (714) 451-6834 to schedule your free, initial consultation.
[i] Welfare and Institutions Code §1700.
[ii] Technically, there is no such thing as a “conviction” when it comes to juvenile offenders. Welfare & Institutions Code §203; People v. West (1984) 154 Cal.App.3d 100, 107. When those under the age of 18 are prosecuted as juveniles (rather than as adults) and are found to have committed a crime, that finding is referred to as an “adverse juvenile adjudication.”
[iii] Vehicle Code §13352(a)(1). Technically, after a person is arrested, their privilege to drive will be suspended, their license will be confiscated, and they will be issued a temporary license that will allow them to lawfully drive for 30 days. Vehicle Code §§13382(a), (b). A person can request a DMV hearing to challenge the legitimacy of the DUI arrest and the subsequent license suspension. Vehicle Code §§13558(b), 14100(a). If the person does not prevail at their DMV hearing, then, after the 30 days are up, the license suspension will go into effect and last for four months. Vehicle Code §13353.3(a), (b). A second suspension – this one, for six months – will be ordered if the person is convicted of DUI. Vehicle Code §13352(a)(1). However, this second period of suspension can run concurrently (or overlap) with the initial, four-month suspension period, which would make the coordination of the DMV and sentencing hearings a prudent consideration. Vehicle Code §13353.3(c), 13352.4.
[iv] This is because the DMV has its own DUI-related, license suspension scheme that is independent of the criminal statute that punishes DUI. Vehicle Code §§13352(b), (a)(3), 23540(a). People v. Bernard (1988) 204 Cal.App.3d 16, 18; Pollack v. DMV (1985) 38 Cal.3d 367, 380. Note: Because the DMV counts a prior juvenile DUI adjudication as a “conviction,” the initial period of suspension that is triggered upon the now-adult driver’s arrest for DUI is extended from four months to one year. Vehicle Code §13353.3(b)(2)(A).
[v] Same.
[vi] People v. Bernard (1988) 204 Cal.App.3d 16, 18; Welfare and Institutions Code §203.
[vii] Vehicle Code §23540(a).
[viii] Prior juvenile adjudication for felony DUI under Vehicle Code §23153(a) will not qualify as a prior felony DUI for the offense of DUI with prior felony DUI under Vehicle Code §23550.5(a)(2). People v. Lopes (2015) 238 Cal.App.4th 983, 987. Additionally, a juvenile court’s declaration that a minor’s wobbler charge was a “felony” (here, for DUI with injury, Vehicle Code §23153(a)) will not elevate the prior adjudication to a “felony” for purposes of a sentencing enhancement scheme in adult court because the juvenile adjudication was not actually punished as a felony (i.e., via imprisonment or pursuant to Penal Code §§17, 18, or 1170(h)). Lopes at 987.
[ix] Subject to Evidence Code §352, a prior juvenile adjudication that did not result in an honorable discharge from the Department of Juvenile Justice pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code §1772(a) is admissible for impeachment – specifically, as evidence demonstrating a witness’s moral turpitude. People v. Lee (1994) 28 Cal.App.4th 1724, 1740. See also Cal. Const., art. 1, §§28(f)(2), (4), Prior juvenile adjudications, both felony and misdemeanor, that were resolved under a statutory section other than §1772(a) – for instance, Welfare and Institutions Code §782 – are also admissible as prior acts of moral turpitude. Lee at 1740. However, a prior juvenile adjudication that resulted in an honorable discharge is not admissible for impeachment purposes, even if the honorably discharged offense involved moral turpitude. People v. Jackson (1986) 177 Cal.App.3d 708, 713. Although all relevant evidence is admissible (including impeachment evidence), relevant evidence is still subject to the probative/prejudicial balancing test of Evidence Code §352. People v. Wheeler (1992) 4 Cal.4th 284, 292, 295.
[x] Penal Code §273.5. People v. Rodriguez (1992) 5 Cal.App.4th 1398, 1402.
[xi] Penal Code §487. People v. Boyd (1985) 167 Cal.App.3d 36, 45.
[xii] Penal Code §476. People v. Parrish (1985) 170 Cal.App.3d 336,349.
[xiii] Penal Code §261.5. People v. Fulcher (1987) 194 Cal.App.3d 749,754.
[xiv] This tactic can be especially effective when the prior juvenile adjudication is recent.
[xv] Penal Code §29820(a).
[xvi] Penal Code §29820(b).
[xvii] Possessing a firearm in violation of Penal Code §29820 is a wobbler offense. Penal Code §§29820(c) 18(a).
[xviii] Such as brandishing a firearm or assault with a deadly weapon. See Penal Code §§29800(b), 23515.
[xix] Penal Code §29800(b). See also People v. Bell (1989) 49 Ca.3d 402, 545.
[xx] Penal Code §§29800(b), 18(a).
[xxi] Welfare and Institutions Code §1700.
[xxii] Cal. Rules of Court Rule 4.421(b)(2) permits the use of juvenile adjudications to aggravate a felony sentence if the prior adjudications are “numerous or of increasing seriousness.” By implication, then, a person must, at minimum have received two prior juvenile adjudications before the adjudications can be used to aggravate their sentence. People v. Quiles (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 612, 621.
[xxiii] Note: The use of a person’s prior juvenile adjudication in this context occurs during the sentencing phase, which is after a person has been convicted of a new crime.
[xxiv] Which is a robbery of a person in someplace other than their home, their vehicle, or near an ATM. Penal Code §212.5(c).
[xxv] Penal Code §213(a)(2).
[xxvi] Prior juvenile adjudications that are either “numerous or of increasing seriousness” are an aggravating factor that can be used to sentence someone to the upper term of a felony sentence. Cal. Rules of Court Rule 4.421(b)(2); People v. Quiles (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 612, 620.
[xxvii] Under the Three Strikes Law, if a person is arrested for a non-strike felony and has one strike prior, their prison sentence will be doubled. Penal Code §§667(c), (e)(1). If a person is arrested for a non-strike felony and has two prior strikes, their prison sentence will also be doubled. Penal Code §§667(c), (e)(2)(C). However, if a person is arrested for a strike felony and has two strike priors, they will be sentenced to prison for 25 years to life. Penal Code §§667(c), (e)(2)(A).
[xxviii] Penal Code §1192.7(c).
[xxix] Penal Code §667.5(c).
[xxx] Penal Code §667.5(c)(21); 1192.7(c)(18).
[xxxi] Penal Code §667.5(c)(10); 1192.7(c)(14).
[xxxii] Penal Code §667.5(c)(3); 1192.7(c)(3).
[xxxiii] Penal Code §667.5(c)(17); 1192.7(c)(27).
[xxxiv] Although certain juvenile adjudications can qualify as strike priors under the Three Strikes Law, juvenile adjudications do not qualify as prior “serious” conviction under Penal Code §667(a). Known as the “nickel prior,” this penalty extends a person’s prison sentence by five years if: (1) they are convicted of a “serious” felony; and (2) they previously suffered a prior conviction for a “serious” felony. Penal Code §667(a)(1). A juvenile adjudication for a “serious” felony will not qualify as a prior “serious” felony conviction unless the youth was prosecuted as an adult in adult court. If they were, then the determination of guilt in that matter is a conviction, not an adjudication. Such a prior conviction will still qualify under Penal Code §667(a) even if the youth was sentenced to, and honorably discharged from, the Department of Juvenile Justice. People v. Shields (1991) 228 Cal.App.3d 1239, 1241, 1243; Cal. Const., art. 1, §28(f)(4). If a young adult (for instance, a 19-year-old) is convicted of a “serious” felony, but is sentenced to the Department of Juvenile Justice rather than prison, his conviction will still qualify as a prior “serious” felony conviction, even if he received an honorable discharge. People v. Jacob (1985) 174 Cal.App.3d 1166, 1171, 1172. And when a young adult is convicted of a wobbler offense and sentenced to the Department of Juvenile Justice, his conviction will not be reduced to a misdemeanor by operation of law unless he receives an honorable discharge. People v. Goodner (1990) 226 Cal.3d 609, 616, 617; Penal Code §17(c).
[xxxv] Penal Code §667(c).
[xxxvi] A prior juvenile adjudication will qualify as a prior felony conviction under the Three Strikes Law if: (1) the prior offense committed was a “serious” or “violent” felony; and (2) the person was at least 16 years of age when they committed the prior offense. Penal Code §§667(d)(3); 1170.12(b)(3); People v. Nguyen (2009) 46 Cal.4th 1007, 1028; People v. Westbrook (2002) 122 Cal.Rptr.2d 514, 520. This remains true even if the prior adjudication was expunged due to an honorable discharge from the Department of Juvenile Justice. Welfare and Institutions Code §1772(b)(4); People v. Daniels (1996) 51 Cal.App.4th 520, 522, 525. The prior adjudication will remain a strike prior even it is later discovered – for the first time – that the defendant was actually a minor at the time of commission of the prior offense. The issue of where to adjudicate the matter – in adult court or in juvenile court – must be first addressed at the trial court level, not the appellate level. Otherwise, the issue is waived. People v. Level (2002) 119 Cal.Rptr.2d 551, 555. Note: a prior juvenile court adjudication cannot be used to disqualify defendant from Penal Code §1210.1(b)’s adult drug diversion program. Westbrook at 519.
[xxxvii] Penal Code §§667(c), (e)(1).
[xxxviii] Penal Code §§667(c)(2), (4).
[xxxix] Penal Code §§190.3.
[xl] Penal Code §190.3(b).
[xli] Prior juvenile criminal conduct involving threats or violence may be used as an aggravating factor during the penalty phase of a death penalty case. Penal Code §§190.3(b); People v. Taylor (2010) 48 Cal.App.4th 574, 653; People v. Lewis (2001) 110 Cal.Rptr.2d 272, 309. Juvenile criminal proceedings where youth was prosecuted as an adult and convicted in adult court also qualify as aggravating factors. Penal Code §190.3(c); People v. Pride (1992) 3 Cal.4th 195, 257. This remains true even if the youth received an honorable discharge after being sentenced to the Department of Juvenile Justice. Pride at 256.
Attorney Michael J. Ocampo is a former deputy district attorney. He focuses his practice exclusively on criminal law so that he can help those accused of a crime — often ordinary, everyday people — ensure that their rights are honored and that they receive a fair opportunity to be heard.
