State v. R. J. S.

Juvenile delinquency proceedings are not criminal trials. State v. N. R. L., 249 Or App 321, 324, 277 P3d 564 (2012), aff’d, 354 Or 222, 311 P3d 510 (2013).

Youth appealed his adjudication for an act that would have constituted first degree sexual abuse if committed by an adult.  Youth assigned error to the juvenile court’s admission of the testimony of the victim’s mother, instead of the victim, under OEC 803(18a)(b).  That rule of evidence allows for the admission of hearsay statements of unavailable witnesses under age 12 if the statement contains “sufficient indicia of reliability.”  On appeal, Youth claimed that the corroboration requirement in OEC 803(18a)(b) that applies in criminal trials also applies to juvenile delinquency proceedings.  In response, the State argued that the corroboration requirement applies “in a criminal trial,” and “a juvenile delinquency proceeding is not” a criminal trial.  Juvenile delinquency proceedings are not criminal trials.  State v. N. R. L., 249 Or App 321, 324, 277 P3d 564 (2012), aff’d, 354 Or 222, 311 P3d 510 (2013).  The Court found, after examining the text, context, and legislative history of OEC 803(18a)(b), that the legislature did not intend for the corroboration requirement to apply to juvenile delinquency proceedings.  Therefore, the Court held that the juvenile court did not err when it allowed the victim’s hearsay statements without corroborative evidence.  Affirmed.