QuestionMay 21, 2025

3. When the Pennsylvania legislature passed its Juvenile Act, setting procedures for juvenile courts, it abolished the infancy defense.Does that mean there is no infancy defense in adult courts? That was the position of the state in Com.v. Martz,118 A.3d 1175 (Pa. Super. 2015). Was it correct? What did the state contend based on the age of the defendant (28) when he was charged with crimes committed when he was under 147 If the infancy defense remains in Pennsylvania, who has the burden of proving the defendant lacks the required capacity to be tried in adult court? What did the trial court do wrong? The appellate court decision is pending review in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court What do you think will be decided there?

3. When the Pennsylvania legislature passed its Juvenile Act, setting procedures for juvenile courts, it abolished the infancy defense.Does that mean there is no infancy defense in adult courts? That was the position of the state in Com.v. Martz,118 A.3d 1175 (Pa. Super. 2015). Was it correct? What did the state contend based on the age of the defendant (28) when he was charged with crimes committed when he was under 147 If the infancy defense remains in Pennsylvania, who has the burden of proving the defendant lacks the required capacity to be tried in adult court? What did the trial court do wrong? The appellate court decision is pending review in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court What do you think will be decided there?
3. When the Pennsylvania legislature passed its Juvenile Act, setting procedures for juvenile courts, it abolished the infancy defense.Does that mean there is no infancy defense in adult courts? That was the position of the state in Com.v. Martz,118 A.3d 1175 (Pa. Super. 2015). Was it correct? What did the state contend based on the age of the defendant (28) when he was charged with crimes committed when he was under 147 If the infancy defense remains in Pennsylvania, who has the burden of proving the defendant lacks the required capacity to be tried in adult court? What did the trial court do wrong? The appellate court decision is pending review in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court What do you think will be decided there?

Solution
4.2(331 votes)

Answer

No, the position taken by the state in Com. v. Martz was incorrect; the infancy defense can still apply in adult courts. The burden of proving lack of capacity generally falls on the defendant, and the trial court likely misapplied this principle. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court may clarify the application of the infancy defense in its decision. Explanation The Pennsylvania legislature's Juvenile Act does not eliminate the infancy defense in adult courts. In Com. v. Martz, the state argued that since the defendant was 28 at the time of trial, he could not claim an infancy defense for actions committed under age 14. The burden of proof regarding capacity typically lies with the defendant. The trial court may have erred by not properly considering the applicability of the infancy defense.

Explanation

The Pennsylvania legislature's Juvenile Act does not eliminate the infancy defense in adult courts. In Com. v. Martz, the state argued that since the defendant was 28 at the time of trial, he could not claim an infancy defense for actions committed under age 14. The burden of proof regarding capacity typically lies with the defendant. The trial court may have erred by not properly considering the applicability of the infancy defense.
Click to rate:

Similar Questions