Commonwealth v. Ulysse

Summary

The Pennsylvania Superior Court held that an adult criminal court had jurisdiction to prosecute Aliquan Ulysse for offenses allegedly committed when he was a juvenile. The court concluded that the juvenile court's failure to find a prima facie case did not constitute a final adjudication or require the Commonwealth to appeal before refiling charges after Ulysse turned twenty-one. The court distinguished Commonwealth v. Taylor and affirmed Ulysse's judgment of sentence.

Holdings

1. The Criminal Division had jurisdiction to prosecute Ulysse as an adult because the Juvenile Court lost jurisdiction when he turned twenty-one, while an adult criminal court may exercise jurisdiction over an adult for crimes committed while he was a juvenile.
2. The Commonwealth was permitted to withdraw and refile the charges after the juvenile court found no prima facie case; it was not required to appeal the order, because the proceeding had not resulted in a juvenile adjudication and double jeopardy did not attach.
3. Commonwealth v. Taylor does not require dismissal of Ulysse's case because Taylor involved a structural constitutional error in the juvenile certification process, whereas Ulysse's juvenile proceedings involved no comparable error.
4. Ulysse's due process claims were waived because he failed to properly raise and develop them in the trial court; in any event, the claims would not warrant relief because the Commonwealth's refiling was authorized and did not violate fundamental fairness.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Criminal Division of the Court of Common Pleas had jurisdiction after the juvenile court dismissed the delinquency charges for failure to establish a prima facie case and the Commonwealth refiled the charges after Ulysse turned twenty-one.
2. Whether the Commonwealth violated Ulysse's substantive or procedural due process rights by refiling the charges in adult criminal court rather than appealing the juvenile court's order.

Disposition

affirmed