In United States v. Mendez, --- F.4th ---, No. 21-50086 (9th Cir. 2022), the Court considered "whether the JDA precludes the government from prosecuting a person as an adult for a continuing conspiracy that includes both pre- and post-majority conduct after the court dismisses a JDA information charging that person with conspiracy based solely on pre-majority conduct."
The Court held it does not and affirmed.
First, the Court found it had interlocutory jurisdiction to hear the appeal.
As to the merits, "[w]e hold that a defendant who continues to participate in a conspiracy after reaching majority ratifies his prior conduct in the conspiracy, such that the conspiracy carries over into his majority. In this situation, the JDA is inapplicable."
"We also hold that, because Mendez allegedly continued to participate in the racketeering conspiracy on his eighteenth birthday and beyond, his racketeering conspiracy offense was not an act of juvenile delinquency under the JDA."
"Consequently, the district court has adult criminal jurisdiction over the majority-spanning RICO conspiracy offense charged in the SSI."
"Because Mendez’s participation in the conspiracy allegedly continued beyond his eighteenth birthday, it was no longer an act of juvenile delinquency under the JDA. Rather, the conduct became a continuing adult RICO conspiracy offense which began when he was a juvenile but continued when he allegedly engaged in additional acts in furtherance of the ongoing conspiracy after reaching the age of majority. The JDA does not shield Mendez from having to answer for this continuing criminal behavior as an adult."
"When a minor ratifies his pre-majority conduct by continuing to participate in an ongoing criminal conspiracy after his eighteenth birthday, the offense is not insulated by the JDA’s procedural enclave."
