In Re Appeal No. 179

Gilbert, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The appellant, age 15, was adjudged to be a juvenile delinquent. The finding resulted from his participation in three housebreakings and malicious destruction of properties which occurred during the afternoon hours. Appellant readily admitted his culpability.

He said that the reason he and two other juveniles broke into the three residences was that they were hungry. One hundred twenty-two dollars was stolen from one house, and in the other two homes the destruction committed by the juveniles took the form of slashed portraits, torn pictures, a mutilated diary and splattered eggs in and about the house. 1 Appellant did not explain, nor was he asked, how the mutilation and the hurling of eggs throughout the houses sated his hunger. Approximately one and one-half months following the adjudicatory hearing, Md. Rule 912, a disposition hearing was held, Md. Rule 913. At that time the court possessed a report of a clinical psychologist.

Testimony was taken from the school principal in which it was indicated that the appellant, sometime after the adjudicatory hearing, had ⁴⁹⁸ been suspended from school because a fire had occurred in his locker. Although the appellant denied that he set fire to his own locker, the principal was of the impression that the juvenile had done so. The principal stated that the young man was a “B - C student who could be A”, and that “the youngster has the potential to do even better”. The psychologist’s report, after indicating most strongly that there was a conflict between the juvenile and his father which emotionally “terrorized” the juvenile, stated: “It is this examiner’s opinion that this child should not be removed from his parents’ home but should remain on probation.

Counseling will be made available to the parents if possible through the court to help especially the father to deal more appropriately with his attitude towards the child. The father seems to be more interested and most eager to help his children and that he might have been over zealous in his efforts to make them the kind of men he wants them to be.” The hearing judge stated: “We have had an epidemic of housebreakings, and we are not going to countenance it. We are not going to have people’s homes broken into, their property vandalized and stolen, and the message should go out loud and clear that we are not going to have it.... I have a job to do.

There are a lot of things that I do that are difficult, but I have to do it. I have to do what I think is right and in the long run is going to best protect and help you boys and at the same time protect the community. . . . I’m very much impressed with your behavior since January 17th when you had a hearing. There was a finding, and you knew that a disposition hearing was coming up and that this case would be disposed of following an investigation.

I am not deciding the truth or falsity of any charges for ⁴⁹⁹ which you were suspended, that has already been determined by the school authorities, but it is important to me because it is indicative of your attitude. It is indicative of the fact that notwithstanding a finding of delinquency in these serious cases you will not comply with the regulations and will not behave as you know you should behave in society. . . . ... I will sign an order committing these boys 2 to the appropriate institution. . . .” An appeal was entered on March 4, 1974 to this Court. Three days later appellant applied to us for a stay of the juvenile court’s order pending a determination of his appeal.

We, pursuant to Md. Ann. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. Art. § 12-701b (1974), conducted a hearing on March 12, 1974, and on March 13, issued our Order staying the effect of the commitment by the juvenile court. Following the receipt of our Order, the juvenile court judge directed that the juvenile be released from the custody of the Secretary of Health and Mental Hygiene, and he placed the child under parental control. 3 The case is now before us on its merits. ⁵⁰⁰ Courts Art. § 3-802 provides: “(a) The purposes of this subtitle are: (1) To provide for the care, protection, and wholesome mental and physical development of children coming within the provisions of this subtitle; (2) To remove from children committing delinquent acts the taint of criminality and the consequences of criminal