In Re Appeal No. 646, Term 1976

Liss, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. This is an appeal from the action of the trial court waiving jurisdiction over the appellant from the Juvenile Court of Prince George’s County to the Circuit Court of that county. At the hearing the State requested a waiver of jurisdiction over three separate alleged acts of delinquency — a robbery and two armed robberies. No witnesses were called at the hearing; in lieu of the testimony, counsel for the State and the accused presented oral argument.

The purpose of a juvenile waiver hearing is to determine whether or not the juvenile is a fit subject for juvenile rehabilitative measures. Matter of Flowers, 13 Md. App. 414 , 283 A. 2d 430 (1971); Kemplen v. Maryland, 428 F. 2d 169 (4th Cir. 1970). Waiver may be granted only where a preponderance of the legally sufficient evidence shows that such a determination is proper in light of the factors enumerated in the Annotated Code of Maryland (1974, 1976 Cum. Supp.l, Courts and Judicial Proceedings, § 3-817 (d)(l)-(5): 1 age of the child; mental and physical condition of the child; child’s amenability to treatment in any institution, facility or program available to delinquents; nature of the offense and the child's alleged participation in it; and the public safety.

Matter of Trader, 20 Md. App. 1 , 315 A. 2d 528 (1974); Matter of Waters, 13 Md. App. 95 , 281 A. 2d 560 (1971). All the factors need not be resolved against the juvenile in order to justify waiver, but the court must consider each factor weighing them in relation to one another in determining whether the child is an unfit subject for ⁹⁶ juvenile rehabilitative measures. Matter of Johnson, 17 Md. App. 705 , 304 A. 2d 859 (1972). We said in In Re Arnold, 12 Md. App. 384, 396-397, 278 A. 2d 658, 664 (1971), that “disposition in a juvenile case is committed to the sound discretion of the juvenile judge, to be disturbed on appeal only upon a finding that such discretion has been abused.” In Re Hamill, 10 Md. App. 586 , 271 A. 2d 762 (1970).

In Matter of Johnson, supra, at page 713 we stated, “What we said in Arnold concerning discretion in juvenile dispositions is equally applicable to waiver hearings.” The juvenile court judge had before him a waiver investigation report and recommendation prepared by the Division of Juvenile Services. The court obviously considered the report in reaching its conclusion as to waiver. Maryland Rule 913 e. provides in part: “e. Order. 1.

If the Court concludes that its jurisdiction should be waived, it