No Remediation for Incompetent Non-Mentally Ill Juvenile: Insights from the Makis M. Case

In the Makis M. case, written by Justice Gaziano, three main issues were presented before the court. Firstly, it questioned whether the mental health code (G.L. c. 123) provided a framework for addressing the remediation of incompetent juveniles, particularly those who were incompetent but not mentally ill. Secondly, it examined whether, in the absence of specific remediation programming under the mental health code, the Juvenile Court had the authority to create and mandate such programs. Lastly, the court had to determine whether the pending charges against the juvenile could be dismissed under G.L. c. 123, § 16 (f), "in the interest of justice."

In the early hours of April 13, 2021, law enforcement apprehended a juvenile inside an apartment building carrying two firearms and ammunition. Subsequently, the Commonwealth charged him with various offenses stemming from this incident, following a delinquency complaint and indictment. Initially arraigned as a youthful offender, the juvenile was later diagnosed with a language-based learning disorder and other information-processing disorders. Two competency inquiries were initiated to assess his ability to stand trial.

In March 2022, following the first competency proceeding, the juvenile was deemed not competent to stand trial but potentially capable of attaining competency in the future. The court also examined the possibility of the juvenile achieving competency through remediation, such as special education interventions. Despite being found incompetent, the juvenile's motions to dismiss under G.L. c. 123, § 16 (f), were denied twice in the autumn of 2022.

In June 2023, a second competency proceeding found the juvenile once again incompetent to stand trial. However, when asked directly about the juvenile's potential for remediation, the judge declined to make a definitive determination. Although the juvenile demonstrated some understanding of competency-related concepts, the focus of the hearing did not assess his ability to learn. The judge noted the absence of available remediation programs in Massachusetts specifically tailored to address the juvenile's intellectual disabilities. She expressed willingness to order the juvenile's participation in such a program if it were available.

As the legal proceedings continue, the juvenile remains subject to numerous release conditions, with pending delinquency and youthful offender charges unresolved. His cases have stalled due to his determined incompetence to stand trial and the lack of remediation programs in the Commonwealth, suggesting a bleak outlook for his foreseeable competency attainment.

The court concluded that the mental health code, specifically sections 15 and 16, did not outline provisions for remediating juveniles found incompetent for reasons other than mental illness, addressing the first issue. Concerning the second issue, the court rejected the Commonwealth's argument that creating and mandating remediation programming for incompetent juveniles fell under the inherent authority of the Juvenile Court, stating that such actions were within the legislative purview. Finally, regarding the last issue of dismissal under G.L. c. 123, § 16 (f), the court remanded the matter to the Juvenile Court for further examination on whether the juvenile presented a present danger to the community.