Question. What are the legal issues when you have the following: A juvenile is brought before a particular magistrate. This first magistrate gives the proper warnings, etc. A statement is taken by law enforcement. The juvenile is brought back, and the first magistrate is gone, so a second magistrate finishes the process, and signs the paperwork.

Is this kosher? If so, could you please direct me to any relevant case law or statutes that would assist me? Thanks.

Cory Kneeland

I don't believe there is any problem with a second magistrate warning a juvenile and allowing the juvenile to sign his statement in his presence when the first magistrate is not available. My argument would be the wording in the statute itself: 51.095(a)(1)(A)says "the statement shows that the child has at some time before the making of the statement received from 'A' [my emphasis] magistrate a warning..." and 51.095(a)(1)(B)(i)says "the statement must be signed in the presence of 'A' [again, my emphasis] magistrate..."

The statute could have said "the same magistrate", but it doesn't say that ... it only says "A" magistrate.

The exception to this is possibly the provision in 51.095(f) which deals with [video]recorded statements where the magistrate can, by speaking on the recording, request that the child and the recording be returned to him at the conclusion of the questioning, so that the child and the magistrate can then view the recording...

Are your officers having the magistrates review video stmts with the kids and then verifying that they were voluntarily given even though the staute doesn't appear mandatory? 51.095(f)