A child was on informal deferred for small theft, but was spectacularly unsuccessful. Juvenile probation officer feels that she wants to proceed to court on the original charge of theft.

Judge says that he has the authority before a case is filed to order extended deferred prosecution under 53.03 (i) and (j). He argues that he can make detention decisions before any case is filed in his court, so he can make deferred decisions before any case is filed in his court.

However, I read these to mean that the judge may order this deferred over my objection, but the case has to be in front of him, either ready for trial, ready for adjudication hearing, or ready for a plea--meaning the case has to be filed before that can happen? Yet the words of the statute say he may order it "at any time" so I think that is where the confusion comes in.

Anyone seen this before? Made any jurisdictional arguments?

53.03(i) seems pretty clear to me. The court has the right to defer prosecution "at any time" but only for those three limited circumstances which all require some sort of adjudication hearing. How can there be an adjudication hearing with no petition on file?

I think your judge is plain wrong but this might not be the best case to fight this battle on. And if the child cannot complete the second deferred probation I doubt your judge will try it a third time.

Yes, I think you are right. Pick the battles, right?

The judge has no authority until the case is filed in court. What is the judge's source of information as to whether the case should be deferred? Is the judge discussing the case facts with someone? Should the judge be recused? Part of your job is drawing the line with a judge who is not following the law.