Defendant denied any history of violence between his parents or
between him and his mother's boyfriends. However, he did remember
incidents where his mother was violent towards her boyfriends.
John Doe also stated that his mother occasionally hit him with a
belt or a broomstick when he misbehaved, but insisted that the
beating were not abusive and denied suffering significant
injuries as a result. Defendant also denied ever having run away
from home, or being placed in a group or foster home. He did not
report any incidents of sexual abuse.
John Doe recalled having been beaten approximately once a month
by his older siblings during his childhood years. During one
incident, his brother dislocated his arm in three different
places. He also recalled occasional fistfights with his sister,
often over which television programs they would watch. Defendant
stated that he was afraid of his siblings, and complained to his
father about the beatings. John Doe recalled that when he was
eight, he called his father at work because his brother and
sister had been hitting him. As a result, his father came to the
house drunk, hit his sister with a belt, and beat up his brother.
The physical abuse by his siblings eventually ended when John Doe
was 13 years old. He described two incidents that led to the end
of the abuse. In one incident, he broke his sister's nose during
a fight over an expensive pair of pants. In the other incident,
defendant and two friends attacked his brother in retaliation for
stealing the television set and radio that he had been given as a
reward for completing another grade in school.
John Doe stated that his brother was addicted to crack cocaine,
and abused alcohol. His brother, according to defendant, has also
been repeatedly incarcerated. John Doe's sister also abused
alcohol and drugs, but he stated that he did not believe her to
be an addict. Defendant reported that both his brother and sister
were periodically thrown out of the home by their mother for
stealing from the family in order to support their drug habits.
John Doe also described his half-sister as a drug addict and
With regard to his own alcohol use, John Doe stated that he
began drinking alcohol when he was approximately 13 or 14 years
old, but that the use was quite limited. With regard to drugs, he
described his use of marijuana as minimal during his childhood
and adolescence. However, defendant acknowledged that he began
using marijuana daily several months after he was incarcerated
for his robbery conviction, and that this pattern continued for
approximately nine months. John Doe denied ever having used
crack, cocaine, or heroin.
Defendant described himself as relatively isolated during his
childhood, and remembered only having one close friend. He stated
that he was unpopular as a child, and that he was bullied by
other children because of his shyness and clothes. John Doe did,
however, recall having several girlfriends during his adolescence
and early childhood, often maintaining two or more relationships
simultaneously. John Doe also has a daughter, who is currently
approximately three years old, with his last girlfriend before
his incarceration. His girlfriend eventually ended the
relationship when she found out that he had numerous girlfriends,
and that he was using them to smuggle marijuana into Riker's
Island while he was incarcerated there.
2) Nature of the offense alleged*fn6
John Doe is charged with eleven acts of juvenile delinquency,
including drug trafficking and various crimes of violence, in the
superceding juvenile information. The charges arise from his
reported involvement in the 165 Organization. One of the more
serious offenses is John Doe's alleged participation in the
and murder of Francisco Soto ("Soto"). Defendant allegedly shot
and killed Soto, and attempted to murder another victim.
Additionally, he has been charged with armed robbery and with
assaulting an individual with a knife or sharp object.
3) Nature and extent of any prior delinquency record
As previously discussed, John Doe was convicted for attempted
robbery in the first degree when he was eighteen. As part of this
crime, he and two other individuals robbed an individual at
gunpoint. John Doe was also arrested on two other occasions.
There was no disposition reported for either of those arrests.
4) Present intellectual development and psychological
A) Intellectual development
John Doe reported that he was a good student in elementary and
junior high school, but acknowledged that he had repeated the
third and ninth grades. Defendant claimed that his attendance
became poor by the seventh grade, and that he started receiving
poor grades as a result of spending time with the "wrong crowd."
Eventually, he dropped out of school before receiving his high
school degree. However, since his incarceration, defendant has
obtained his GED and an electrician's certificate.
On the WAIS-R, a standardized intelligence test performed by
Dr. Drob, John Doe obtained a Full Scale IQ of 96 which placed
him in the average range of intellectual functioning for
individuals in his age group. Defendant's non-verbal IQ, however,
exceeded his verbal IQ by 31 points. Dr. Drob attributed this
unusual difference in scores as possibly a result of a mild
learning disability and the interference of emotional issues that
have hampered his academic learning. Dr. Drob also noted that
defendant had received a perfect score on the Block Design
subtest of the WAIS-R, a score which is in the 99 percentile.
Based on John Doe's score on the Block Design test, Dr. Drob
concluded that defendant has a high intellectual potential. The
score also suggested that John Doe would be especially skilled at
being an electrician, an area that John Doe reported as having
excelled at in prison.
Dr. Rosenfeld did not perform an IQ test because the nature of
the test precludes repeated assessments with the same
instruments. However, he questioned the validity of Dr. Drob's
results because Dr. Drob had used an older version of the WAIS-R.
Moreover, with regard to Dr. Drob's ultimate conclusion of
defendant's high intellectual potential, Dr. Rosenfeld asserted
that the conclusion was overstated. Rather, he ascertained John
Doe to have an approximately average intellectual functioning
outside of his excellence in spatial organization. Dr. Rosenfeld
acknowledged, however, that John Doe's performance on the test
could have been hampered by his poor education and the cultural
biases inherent in the test.
B) Psychological maturity
Dr. Drob reported that the results of personality testing
indicate that defendant is an immature and hyper-vigilant
individual who has difficulties with interpersonal relationships
and impulse control. Dr. Drob also stated that John Doe suffers
from acute anxiety and marked personality dysfunction from his
struggles with issues of self-esteem. Additionally, the results
of the Thematic Apperception Test revealed defendant's
preoccupation with receiving guidance from an older, wiser adult
— a need which was fulfilled by defendant's association with Juan
Ramirez. Dr. Drob attributed this need for guidance to the abuse
from his siblings, the lack of meaningful contact with his
father, and to the failure of his mother to speak to him about
moral issues. Moreover, the results of the Gudjohnson
suggestibility scale indicated that John Doe is easily influenced
Lastly, Dr. Drob concluded that defendant does not suffer from a
disabling psychiatric disorder, but has serious psychological
difficulties that require counseling and psychotherapy treatment.
In contrast, Dr. Rosenfeld reported that the only symptoms that
stood out in his mental examination of defendant was mild
depression and anxiety that arose upon his incarceration for the
current charges. While Dr. Rosenfeld identified John Doe as
having an anti-social personality disorder, he also stated that
defendant does not have significant symptoms of genuine
psychological distress. With regard to his yearning for an older,
male role model, Dr. Rosenfeld acknowledged that this need was
fulfilled by defendant's association with Juan Ramirez. Dr.
Rosenfeld also reported that John Doe claimed that he had been
manipulated by Ramirez, and that he had largely performed
criminal activities at Ramirez's request. However, Dr. Rosenfeld
noted that defendant appeared to take pride in his
accomplishments as a criminal, and that he had engaged in some
violent and criminal activities, including the distribution of
marijuana at Riker's Island, on his own initiative.
In addition, Dr. Rosenfeld criticized Dr. Drob's conclusions,
contending that many of the personality tests utilized by Dr.
Drob generated uninterpretable or meaningless data. According to
Dr. Rosenfeld, the responses to Dr. Drob's tests revealed
considerable exaggeration of defendant's current psychiatric and
psychological symptoms. Dr. Rosenfeld concluded that John Doe
appeared to be motivated by the desire to present himself as
psychologically disturbed, quite likely for the purpose of
eliciting sympathy in the hope of obtaining a favorable decision
in this transfer determination.
Dr. Rosenfeld based this conclusion partly on the results of
the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory test (the
"MMPI"), a written questionnaire, that he performed on defendant.
He reported that John Doe had greatly exaggerated his symptoms in
his responses to the MMPI, indicating that defendant was
dishonest in reporting his psychological symptoms overall.
However, at the hearing, Dr. Rosenfeld admitted that the results
of the test were compromised by the failure of the prison to
secure the testing situation. Dr. Rosenfeld testified that he had
directed the federal agent not to return the defendant to custody
until he had completed the test. However, contrary to his
directions, John Doe was placed into custody with the test,
presenting the possibility that other inmates had helped him with
5) The juvenile's response to past treatment efforts and the
nature of those efforts
John Doe does not appear to have undergone any psychiatric or
psychological treatment in the past. However, John Doe responded
favorably to educational and vocational training programs at
Green Correctional facility, where he obtained a GED and an
6) Availability of programs designed to treat the juvenile's
In his sur-reply, John Doe identified the Federal Corrections
Institution at Butner ("F.C.I. Butner") as a possible treatment
center. F.C.I. Butner is an adult federal institution that has
specialized group therapy programs and individual therapy, as
well as vocational and educational courses. At the hearing, Dr.
Drob also testified that he had spoken to a psychologist at
F.C.I. Butner, and that the psychologist had affirmed the
availability and appropriateness of F.C.I. Butner as a
rehabilitative institution for defendant.