Whose job is it to draft Mississippi youth court orders, the prosecutor or the court staff?

Plain-English summary

A Yazoo County Youth Court Judge asked the AG who is responsible for drafting youth court orders. She referenced a 1996 AG opinion (Harkey) that distinguished between paperwork for filing a petition (the prosecutor's job) and paperwork for adjudication, disposition, taking a juvenile into custody, and similar matters (the court staff's job, hired by the judge and paid by the county under § 43-21-119).

The AG confirmed and applied the Harkey framework. Drafting orders that result from adjudication and disposition hearings is the responsibility of the youth court staff, not the prosecutor. The court staff is hired by the judge under § 43-21-123 and paid out of any available funds budgeted for the youth court by the board of supervisors.

The opinion adds an important footnote: while the judge is ultimately responsible for issuing his or her orders, the judge may, in discretion, require a clerk, administrator, attorney, or other individual involved in the criminal court process to draft and present orders for the judge's signature. So the rule is not "court staff must draft," but rather "the prosecutor is not responsible for drafting these orders, and the court has discretion over whom it asks to do so." That includes possibly delegating to others involved in the case if the judge finds that workable.

The AG also noted a procedural caveat: opinions are not issued to advise one public officer about another's duties. Section 7-5-25 limits AG opinions to questions of law for the requestor's own future guidance. To the extent the request asked about the prosecutor's duties, the AG declined to answer. To the extent it asked who is responsible for the court's own orders, the AG answered.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2020. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Background and statutory framework

Section 43-21-119 sets up the youth court's staffing structure:

The judge or his designee shall appoint as provided in Section 43-21-123 sufficient personnel, responsible to and under the control of the youth court, to carry on the professional, clerical and other work of the youth court. The cost of these persons appointed by the youth court shall be paid as provided in Section 43-21-123 out of any available funds budgeted for the youth court by the board of supervisors.

Section 43-21-123 governs how youth court staff are appointed and compensated, with the funding coming from the county budget allocated to the youth court.

The Harkey opinion (Dec. 16, 1996) provided the operating framework:

[P]aperwork necessary for the filing of a petition should be done by the prosecuting attorney of the youth court. Paperwork for an informal adjustment, an adjudicatory hearing, as well as paperwork necessary for taking a juvenile into custody and disposition of a case should be done by youth court staff, hired by the judge and paid by the county, out of the court budget . . . .

The 2020 Cotton opinion confirms that the same division applies to "orders" (a category of paperwork). Petition filing is the prosecutor's. Adjudication and disposition orders are the court's.

The footnote referencing the Johnson opinion (April 27, 2001) tempers this with judicial discretion: a judge may require a clerk, administrator, attorney, or other person involved in the case to draft and present an order for signature. That delegation does not change who is "responsible," it just allows the judge flexibility in how the work gets done. The judge is always responsible for the final order.

The AG's process note about § 7-5-25 deserves attention. AG opinions are issued for the requesting official's "future guidance." They cannot be used to assign duties to a different official. So when a judge asks "what is the prosecutor's job?" the AG can only answer to the extent the answer is part of the judge's own guidance about how to administer the court, not as a directive to the prosecutor.

Common questions

Q: Can a judge require the youth court prosecutor to draft adjudication orders?
A: The opinion treats prosecutor responsibility as ending with petition-filing paperwork. Drafting adjudication and disposition orders is the court's responsibility. A judge can, in discretion, ask a prosecutor to draft an order, but the prosecutor cannot be forced to do so as a structural matter. Court staff is the default.

Q: What if the youth court has no dedicated staff to draft orders?
A: Section 43-21-119 directs the judge to appoint sufficient personnel, with funding from the county budget. If the court is understaffed, the path is to request additional budget allocation. Some smaller counties may rely on the chancery clerk or designated youth court referee staff.

Q: Can the judge use law clerks or interns to draft orders?
A: The opinion does not expressly address law clerks or interns, but the Johnson footnote contemplates delegation to "a clerk, administrator, attorney, or other individual involved in the criminal court process." A law clerk hired by the judge is part of the court's staff under § 43-21-119.

Q: Can the judge require parents' or children's lawyers to draft orders?
A: The Johnson discretion is broad enough to cover that, but it is not common practice. The judge has discretion; the lawyers do not have a duty to draft court orders absent the judge's direction.

Q: Does the Cotton opinion apply outside Yazoo County?
A: AG opinions are persuasive, not binding. The reasoning applies statewide, and other youth courts can rely on it. But the opinion was specifically directed to the Yazoo County Youth Court Judge.

Q: What about informal-adjustment paperwork?
A: The Harkey opinion includes informal-adjustment paperwork in the court-staff bucket alongside adjudication and disposition. The same is true in 2020.

What this means for you

For youth court judges: Organize your operational practice around the Harkey/Cotton framework. Your court staff (or designated drafters under your delegation) handles adjudication and disposition orders. The youth court prosecutor handles petition filing. Use the Johnson discretion to allocate work among the available personnel as efficiency demands.

For youth court referees: Same framework applies; you operate under the judge's authority. Your court staff drafts orders unless the judge delegates otherwise.

For youth court prosecutors: Your responsibility is petition filing, not drafting adjudication or disposition orders. If the judge asks you to draft an order in a particular case, that is a discretionary delegation, not an enforceable duty. Politeness and cooperation often resolve such requests; structurally, the work belongs to the court.

For county administrators: Budget for adequate youth court staff. Section 43-21-119 makes the court's drafting capacity dependent on the county budget. Underfunding the youth court creates real operational problems.

For juvenile defenders: Track who is drafting orders in your county. If the prosecutor is drafting orders, the defense may have access to those drafts before signing; if court staff drafts, access patterns differ. Know your local practice.

Citations and references

Statutes:
- Miss. Code Ann. § 7-5-25 (AG opinions issued to requesting officials for future guidance)
- Miss. Code Ann. § 43-21-119 (youth court staffing)
- Miss. Code Ann. § 43-21-123 (appointment and compensation of youth court personnel)

Source

• Landing page: https://attorneygenerallynnfitch.com/divisions/opinions-and-policy/recent-opinions/
• Original PDF: https://attorneygenerallynnfitch.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/M.Cotton_January-31-2020-Preparation-of-Youth-Court-Orders.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain — the linked PDF is authoritative.

Lynn Fitch
ATTORNEY GENERAL
OPINIONS DIVISION

January 31, 2020

The Honorable Mary B. Cotton
Yazoo County Youth Court Judge
Post Office Box 1437
Yazoo City, Mississippi 39194

Re: Preparation of Youth Court Orders

Dear Judge Cotton:

Attorney General Lynn Fitch is in receipt of your opinion request and has assigned it to me for research and reply.

Background and Issues Presented

Your request asks us to determine if the Youth Court Prosecutor is responsible for preparing the orders issued by the youth court in the prosecution of a juvenile delinquent. You cite a previous opinion issued by this office dealing with a school attendance officer by which this office opined:

[P]aperwork necessary for the filing of a petition should be done by the prosecuting attorney of the youth court. Paperwork for an informal adjustment, an adjudicatory hearing, as well as paperwork necessary for taking a juvenile into custody and disposition of a case should be done by youth court staff, hired by the judge and paid by the county, out of the court budget . . . .

MS AG Op., Harkey (December 16, 1996). You then ask if the term "paperwork" includes orders issued by the court. You state you believe the term "paperwork", as used in the previous opinion, includes orders of the court. You ask "whether the Youth Court Prosecutor should be responsible for generating the orders resulting from all adjudication and disposition hearings conducted in the Youth Court."

Response and Legal Analysis

Section 7-5-25 of the Mississippi Code Annotated provides the Attorney General is authorized to issue official opinions to designated State and local public officers upon any question of law relating to their respective offices. Official opinions are not issued to advise one public officer about another public officer's duties and responsibilities. To the extent your request asks about another official's responsibilities, we decline to answer. However, to the extent your question may be limited to who is responsible for the preparation of the orders of the Youth Court, we provide the following response.

In a previous opinion to the Honorable Dale Harkey, this office opined:

It is our opinion that paperwork necessary for the filing of a petition should be done by the prosecuting attorney of the youth court. Paperwork for an informal adjustment, an adjudicatory hearing, as well as paperwork necessary for taking a juvenile into custody and disposition of a case should be done by youth court staff, hired by the judge and paid by the county, out of the court budget, as provided for in Sec. 43-21-119.

MS AG Op., Harkey (December 16, 1996) (emphasis added).

While the Harkey opinion pertained to the duties of a school attendance officer, we find the opinion nonetheless applicable here, as the relevant portion of the opinion clearly deals with the youth court prosecutor's duties as well as the court's duties pursuant to Section 43-21-119 of the Mississippi Code Annotated. Section 43-21-119 states:

The judge or his designee shall appoint as provided in Section 43-21-123 sufficient personnel, responsible to and under the control of the youth court, to carry on the professional, clerical and other work of the youth court. The cost of these persons appointed by the youth court shall be paid as provided in Section 43-21-123 out of any available funds budgeted for the youth court by the board of supervisors.

(Emphasis added.) Any paperwork necessary to commence a filing in the youth court would be the responsibility of the youth court prosecutor. However, any paperwork for "taking a juvenile into custody and disposition of a case" is the responsibility of the youth court staff which is hired by the judge and paid by the county out of the court's budget. Therefore, drafting the orders of the court would be the responsibility of the court staff hired by the judge.

(Footnote: Though finding the Judge to be ultimately responsible for the issuance of his orders, this office further opined that, "the Circuit Judge may, in his discretion, require a clerk, administrator, attorney, or other individual involved in the criminal court process to draft and present a court order for the judge's signature, in order for the action to be properly recorded among the court's minutes." See MS AG Op., Johnson (April 27, 2001).)

If we can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to call us.

Very truly yours,

LYNN FITCH, ATTORNEY GENERAL

Emiko Hemleben
Special Assistant Attorney General