E.J.M. v. State

In its unpublished memorandum, the majority affirms the trial court’s decision to deny E.J.M.’s request for funds to hire a mental, health expert to testify on his behalf at the hearing on the motion to transfer the case from the juvenile court to the circuit court. The majority relies on the following rationale and holding in Ex parte H.P.W., 628 So.2d 514, 516 (Ala.1993):

‘We first address the juvenile’s claim that the trial court erred in denying his motion asking the court to order the State to pay the expenses for a mental evaluation. He argues that the denial of this motion violated his…