State witness. Defendant argues that his Sixth Amendment right to cross-examine a witness was impermissibly compromised when the trial court excluded the witness’s juvenile record for impeachment purposes. The State maintains that the trial court properly excluded the juvenile record pursuant to Indiana Evidence Rule 609(d). Generally, evidence relating to juvenile delinquency proceedings cannot be used as evidence for purposes of impeachment. Ind. Evidence Rule 609(d) (1996). See also Goolsby v. State, 517 N.E.2d 54, 61 (Ind.1987) (recognizing that this Court has consistently held that juvenile delinquency proceedings are considered civil in nature and consequently are not to be used to impeach a defendant in a criminal proceeding); Perkins v. State, 483 N.E.2d 1379, 1384 (Ind.1985) (<HOLDING>). Despite this rule, Defendant argues on appeal
holding that statute allowing for transfer of juvenile to adult criminal court does not implicate apprendi because the judges transfer determination does not subject the juvenile to enhanced punishment it subjects the juvenile to the adult criminal justice system holding that the prior conviction exception should not extend to nonjury juvenile adjudications holding apprendi exception for prior convictions encompasses juvenile adjudications holding that juvenile adjudications may not be used for impeachment purposes because the disposition of a juvenile does not constitute a criminal conviction holding that a juvenile adjudication may be used as a prior conviction for apprendi purposes