for their criminal conduct than those who have attained the age of 18. Consequently, the legislature has prescribed lesser penalties for those who commit serious offenses as juveniles. While the legislature has provided the means to treat specified juvenile offenders as adults for purposes of prosecution and punishment, the legislature has not similarly chosen to provide for treatment of certain adults as juveniles. See K.S.A. 38-1636. Because the legislature has not deemed appropriate the consideration of adults as juveniles for purposes of prosecution and sentencing, the sentencing court’s attempt to circumvent the legislature’s policy decisions by so regarding the adult codefendants’ offenses is inappropriate. See State v. Heath, 21 Kan. App. 2d 410, 418, 901 P.2d 29 (1995) (<HOLDING>). However, in Roper, the United States Supreme
holding that a statutory right is a creature of the legislature and does not exist where the legislature has not acted holding that disagreement with the classification of a crime by the legislature is not a substantial and compelling reason to depart from the presumptive sentence holding that a circuit court has no jurisdiction to review a district courts discretionary decision not to depart downward from the guidelines but would have jurisdiction if the district court based its decision on the belief that it did not have the authority to depart holding that where the district court was able to estimate drug quantity there is no reason to depart from 2d11 recognizing that a defendant may appeal a district courts refusal to depart downward if the sentence was imposed in violation of law because the district court misconstrued its authority to depart