with the district court detailing the experts’ observations and conclusions. In December 2005, following receipt of the Dakota Horizons Report, the district court held a hearing on the motion to transfer. The government presented the testimony of an FBI agent who had investigated the case. On December 15, 2005, the district court granted the government’s motion to transfer the case. The defense filed a notice of interlocutory appeal. In August 2006, this court remanded because the district court had improperly concluded that it was required to assume, for purposes of a transfer determination, that the juvenile committed the offense charged in the information. United States v. Juvenile Male, 199 Fed.Appx. 625 (9th Cir.2006) (citing United States v. Juvenile, 451 F.3d 571 (9th Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>)). On remand, the district court exercised its
holding that a courts decision to proceed with an adjudication of guilt is one of absolute nonreviewable discretion holding that such a decision was within the trial courts discretion holding that the statute is mandatory holding that assumption of the defendants guilt is within the courts discretion but is not mandatory holding that denial of amendment is within discretion of trial court