an interest in prosecuting, and devoting substantial resources to, misdemeanors occurring on federal park land, then surely there is a substantial federal interest in prosecuting a murder occurring on the same land. 5 . The preponderance of the evidence standard applies because a transfer hearing is not a criminal proceeding resulting in an adjudication of guilt or innocence, but rather is a civil proceeding resulting in an adjudication of status. See United States v. Juvenile Male #1, 86 F.3d 1314, 1322-23 (4th Cir.1996). The strict rules of evidence therefore do not apply during a transfer hearing and hearsay is admissible. See United States v. A.R., 38 F.3d 699, 703 (3d Cir.1994); United States v. Doe, 871 F.2d 1248, 1254-55 (5th Cir.1989). 6 . See Juvenile Male # 1, 86 F.3d at 1322 (<HOLDING>) (quoting United States v. Romulus, 949 F.2d
holding that decision to sentence juvenile as an adult subject to abuse of discretion review 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 decision to transfer rests within the sound discretion of the court holding that the decision to transfer rests within the sound discretion of the district court recognizing that the question of whether the interest of justice is served by the transfer of a juvenile for adult prosecution is a decision within the broad discretion of the district court