Whether the refusal of the United States Attorney to detail the defendant's role in weighing his potential for rehabilitation in the interest of justice and the failure of the District Court to consider that role in offenses charged violated the defendant's Due Process rights, particularly when at the transfer hearing there was no evidence proffered by the government with regard to what acts were committed by the juvenile

QUESTION PRESENTED Whether the refusal of the United States Attorney to detail the defendants role in weighing his potential for rehabilitation in the interest of justice and the failure of the District Court to consider that role in offenses charged violated the defendants Due Process rights particularly when at the transfer hearing there was no evidence proffered by the government with regard to what acts were committed by the juvenile. The District Court considered the brutal and heinous nature of the offense in determining whether the defendant could be rehabilitated when the defendant may not have committed any acts of violence and thus transferred the defendant from juvenile status to adult status. He now faces multiple life sentences. 1 rd * ;