Yes. In Matter of Seven Minors the Nevada Supreme Court held that a juvenile court should decide for or against transfer to charge a juvenile as an adult on the basis of a matrix of categories: (1) the nature and seriousness of the charged offense or offenses, (2) the persistency and seriousness of adjudicated or voluntarily admitted past criminal offenses, and (3) the personal attributes of the offender. 99 Nev. at 442, 664 P.2d at 957. We also noted, however, that either seriousness of the charged offense or past record, or a combination of these two categories, may support a decision to transfer. Id. Once a transfer is justified on the basis of public interest and safety, there is no need to consider the “best interest of the child.” Id. at 433, 664 P.2d at 951.
In Ortiz v. State, 104 Nev. 312, 756 P.2d 1189 (1988), the Appellant juvenile sought review from an order of the Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County (Nevada), which certified that appellant could be treated as an adult to answer charges of trafficking in a controlled substance, sale of a controlled substance, and conspiracy to sell a controlled substance. The Nevada Supreme Court held when juveniles, such as Ortiz, knowingly and extensively involve themselves in the sale and trafficking of significant quantities of controlled substances, their transfer to the adult criminal court may be readily justified as essential to public safety and welfare.