[34] I dissent to that portion of the majority opinion which states that the juvenile code as interpreted by the majority is constitutional. See the dissents as set out in P. v. State ofOklahoma, Department of Institutions, Social *Page 1304 and RehabilitativeServices, 578 P.2d 352 (Okla. 1978); M. v. State of Oklahoma,Department of Institutions, Social and Rehabilitative Services,577 P.2d 908 (Okla. 1978); J.V. v. State Department ofInstitutions, Social and Rehabilitative Services, 572 P.2d 1283 (Okla. 1978) and specially concurring opinions in In Matter ofJ.L. v. State of Oklahoma, ex rel. Department of Institutions,Social and Rehabilitative Services, 572 P.2d 1283 (Okla. 1978) and In Matter of H., 577 P.2d 1292 (Okla. 1978).
[35] I am authorized to state that SIMMS, J., concurs in the views herein expressed.