NILES, Ohio - Attorneys for the Niles teenager who was convicted of murdering his elderly neighbor say his case should have been heard in juvenile court. 

Oral arguments were heard Tuesday before the 11th District Court of Appeals in the appeal filed on behalf of Jacob Larosa. Larosa was convicted of murdering 94-year-old Marie Belcastro in 2015 when he was just 15 years old. 

Larosa pleaded no contest and was found guilty of aggravated murder, attempted rape, and theft for breaking into Belcastro's home, attempting to rape her and beating her to death with a heavy metal flashlight. 

He was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. 

In briefs filed Tuesday, Larosa's attorney, Lynn Maro, argues that Larosa's conviction and sentence should be overturned. 

Maro argues that Larosa's case should have been heard in juvenile court, citing a 1982 United States Supreme Court decision that found age is "more than a chronological fact," but also an indication that juveniles are not generally capable of understanding the severity of their actions, which should be taken into consideration at sentencing. 

"Multiple doctors provided testimony that there were treatment options and rehabilitation options available that had not been tried with Jacob. In disregard of these facts, the juvenile court bound the case over for Jacob to be tried as an adult. Testimony and evidence confirmed improvement in behavior and maturity in the three years Jacob was incarcerated while awaiting trial. Yet, the trial court's sentence foreclosed the possibility of change and rehabilitation," Maro wrote in her brief. 

Maro went on to write that Larosa had a low IQ and several developmental disorders, including ADHD, oppositional defiant disorder, and learning disabilities, along with a difficult home life. 

When a hearing was held to determine if Larosa was amenable to rehabilitation, Maro wrote the prosecution focused instead on the brutality of the crime, rather than whether Larosa could be reformed. 

"The decision to try any child as an adult must be done adhering to the principles ensuring reliability and confidence that the correct decision has been made. In this case, that was not done," Maro wrote. 

The prosecution argued that the juvenile court has broad discretion to determine if a juvenile should be tried as an adult and cited a law stating that the only way that decision should be reversed is if it is found that the juvenile court abused its discretion. 

Assistant Trumbull County prosecutor Chris Becker wrote in his brief that the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion and in fact took a number of factors into consideration when deciding that Larosa should be tried as an adult, including Larosa's history of disciplinary infractions, the fact that Belcastro had done nothing to provoke him and the extreme brutality of the crime.