Juvenile Justice

Question 1

Breed v. Jones (1975)

Answer 1

double jeopardy to adjudicate a minor in juvenile court and try them as an adult

Question 2

Fare v. Michael C. (1979)

Answer 2

set boundaries on Miranda protections for juveniles

assuming that juveniles understand the legal differences between parole/probation officers and attorneys

Question 3

GJI v. State (1989)

Answer 3

OK Appeals found that OK’s competency statute was not applicable to juvenile proceedings, saying that it was “neither appropriate nor necessary” that a child understand a case against him or her since the system was allegedly focused on treatment, not punishment

Question 4

Graham v. Florida (2010)

Answer 4

sentencing offenders under 18 at the time of their crime to life sentences was cruel and unusual punishment for crimes less than murder - there is not constitutional requirement to guarantee eventual release, just the opportunity for release

Question 5

In re Gault (1967)

Answer 5

due process protections for juveniles

15 yo charged with obscene phone calls; at hearing, no witness, evidence was hearsay; established:
(1) a requirement of notice of charges;
(2) a right to an attorney;
(3) a right to cross-examine and confront witnesses; and
(4) a right to avoid self-incrimination

Question 6

In re Winship (1970)

Answer 6

“reasonable doubt” is the standard of proof where in formal adjudication for minors, just as with adults

Question 7

JDB v. North Carolina (2011):

Answer 7

SCOTUS suggested that Miranda warning procedures should account for mental capacities of juveniles

Question 8

Kent v. United States (1966)

Answer 8

first SCOTUS case to allude formally to due process for juvenile proceedings

Kent Criteria for deciding whether a juvenile should be tried as an adult:
- The seriousness of the alleged offense and the potential danger to the community.
- The degree of violence and premeditation against a person and the degree of injury.
- The quality of evidence.
- Whether others involved will be tried as adults.
- The sophistication, maturity, and intelligence of the juvenile.
- The defendant’s history and prospects for rehabilitation

Question 9

McKeiver v. Pennsylvania (1971)

Answer 9

SCOTUS held that a juvenile had no right to a trial by jury, although states retained such right

Question 10

Miller v. Alabama (2012)

Answer 10

SCOTUS ruled that mandating LWOP for an offender > 18 at the time of the crime was a violation of 8th amendment

Question 11

Roper v. Simmons (2005)

Answer 11

Roper v. Simmons (2005): SCOTUS ruled that sentencing juvenile offenders to death constituted cruel and unusual punishment

Question 12

Schall v. Martin (1984)

Answer 12

SCOTUS ruled that juveniles may be denied bail to protect them or community

Question 13

Thompson v. Oklahoma (1988)

Answer 13

15-year-old defendants were protected from receiving death penalty