Juvenile Justice - Delinquency Flashcards
Steps
- Intake
- Waiver (to adult criminal court)
- Adjudication
- Disposition (sentencing)
Theology
20th Century reform towards a nonpunitive parens patriae alternative to criminal justice. The child was to be treated and rehabilitated, not punished. Child isn’t entitled to procedural rights available to adults b/c child has right to custody, not liberty, which parents have failed to provide, so the state steps in. The goal is rehabilitation, not punishment, on the idea that kids are more susceptible to outside influences and lack responsibility. Are also risk adverse, so rehabilitation might “stick.”
Punishment
Imposes suffering purposely upon offender b/c of offense. Point of sanction is to visit unpleasantness upon a person. Always looks backward. Disposition is tied/linked to act; it’s determinative
Rehabilitation.
Goal is to benefit the recipient to relieve suffering. Don’t respond to past actions, but present status - don’t respond to actions, but to who the person is. Almost always indeterminate - treat until someone isn’t sick
Delinquent Offense
Kid commits a “crime” if done by an adult.
Status Offense
Only kids can violate, prohibited simply b/c person is a minor. Idea of criminalizing behavior that is harmful to juvenile’s healthy growth and development.
Kent v. U.S.
[SCOTUS]
Due Process Required for Juvenile Court to Waive Jurisdiction: petitioner is entitled to a (i) hearing, (ii) with counsel present, and (iii) access by his counsel to the records which will presumably be considered by the court and (iv), a statement of reasons, including relevant facts, for the juvenile court’s decision.
In re Gault
[SCOTUS]
The condition of the being a boy doesn’t justify a kangaroo court b/c a boy can be institutionalized in a setting much like a prison, same as an adult. Due Process requires: (i) notice - advance written notice to parents and child of scheduled court proceedings, setting forth the alleged misconduct with particularity, so that there’s a reasonable opportunity to prepare (ii) right to counsel (iii) protection from 5th Amendment u/ self-incrimination (iv) confrontation/cross examination in the absence of a valid confession, if adjudicating someone as guilty could result in commitment to state institution. Doesn’t rule on right to appeal and have a transcript of proceedings.
In re Winship
[SCOTUS]
Due process requires juvenile adjudications to apply a beyond reasonable doubt standard. Mere variations in age among defendants doesn’t suffice to warrant the use of different burdens of proof so long as they all face loss of liberty as a possible sentence.
McKeiver v. Pennsylvania
[SCOTUS]
Due Process in juvenile proceedings require fundamental fairness. All of the previous Constitutional safeguards extended to juvenile court (requirements of notice, counsel, confrontation, cross-examination and the standard of proof) have a special emphasis on fact finding. We can’t say juries are a necessary component of accurate fact-finding and may make the juvenile proceeding into a fully adversary process.
Breed v. Jones
[SCOTUS]
Juvenile was adjudicated as guilty of armed robbery, but at disposition, found not amenable to treatment, so he was then tried and convicted in criminal court. Juvenile contends this constitutes double jeopardy. Held It’s to late in the day to say that the juvenile justice system isn’t criminal like in some ways. The double jeopardy clause protects from twice being subjected to the potential or risk of trial and conviction (financial, physical, emotional), not just punishment. Rule In most cases, this means the transfer decision must be made prior to an adjudicatory hearing. In cases where evidence about the offense is considered relevant, it may be some added burden on juvenile courts, who will have to hold two hearings on the same info the transfer is rejected. But this isn’t going to be a substantial burden, even if the courts are overworked b/c it’s likely some will get transferred out and off the court’s plate.
United States v. Bland
[D.C. Court of Appeals]
Family Court has exclusive jurisdiction of proceeding in which a child is under 18 and hasn’t been charged with a specified crime listed in §2301. Defendants argue this violates D.P. b/c gives attorney discretion to decide whether child goes to juvenile court or crim. court depending on the charge the prosecutor files. Held Prosecutor has always had age-old function of deciding what charge to bring against whom; no D.P. violation
Dissent: Kent presumes that hearing starts in juvenile court and to move it you have to have a Kent hearing.
Matter of Johnson
[Maryland]
Maryland waiver statute to juvenile court requires consideration of - (i) age (ii) mental/physical condition (iii) amenability of treatment (iv) nature of offense and (v) public safety. Not all factors must be resolved against the juvenile but we think the judge gave to much effect to the offense to the extent the appellant’s amenability to rehabilitation was cast aside.
Juvenile Waiver Forms
- Judicial Waiver - Juvenile court judge conducts an individual evaluation
- Prosecutor Discretion - Prosecutors decide to file in either juvenile or criminal court
- Statutory Exclusion - Law requires juvenile of min age accused of designated serious offenses to be prosecuted in adult court
