JUVENILE PROCEEDING CRIMINAL PROCEEDING Respondent Defendant Taking into Custody Arrest Petition for Delinquency Charged with a Crime Detention Hearing Bail Hearing Adjudicatory Hearing Admits the Facts of the Trial Petition Pleads Finding of Delinquency Verdict Dispositional Hearing Sentencing Commitment to Treatment Jail
Common Law Juveniles over 7 treated as adults. Juveniles under 7 treated as incapable of forming criminal intent. 12 year old hung as punishment. 1899 Illinois/1st Juvenile Court 1925
Create a separate court for children under the age of 16 who were neglected, dependent, or delinquent; Change the reason for the court from punishment to rehabilitation; To avoid stigmatizing a juvenile, court proceedings would be confidential; Juveniles were to be kept apart from incarcerated adults; and Juvenile court proceedings were to be informal rather than following and using the legal model.
In Re Gault Gault sentenced to six years in detention home via Arizona’s juvenile justice system. An adult could have been sentenced to no more than 2 months in jail and fined between $5.00 to $50.00 for having committed Gault’s offense.
Whether the due process clause of the 14th Amendment requires that constitutional protections, such as notice, cross examination, counsel, and self incrimination, be made applicable in the adjudicatory phase of a juvenile proceeding?
During delinquency adjudicatory proceedings, the due process clause of the 14th Amendment requires that proceedings that may result in the child’s freedom being curtailed require: notice of the charges; right to cross examine and confront witnesses; right to invoke the privilege against self incrimination; and right to counsel.
Began what critics called the constitutionalization of the juvenile justice system; or What advocates viewed as the application of fundamental fairness in juvenile proceedings.
What are the differences between the juvenile justice process and criminal proceedings for adults?
Whether a juvenile will be tried as a juvenile within the juvenile justice system and subject to a juvenile court disposition or whether the juvenile will be tried as an adult in a criminal court and subject to adult sanctions?
Legislative Exclude certain offenses committed by children of certain ages from jurisdiction of the juvenile court. Prosecutorial The prosecutor decides in which court to charge the juvenile. Concurrent The juvenile and criminal court have jurisdiction. Juvenile Court Waiver The juvenile judge decides whether to waive jurisdiction and transfer the juvenile up to criminal court. Reverse Certification The judge in the criminal court decides to transfer down the juvenile to juvenile court.
46 states provide for the waiver of jurisdiction over the juvenile by the juvenile court judge. When deciding to waive jurisdiction over the juvenile and transfer to criminal court, legislatures understand Kent to constitutionally require: waiver hearing; providing the juvenile and attorney access to any records examined by juvenile judge; and providing a written statement of reasons for the waiver by the judge.
South Carolina’s State v. Pittman indicates that the juvenile judge should consider the following criteria when deciding whether to waive jurisdiction over a juvenile: seriousness of alleged offense; whether the offense was committed in a violent, willful, or premeditated manner; whether the offense was committed against a person or property; the prosecutive merit of the case; the desirability of trial and disposition in the same court; the sophistication and maturity of the juvenile; the record and previous history of the juvenile; and whether the public can be protected and whether the juvenile can be rehabilitated.
Intake Period between being taken into custody but before formal court proceedings begin. Diversion To what? ▪ social agencies ▪ church programs ▪ Outward Bound Criteria to decide whether to divert? ▪ child’s attitude toward the offense ▪ child’s record ▪ offense
Constitutionally permissible (Schall v. Martin) & bail not required; Probable cause is necessary to detain; Counsel is required since juvenile faces loss of liberty (see Gerstein v. Pugh) Incarceration, separate from adults, is required; Length of time for detention is limited; Juveniles do have the right to a speedy trial; criteria to evaluate “speedy” are from Barker v. Wingo and include: length of the delay; reason for the delay; prejudice to the juvenile because of the delay; & seriousness of the offense.
Most states’ statutes state that “taking into custody” is not an arrest. To “take a juvenile into custody” usually requires that the juvenile be found to be violating a criminal law or ordinance. Special treatment is required once a juvenile is taken into custody and includes: notification of parents; incarceration separately from adults; limited taking of fingerprints and photographs; and maintaining separate and confidential records.
While taking into custody does not constitute an arrest, the law of arrest is applied to juveniles. Thus the Fourth Amendment’s instructions regarding search and seizures, except in the public school setting, are applicable to juveniles.
Probable Cause & Warrant Stop & Frisk Informant tip & evasive action Consent 3rd Party Consent
While probable cause is required to search adults, reasonable suspicion will suffice to search within the public school setting. (New Jersey v. T.L.O.) Action (1995) permitted schools to require student athletes to submit to drug testing if the student wanted to participate in after school athletics. Earls expanded this, allowing schools to drug test all students who want to participate in extracurricular activities.
Miranda v. Arizona requires that individuals taken into police custody be given the following warnings before a police custodial interrogation can begin: right to remain silent; anything you say can and will be used against you; right to an attorney; and if you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you.
Miranda focuses on the 5th Amendment privilege against self incrimination and the 6th Amendment right to counsel rather than trying to determine the voluntariness of an individual’s statement. Miranda is applicable to juveniles.
When is a juvenile said to “knowingly and intelligently” waive his Miranda rights? Consider: Age of juvenile Education of juvenile Juvenile’s understanding of the charges Whether juvenile is allowed to consult with friends and relatives Methods used in the interrogation Length of the interrogation
Does asking to speak to a probation officer invoke the 5th amendment’s privilege against self incrimination? No. See Fare v. Michael C. Many states do provide greater rights than the Court’s understanding of the Constitution. Even if juvenile knowingly and intelligently waived Miranda rights, Leon says that there is still a need to inquire if a juvenile’s confession is voluntary. The State can prove that a confession was voluntarily made by a preponderance of the evidence. See Lego v. Twomey.
In McKeiver, the Supreme Court indicated that juveniles were not constitutionally entitled to a jury trial.
While the Sixth Amendment guarantees adults accused of a crime the right to a speedy, public, and impartial jury trial, McKeiver indicates that a jury trial is not required; public trials are typically not required since juvenile proceedings should be confidential but that depends upon the state. See J.S. (VT) and RLR (AL); and a speedy trial, though not public and without a jury, is required. See In Re Thomas J.
In Re Causey indicated that it is constitutionally required that a juvenile be granted the right to plead “not guilty” by reason of insanity if not competent at the time the delinquent act was committed. Juveniles must also be competent to stand trial, i.e. “…present ability to consult with his lawyer to a reasonable degree of rational understanding.” See Dusky v. U.S. and
Since the function of the juvenile court was rehabilitation rather than punishment, disposition favors rehabilitation; however, “get tough” legislation by states has shifted the emphasis from rehabilitation to proportionality, i.e. make the punishment fit the crime. Appellate courts will generally uphold a juvenile court’s disposition, including institutional commitment, unless there is a showing of “abuse of discretion.” See In Re Gregory S.
Capital punishment or the imposition of the death penalty for an act committed by a juvenile under the age of 18 violates the 8th Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. See Roper v. Simmons. Life in prison without the possibility of parole for an act committed by a juvenile under the age of 18 violates the 8th Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. See Miller v. Alabama.
After Gault, what are the differences between the juvenile justice system and the criminal justice process?