Chapter 14: The Juvenile CourtChapter 14: The Juvenile Court

The Processing of Juvenile OffendersThe Processing of Juvenile Offenders ArrestArrest Court IntakeCourt Intake DetentionDetention Court HearingsCourt Hearings

Due Process Issues in the Juvenile Court (Pivotal Supreme Court Cases)Due Process Issues in the Juvenile Court (Pivotal Supreme Court Cases) The Right to Due ProcessThe Right to Due Process Right to CounselRight to Counsel Burden of ProofBurden of Proof Jury TrialJury Trial Double JeopardyDouble Jeopardy The Right to Bail and Preventive DetentionThe Right to Bail and Preventive Detention

Public Access to Juvenile Court Proceedings and RecordsPublic Access to Juvenile Court Proceedings and Records Right to Public HearingsRight to Public Hearings Confidentiality of Juvenile HearingsConfidentiality of Juvenile Hearings Media InvolvementMedia Involvement Destruction of RecordsDestruction of Records

The Transfer of Serious Offenders to Criminal CourtThe Transfer of Serious Offenders to Criminal Court Reasons for Transferring JuvenilesReasons for Transferring Juveniles Legal Criteria for TransferLegal Criteria for Transfer The Transfer ProcessThe Transfer Process Who is Transferred?Who is Transferred? The Impact of Race and Ethnicity in Transferred CasesThe Impact of Race and Ethnicity in Transferred Cases

1) Arrest and Court Intake1) Arrest and Court Intake

a. Arrest – Though adult offenders are arrested, juvenile offenders are "taken a. Arrest – Though adult offenders are arrested, juvenile offenders are "taken into custody" (this reflects the civil nature of the juvenile court)into custody" (this reflects the civil nature of the juvenile court)

i. Police are generally the first to make a formal determination as to whether or not to i. Police are generally the first to make a formal determination as to whether or not to process the juvenileprocess the juvenile

ii. Arrest policies for juvenile offenders vary widely from state to state, but during an ii. Arrest policies for juvenile offenders vary widely from state to state, but during an arrest, a juvenile is typically taken to the police station for initial screening and arrest, a juvenile is typically taken to the police station for initial screening and interrogationinterrogation

iii. From here, an officer will decide whether to terminate the case or to divert it to an iii. From here, an officer will decide whether to terminate the case or to divert it to an alternative program, rather than initiating the legal processalternative program, rather than initiating the legal process

b. Court Intake – About 85 percent of all delinquency cases are referred to b. Court Intake – About 85 percent of all delinquency cases are referred to juvenile court by law enforcement, with the rest being referred by social service juvenile court by law enforcement, with the rest being referred by social service agencies, schools, parents, probation officers and victimsagencies, schools, parents, probation officers and victims

i. Once juvenile offenders are referred to the court, they go through a process known as i. Once juvenile offenders are referred to the court, they go through a process known as intakeintake, (or the initial case screening process of the juvenile court system designed to , (or the initial case screening process of the juvenile court system designed to screen out cases that do not warrant a formal court hearing)screen out cases that do not warrant a formal court hearing)

Case Reported By Police

Police refer case to court

Processed by the Court intake department

Formally charged by the prosecutor

Tried in a Court Hearing

Youth assigned to some form of correctional activity

The basic processing of juvenile The basic processing of juvenile offendersoffenders

c. Cases that are screened out usually fall into one or more of the following categoriesc. Cases that are screened out usually fall into one or more of the following categories

i. Cases involving matters over which the court has no jurisdictioni. Cases involving matters over which the court has no jurisdiction

ii. Cases in which the evidence against the child is insufficientii. Cases in which the evidence against the child is insufficient

iii. Cases that are not serious enough to require juvenile court adjudicationiii. Cases that are not serious enough to require juvenile court adjudication

iv. Cases in which the youth or his or her family have already compensated the victim (i.e. iv. Cases in which the youth or his or her family have already compensated the victim (i.e. through civil law suits)through civil law suits)

v. Cases that should be waived to criminal courtv. Cases that should be waived to criminal court

d. Informal hearings, adjudications, and probation supervision are frequently d. Informal hearings, adjudications, and probation supervision are frequently administered at the intake levels, without referral to a judge (discussed later)administered at the intake levels, without referral to a judge (discussed later)

e. Though several elements are examined during the process of intake, the e. Though several elements are examined during the process of intake, the seriousness of the offense is often the most importantseriousness of the offense is often the most important

i. If a child has been referred to the court on a relatively minor charge, the intake worker can i. If a child has been referred to the court on a relatively minor charge, the intake worker can determine that court intervention is not necessary and that the child should be released, determine that court intervention is not necessary and that the child should be released, (possibly after a stern lecture)(possibly after a stern lecture)

f.f. Informal adjustment Informal adjustment, or cases that are handled through discretionary non-judicial , or cases that are handled through discretionary non-judicial proceedings, is often determined by the intake processproceedings, is often determined by the intake process

i. Similarly, i. Similarly, informal probationinformal probation (a case adjustment practice in which the child and family (a case adjustment practice in which the child and family comply with requirements of probation personnel without a formal court order—typically for comply with requirements of probation personnel without a formal court order—typically for a 3 to 6 month period) is often determined by intake workers during the initial processing a 3 to 6 month period) is often determined by intake workers during the initial processing phasephase

ii. Informal probation is widely used, and is just one of the many options taken into ii. Informal probation is widely used, and is just one of the many options taken into consideration by intake workersconsideration by intake workers

g. Problems can arise though, especially if parents and juveniles are unaware that g. Problems can arise though, especially if parents and juveniles are unaware that they have a right to a court hearing before the probation staff has any sanctioned they have a right to a court hearing before the probation staff has any sanctioned authority over their behavior and that their admission of guilt (which is a authority over their behavior and that their admission of guilt (which is a requirement of diversion), will become part of their formal juvenile recordrequirement of diversion), will become part of their formal juvenile record

i. In many jurisdictions, statements that juveniles make during intake can be used against i. In many jurisdictions, statements that juveniles make during intake can be used against them at an adjudication hearing (discussed later)them at an adjudication hearing (discussed later)

h. After a h. After a petitionpetition, (or the document that sets forth the specific charge against a , (or the document that sets forth the specific charge against a juvenile), is filed, the prosecutor evaluates the case in terms of its legal adequacyjuvenile), is filed, the prosecutor evaluates the case in terms of its legal adequacy

i. A petition is the counterpart of an indictment in an adult criminal prosecutioni. A petition is the counterpart of an indictment in an adult criminal prosecution

ii. It is important to note that if the prosecutor decides not to file the petition, this decision is ii. It is important to note that if the prosecutor decides not to file the petition, this decision is regarded as final and the case is then dismissedregarded as final and the case is then dismissed

iii. If a petition is filed, then it is usually followed by a report by the intake officer about the iii. If a petition is filed, then it is usually followed by a report by the intake officer about the social and behavioral patterns of the juvenile in questionsocial and behavioral patterns of the juvenile in question

2) Detention2) Detention

a. The a. The detentiondetention, or the temporary confinement of a juvenile pending , or the temporary confinement of a juvenile pending adjudication, disposition, or implementation of disposition, requires that a adjudication, disposition, or implementation of disposition, requires that a petition be filed within 48 to 72 hourspetition be filed within 48 to 72 hours

b. Preventive detention of juveniles is usually practiced for 3 reasons:b. Preventive detention of juveniles is usually practiced for 3 reasons:

i. to protect the childi. to protect the child

ii. To protect society from further law-breaking by the childii. To protect society from further law-breaking by the child

iii. To assure that the child will appear at subsequent hearingsiii. To assure that the child will appear at subsequent hearings

c. Juveniles may also be detained for purposes of evaluation, or while they await c. Juveniles may also be detained for purposes of evaluation, or while they await placement in a long term correctional or treatment facilityplacement in a long term correctional or treatment facility

d. Both federal and state courts have held that a juvenile may not be detained d. Both federal and state courts have held that a juvenile may not be detained pending trail on charges of delinquency without a prompt determination of probable pending trail on charges of delinquency without a prompt determination of probable causecause

e. Detention and arrest disparities are frequent in the juvenile justice systeme. Detention and arrest disparities are frequent in the juvenile justice system

i. However, some overrepresentation may stem from factors other than discrimination such as i. However, some overrepresentation may stem from factors other than discrimination such as factors relating to the seriousness and volume of crime, prior record, and life circumstances factors relating to the seriousness and volume of crime, prior record, and life circumstances (which may influence the decisions of police, justices, etc.)(which may influence the decisions of police, justices, etc.)

ii. According to the Regoli/Hewitt, few studies that examine disparities in our justice system ii. According to the Regoli/Hewitt, few studies that examine disparities in our justice system control for offense seriousness, let alone family and school circumstancescontrol for offense seriousness, let alone family and school circumstances

iii. While the actual causes of disparities or overrepresentation based on race and sex iii. While the actual causes of disparities or overrepresentation based on race and sex continue to be debated, blacks and females are certainly treated differently by the juvenile continue to be debated, blacks and females are certainly treated differently by the juvenile justice systemjustice system

f. Race –In 1997, 15 percent of delinquency cases involving white youths included f. Race –In 1997, 15 percent of delinquency cases involving white youths included detention at some point between referral and disposition, while among case detention at some point between referral and disposition, while among case involving blacks the figure was 27 percentinvolving blacks the figure was 27 percent

i. Detention was used in 14 percent of drug cases involving white youths, in 38 percent in i. Detention was used in 14 percent of drug cases involving white youths, in 38 percent in cases involving black youths, and in 16 percent of cases involving youths of other racescases involving black youths, and in 16 percent of cases involving youths of other races

g. Sex – In 1997, 20 percent of male delinquency cases involved detention while that g. Sex – In 1997, 20 percent of male delinquency cases involved detention while that number was 15 percent for femalesnumber was 15 percent for females

i. Girls were more likely to be detained for minor offenses such as status offenses, public i. Girls were more likely to be detained for minor offenses such as status offenses, public disorder, and traffic offenses (they are also more likely to be placed in detention for probation disorder, and traffic offenses (they are also more likely to be placed in detention for probation and parole violations)and parole violations)

3) Court Hearings3) Court Hearings

a. In recent decades, juvenile court proceedings have taken on many of the a. In recent decades, juvenile court proceedings have taken on many of the characteristics of the adversarial adult criminal court systemcharacteristics of the adversarial adult criminal court system

i. This is primarily due to "get tough on crime" legislation and landmark Supreme Court Casesi. This is primarily due to "get tough on crime" legislation and landmark Supreme Court Cases

ii. There is a noticeable convergence between juvenile and adult court proceedings, and Barry ii. There is a noticeable convergence between juvenile and adult court proceedings, and Barry Feld argues that juvenile courts tend to operate with two competing conceptions of adolescentsFeld argues that juvenile courts tend to operate with two competing conceptions of adolescents

iii. One on hand, juveniles are considered to be children, while on the other hand they are iii. One on hand, juveniles are considered to be children, while on the other hand they are increasingly being held accountable for their "adult-like crimes" (the worst of both worlds?)increasingly being held accountable for their "adult-like crimes" (the worst of both worlds?)

b. In an b. In an adjudication hearingadjudication hearing, or a hearing held to determine whether the child , or a hearing held to determine whether the child committed the offense of which he or she is accused, the required standard of committed the offense of which he or she is accused, the required standard of evidence is proof beyond a reasonable doubt (as it is in the adult criminal court evidence is proof beyond a reasonable doubt (as it is in the adult criminal court system)system)

i. The right to refuse to testify and the right to counsel are protected i. The right to refuse to testify and the right to counsel are protected

c. In order for a confession to be used in court, it must be voluntary and corroborated c. In order for a confession to be used in court, it must be voluntary and corroborated by someone other than an accomplice and preceded by the Miranda warning:by someone other than an accomplice and preceded by the Miranda warning:

i. the right to remain silenti. the right to remain silent

ii. The right to have an attorney present during questioning and to have an attorney provided ii. The right to have an attorney present during questioning and to have an attorney provided free of charge if the youth cannot afford to hire onefree of charge if the youth cannot afford to hire one

d. After hearing all of the evidence, the court may dismiss or continue the case or d. After hearing all of the evidence, the court may dismiss or continue the case or sustain the petitionsustain the petition

i. If the petition is sustained, the court will then set a date for the disposition hearing or the judge i. If the petition is sustained, the court will then set a date for the disposition hearing or the judge may ask for a social investigation report and make an immediate disposition report (this should may ask for a social investigation report and make an immediate disposition report (this should show you how much discretion there is in the juvenile justice system)show you how much discretion there is in the juvenile justice system)

e. At a e. At a disposition hearingdisposition hearing, (or a juvenile court hearing in which the court determines , (or a juvenile court hearing in which the court determines what action will be in the youth's and community's best interests; the equivalent of the what action will be in the youth's and community's best interests; the equivalent of the sentencing stage in the criminal court process), the probation officer, the prosecutor, sentencing stage in the criminal court process), the probation officer, the prosecutor, the defense attorney, and the child's parents typically discuss available optionsthe defense attorney, and the child's parents typically discuss available options

i. Hearsay evidence and opinions are admissible at this stage and depending on community i. Hearsay evidence and opinions are admissible at this stage and depending on community resources, the judge may have a considerable range of disposition options (ranging from resources, the judge may have a considerable range of disposition options (ranging from dismissal to incarceration)dismissal to incarceration)

ii. Disposition decisions are made in a relatively small amount of juvenile cases (In 1997, nearly ii. Disposition decisions are made in a relatively small amount of juvenile cases (In 1997, nearly 1.8 million juveniles were referred to the juvenile court while 57 percent were petitioned to the 1.8 million juveniles were referred to the juvenile court while 57 percent were petitioned to the juvenile court for an adjudicatory hearing)juvenile court for an adjudicatory hearing)

iii. Of these cases, 1 percent was waived to criminal court, 41 percent were non-iii. Of these cases, 1 percent was waived to criminal court, 41 percent were non-adjudicated, and 58 percent were adjudicated as delinquentadjudicated, and 58 percent were adjudicated as delinquent

iv. From the cases in which juveniles were adjudicated as delinquent, 55 percent were iv. From the cases in which juveniles were adjudicated as delinquent, 55 percent were placed on probation while only 28 percent resulted in out-of-home placements (i.e. boot placed on probation while only 28 percent resulted in out-of-home placements (i.e. boot camp, ranch, group home, correctional institution, etc.)camp, ranch, group home, correctional institution, etc.)

f. There are many disparities in adjudications and dispositions (mainly race and f. There are many disparities in adjudications and dispositions (mainly race and sex)sex)

i. In 1997 males accounted for 77 percent of all delinquency cases handled by the i. In 1997 males accounted for 77 percent of all delinquency cases handled by the juvenile courts, and cases involving males were more likely than cases involving females juvenile courts, and cases involving males were more likely than cases involving females to be adjudicated (59-53, respectively)to be adjudicated (59-53, respectively)

ii. Of petitioned youths, 59 percent of whites and 55 percent of blacks were adjudicated ii. Of petitioned youths, 59 percent of whites and 55 percent of blacks were adjudicated (national statistics, 1997)(national statistics, 1997)

An example of the juvenileAn example of the juvenile court process court process

(from Maricopa County, Arizona) (from Maricopa County, Arizona)

iii. 1997 dispositions – Males were moreiii. 1997 dispositions – Males were more

likely to placed in an out-of-home facility thanlikely to placed in an out-of-home facility than

were females, (30-22, respectively) and blackswere females, (30-22, respectively) and blacks

were more likely than whites to be placed in were more likely than whites to be placed in

out-of-home facilities (32-26, respectively)out-of-home facilities (32-26, respectively)

g. It is important to note that these nationalg. It is important to note that these national

statistics are compiled without controllingstatistics are compiled without controlling

for the seriousness or context of the crime,for the seriousness or context of the crime,

the criminal histories of youths, the amountthe criminal histories of youths, the amount

of harm to society, or for the offenders family lifeof harm to society, or for the offenders family life

Juvenile Court activity, 1988 v. 1997Juvenile Court activity, 1988 v. 1997

4) Due Process Issues in the Juvenile Court4) Due Process Issues in the Juvenile Court

a. In a. In Kent v. United StatesKent v. United States (1966), the court ruled that a formal waiver hearing (1966), the court ruled that a formal waiver hearing must take place before the transfer of a juvenile to criminal courtmust take place before the transfer of a juvenile to criminal court

i. This was the first case to deal with the rights to due process with respect to juvenile i. This was the first case to deal with the rights to due process with respect to juvenile offenders, and it set the stage for offenders, and it set the stage for In re GaultIn re Gault (1967), in which the court determined that (1967), in which the court determined that juveniles may not be denied basic due process rights in juvenile adjudicatory hearingsjuveniles may not be denied basic due process rights in juvenile adjudicatory hearings

ii. Justice Fortas, who wrote the majority opinion for the court in re Gault, argued that the ii. Justice Fortas, who wrote the majority opinion for the court in re Gault, argued that the "basic requirement of due process…" must be satisfied in juvenile proceedings because "basic requirement of due process…" must be satisfied in juvenile proceedings because "neither the fourteenth amendment nor the Bill of Rights is for adults only" (this was contrary "neither the fourteenth amendment nor the Bill of Rights is for adults only" (this was contrary to parens patriae)to parens patriae)

b. Fortas then set out the essentials of due process for juveniles and how they should b. Fortas then set out the essentials of due process for juveniles and how they should apply to adjudicatory hearings:apply to adjudicatory hearings:

i. The juvenile has a right to counsel and to court-appointed counsel, if necessaryi. The juvenile has a right to counsel and to court-appointed counsel, if necessary

ii. With the aid of counsel, the child can present his or her defense and confront witnesses, ii. With the aid of counsel, the child can present his or her defense and confront witnesses, who must present testimony under oath through cross-examinationwho must present testimony under oath through cross-examination

iii. The child also has the right to confront his or her accuser as well as a right against self-iii. The child also has the right to confront his or her accuser as well as a right against self-incrimination. Since his or her freedom is at stake, this right has a special urgencyincrimination. Since his or her freedom is at stake, this right has a special urgency

iv. To make use of the available elements of the defense, the child has a right to timely notice iv. To make use of the available elements of the defense, the child has a right to timely notice of the charges against him or herof the charges against him or her

c. Note that this initially only applied to the adjudicatory hearing, where guilt or c. Note that this initially only applied to the adjudicatory hearing, where guilt or innocence is determinedinnocence is determined

i. In re Gault did not deal with the rights a juvenile reserved at a disposition hearingi. In re Gault did not deal with the rights a juvenile reserved at a disposition hearing

d. While most state juvenile codes now provide juveniles with a statutory right to d. While most state juvenile codes now provide juveniles with a statutory right to counsel, (i.e. public defender, defense attorney) few states ensure effective legal counsel, (i.e. public defender, defense attorney) few states ensure effective legal counselcounsel

i. Jane Knitzer and Merril Sobie studied defense counsel performance in New York and reported i. Jane Knitzer and Merril Sobie studied defense counsel performance in New York and reported that there is inadequate representation of juveniles in 45 percent of observed casesthat there is inadequate representation of juveniles in 45 percent of observed cases

ii. Most attorneys (especially public defenders) cite that they are stretched very thin and carry ii. Most attorneys (especially public defenders) cite that they are stretched very thin and carry large caseloads (Barry Feld found that in urban communities, public defenders often had large caseloads (Barry Feld found that in urban communities, public defenders often had between 600 and 800 caseloads)between 600 and 800 caseloads)

e. In e. In In Re Winship In Re Winship (1970), the court determined that juveniles, in delinquency cases, (1970), the court determined that juveniles, in delinquency cases, have the right to be convicted only if there is proof beyond a reasonable doubthave the right to be convicted only if there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt

i. It is interesting to note that Justice Burger (who dissented) stated that "Since I see no i. It is interesting to note that Justice Burger (who dissented) stated that "Since I see no constitutional requirement of due process sufficient to overcome the legislative judgment of the constitutional requirement of due process sufficient to overcome the legislative judgment of the States in this area, I dissent from further strait-jacketing an overly restricted system... [which].. States in this area, I dissent from further strait-jacketing an overly restricted system... [which].. requires breathing room and flexibility in order to survive" (on a side note, Burger wrote the requires breathing room and flexibility in order to survive" (on a side note, Burger wrote the concurring opinion in Roe v. Wade (1973))concurring opinion in Roe v. Wade (1973))

f. In f. In McKeiver v. Pennsylvania McKeiver v. Pennsylvania (1971), the Supreme Court decided that juveniles do (1971), the Supreme Court decided that juveniles do not have a constitutional right to a jury trial in juvenile courtnot have a constitutional right to a jury trial in juvenile court

i. The court ruled that a jury trail is an adult right that is not essential in juvenile i. The court ruled that a jury trail is an adult right that is not essential in juvenile proceedings, and felt that the states should be allowed to have jury trials in their own proceedings, and felt that the states should be allowed to have jury trials in their own juvenile proceedings if they wished (in other words, the decision was completely left up juvenile proceedings if they wished (in other words, the decision was completely left up to the states)to the states)

ii. In 1999, the Appellate Court of Illinois ruled that a juvenile charged with first-degree ii. In 1999, the Appellate Court of Illinois ruled that a juvenile charged with first-degree murder and tried in the juvenile court may not be denied a jury trialmurder and tried in the juvenile court may not be denied a jury trial

g. In g. In Breed v. Jones Breed v. Jones (1975), the Supreme Court decided that the criminal prosecution of a (1975), the Supreme Court decided that the criminal prosecution of a child following a juvenile court hearing is unconstitutional because it constitutes child following a juvenile court hearing is unconstitutional because it constitutes double double jeopardy jeopardy (the prosecution of an individual a second time for the same offense. It is (the prosecution of an individual a second time for the same offense. It is prohibited by the 5th amendment)prohibited by the 5th amendment)

i. In other words, a juvenile cannot be tried and convicted in a juvenile court and i. In other words, a juvenile cannot be tried and convicted in a juvenile court and then tried and convicted of the same crime in an adult court (this would be then tried and convicted of the same crime in an adult court (this would be contrary to the 5th amendment)contrary to the 5th amendment)

h. In h. In Schall v. Martin Schall v. Martin (1984), the Supreme Court ruled that juveniles may be held in (1984), the Supreme Court ruled that juveniles may be held in preventive detention while awaiting adjudication if they are determined to be "serious preventive detention while awaiting adjudication if they are determined to be "serious risks" to the communityrisks" to the community

I. The preventive detention of juveniles was found to be constitutional and the court I. The preventive detention of juveniles was found to be constitutional and the court articulated that there were three primary justifications for its use:articulated that there were three primary justifications for its use:

i. The legitimate and compelling state interest in protecting the community from crimei. The legitimate and compelling state interest in protecting the community from crime

ii. Protecting the juvenile form his or her own "folly" and the consequences of criminal ii. Protecting the juvenile form his or her own "folly" and the consequences of criminal activityactivity

iii. Preventing the child from absconding (fleeing)iii. Preventing the child from absconding (fleeing)

j. Pre-trial detention is also constitutional as long as one or more of the j. Pre-trial detention is also constitutional as long as one or more of the conditions are met, providing that the authorities have probable cause to believe conditions are met, providing that the authorities have probable cause to believe that the juvenile is responsible for the commission of a crimethat the juvenile is responsible for the commission of a crime

5) Public Access to Juvenile Court Proceedings and Records5) Public Access to Juvenile Court Proceedings and Records

a. Since 1985, stage legislatures have made significant changes in how a. Since 1985, stage legislatures have made significant changes in how information about juvenile offenders is treated by the justice systeminformation about juvenile offenders is treated by the justice system

i. By 1996, 22 states provided for open hearings of juvenile offenders in certain casesi. By 1996, 22 states provided for open hearings of juvenile offenders in certain cases

ii. Moreover, nearly all states have statutes that specify circumstances in which juvenile ii. Moreover, nearly all states have statutes that specify circumstances in which juvenile records may be made available to the publicrecords may be made available to the public

b. Around 80 percent of states permit the release of the certain juveniles' names b. Around 80 percent of states permit the release of the certain juveniles' names and/or photographs to the media, but a few states forbid publication of the and/or photographs to the media, but a few states forbid publication of the juvenile's name and/or any other identifying informationjuvenile's name and/or any other identifying information

i. In Davis v. Alaska (1974), the Court ruled that a defendant's sixth amendment right to i. In Davis v. Alaska (1974), the Court ruled that a defendant's sixth amendment right to confront witnesses must prevail over the state's interest in protecting juveniles from adverse confront witnesses must prevail over the state's interest in protecting juveniles from adverse publicitypublicity

ii. In Oklahoma Publishing Company v. District Court (1977), the Supreme Court held that once ii. In Oklahoma Publishing Company v. District Court (1977), the Supreme Court held that once information is "publicly revealed" or "in the public domain" its publication or broadcast cannot information is "publicly revealed" or "in the public domain" its publication or broadcast cannot be restrainedbe restrained

iii. In Smith v. Daily Mail Publishing Co. (1979), the Supreme Court ruled that when information iii. In Smith v. Daily Mail Publishing Co. (1979), the Supreme Court ruled that when information is lawfully obtained with respect to a juvenile's identity/record, the state cannot prohibit its is lawfully obtained with respect to a juvenile's identity/record, the state cannot prohibit its publicationpublication

c. In more than half of all states, provisions exist that permit the destruction of certain c. In more than half of all states, provisions exist that permit the destruction of certain juvenile court recordsjuvenile court records

i. These statues allow for either the sealing or destruction of juvenile recordsi. These statues allow for either the sealing or destruction of juvenile records

ii. Should all juvenile records be destroyed to protect these people later in life from information ii. Should all juvenile records be destroyed to protect these people later in life from information leaks?leaks?

iii. There is also a debate of whether or not an adult who is facing a criminal charge should have iii. There is also a debate of whether or not an adult who is facing a criminal charge should have his/her juvenile record taken into consideration at trialhis/her juvenile record taken into consideration at trial

6) The Transfer of Serious Offenders to Criminal Court6) The Transfer of Serious Offenders to Criminal Court

a. The old system of juvenile corrections emphasized treatment and concern for the a. The old system of juvenile corrections emphasized treatment and concern for the privacy of the offender, but much has changed in recent decadesprivacy of the offender, but much has changed in recent decades

b. In response to demands for getting "tough on crime," many states have b. In response to demands for getting "tough on crime," many states have advocated one or more of the following changes:advocated one or more of the following changes:

i. Lowering the age for waiver (dropping the minimum age for waiver from 15 to 14, for i. Lowering the age for waiver (dropping the minimum age for waiver from 15 to 14, for example)example)

ii. Expanding the list of crimes eligible for waiverii. Expanding the list of crimes eligible for waiver

iii. Establishing "presumptive waiver" provisions requiring that certain offenders be iii. Establishing "presumptive waiver" provisions requiring that certain offenders be transferred unless they can prove they are suitable for juvenile rehabilitationtransferred unless they can prove they are suitable for juvenile rehabilitation

iv. Excluding certain offense from juvenile court jurisdiction, such as violent crimes iv. Excluding certain offense from juvenile court jurisdiction, such as violent crimes against the personagainst the person

v. Adding prior record provisions making certain repeat offenders eligible for waiverv. Adding prior record provisions making certain repeat offenders eligible for waiver

vi. Requiring that once an offender is waived from criminal court jurisdiction or is vi. Requiring that once an offender is waived from criminal court jurisdiction or is convicted in criminal court, all subsequent cases are under criminal court jurisdictionconvicted in criminal court, all subsequent cases are under criminal court jurisdiction

vii. Lowering the maximum age of juvenile court jurisdiction (from 18 to 16 or 15, for example), vii. Lowering the maximum age of juvenile court jurisdiction (from 18 to 16 or 15, for example), thus allowing criminal courts to prosecute younger offenders without the need for the waiver thus allowing criminal courts to prosecute younger offenders without the need for the waiver processprocess

c. When Congress passed new crime control legislation in 1994, it lowered the minimum c. When Congress passed new crime control legislation in 1994, it lowered the minimum age for transferring juveniles for adult prosecution from age 15 to age 13 for certain age for transferring juveniles for adult prosecution from age 15 to age 13 for certain violent federal offensesviolent federal offenses

d. There are 3 main reasons for transferring a juvenile to criminal courtd. There are 3 main reasons for transferring a juvenile to criminal court

i. If the offense is determined to be severe enough to warrant such as transferi. If the offense is determined to be severe enough to warrant such as transfer

ii. Some youths are viewed as not amenable to treatment programsii. Some youths are viewed as not amenable to treatment programs

iii. Some citizens and penal experts argue for longer term incarceration, which a criminal court iii. Some citizens and penal experts argue for longer term incarceration, which a criminal court can providecan provide

e. The legal criteria for transfer lie within the landmark Kent case, in which the court e. The legal criteria for transfer lie within the landmark Kent case, in which the court stated that there is no constitutional requirement for a separate juvenile court systemstated that there is no constitutional requirement for a separate juvenile court system

i. However, most states have legislated that juvenile courts have original jurisdiction over all i. However, most states have legislated that juvenile courts have original jurisdiction over all youths who are under the age of 18 at the time of their arrest (most states also set a minimum youths who are under the age of 18 at the time of their arrest (most states also set a minimum age for the transfer of a juvenile to criminal court for certain offenses)age for the transfer of a juvenile to criminal court for certain offenses)

f. There are several methods to initiate the transfer of an offender from a juvenile court f. There are several methods to initiate the transfer of an offender from a juvenile court to a criminal courtto a criminal court

i. A i. A judicial waiverjudicial waiver, (or a method used for transferring youths to criminal court in which the , (or a method used for transferring youths to criminal court in which the juvenile court judge is the primary decision maker in determining whether the youth should juvenile court judge is the primary decision maker in determining whether the youth should be transferred), is the most commonly utilized waiver in the juvenile Courtbe transferred), is the most commonly utilized waiver in the juvenile Court

ii. ii. Legislative exclusionLegislative exclusion, (or a method used for transferring youths to criminal court, , (or a method used for transferring youths to criminal court, whereby the most serious or persistent offenders or those over a certain age are excluded whereby the most serious or persistent offenders or those over a certain age are excluded from juvenile court jurisdiction and automatically prosecuted as adults), has been used by from juvenile court jurisdiction and automatically prosecuted as adults), has been used by many states as an alternative to the judicial waiver, in order to bypass the juvenile court many states as an alternative to the judicial waiver, in order to bypass the juvenile court completelycompletely

iii. The iii. The Prosecutorial waiverProsecutorial waiver, (a method used for transferring youths to criminal court in , (a method used for transferring youths to criminal court in which the prosecutor is the primary decision maker in determining whether a youth should be which the prosecutor is the primary decision maker in determining whether a youth should be transferred; the prosecutor typically has concurrent jurisdiction to file charges in either transferred; the prosecutor typically has concurrent jurisdiction to file charges in either juvenile or criminal court), is utilized by at least 15 statesjuvenile or criminal court), is utilized by at least 15 states

iv. The iv. The Reverse waiverReverse waiver allows a juvenile who is being prosecuted as an adult in criminal allows a juvenile who is being prosecuted as an adult in criminal court to petition to have their case transferred to juvenile court for adjudication or disposition court to petition to have their case transferred to juvenile court for adjudication or disposition

v. The v. The Demand waiverDemand waiver allows a juvenile to request to have his or her case transferred from allows a juvenile to request to have his or her case transferred from juvenile court to criminal court (this is often utilized by a juvenile who feels that they will be juvenile court to criminal court (this is often utilized by a juvenile who feels that they will be acquitted in a jury trial)acquitted in a jury trial)

g. Who is transferred to criminal court varies, but there is certainly a disparity g. Who is transferred to criminal court varies, but there is certainly a disparity between sex and race/ethnicitybetween sex and race/ethnicity

i. Males are significantly more likely than females to be waived to criminal court, comprising i. Males are significantly more likely than females to be waived to criminal court, comprising 95 percent of all waived cases95 percent of all waived cases

ii. Over 85 percent of waived cases involve juveniles who were age 16 or older at the ii. Over 85 percent of waived cases involve juveniles who were age 16 or older at the time of their offensetime of their offense

iii. In 1997, white youths accounted for 50 percent of waived cases, black youths-46 iii. In 1997, white youths accounted for 50 percent of waived cases, black youths-46 percent, and other youths-4 percentpercent, and other youths-4 percent

iv. National statistics may cloud the extent of these disparities in certain areasiv. National statistics may cloud the extent of these disparities in certain areas

v. In a study conducted by Jeffrey Fagan and associates that examined transfer cases in v. In a study conducted by Jeffrey Fagan and associates that examined transfer cases in Boston, Detroit, Newark, and Phoenix, it was determined that black youths were 75% Boston, Detroit, Newark, and Phoenix, it was determined that black youths were 75% more likely to be waived to criminal court than white youthsmore likely to be waived to criminal court than white youths

h. However, most youths who meet the offense and statutory-age criteria for h. However, most youths who meet the offense and statutory-age criteria for waiver are not transferred to criminal courtwaiver are not transferred to criminal court

End of chapter 14 notesEnd of chapter 14 notes