1 / 13

The Legal Rights of Juveniles

The Legal Rights of Juveniles. Context of Parens Patriae Police Detention Intake Waiver Adjudication . Overriding Issue?. Parens Patriae The state is acting as a surrogate parent, has a right to intervene in the life of a child E.G. Ex Parte Crouse (1838)

panthea
Télécharger la présentation

The Legal Rights of Juveniles

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Legal Rights of Juveniles Context of Parens Patriae Police Detention Intake Waiver Adjudication

  2. Overriding Issue? • Parens Patriae • The state is acting as a surrogate parent, has a right to intervene in the life of a child • E.G. Ex Parte Crouse (1838) • Commonwealth v. Fisher (1905) • Intervene in the life of a child for that child’s good • Therefore, Bill of Rights does not apply to juveniles • 1900s-1960 = Largely “Hands Off” doctrine

  3. Parens Patriae attacked • Increased (and public) evidence of judicial abuse of discretion (Gault, for example) • Attack on Rehabilitation • Mistrust of Government • Rise of Labeling Theory • National Trend in Bureaucratization

  4. The Police • Haley V. State of Ohio (1948) • Gallegos V. Colorado (1962) • Harling V. United States (1961) BUT: • Fare v. Michael C. (1979) • New Jersey vs. T.L.O. (1985) • Cason v. Cook (1987)

  5. The Police: Recent Lower Court Cases • Smith v. State (1992) Versus • State v. Sugg (1995) • In the Interest of J.L., A Child (1993) Versus • In the Interest of S.A.W. (1993)

  6. Detention • Schall v. Martin (1984) • Preventative Detention is constitutional • Lower Cases • Martarea v. Kelly (1972) • Punitive/hazardous conditions of confinement violate juvenile’s constitutional rights

  7. Intake (No S.C. Cases) • In re Frank H. (1972) • No right to counsel (not “critical” phase) • Too much burden would be placed in JJS • In re Wayne H. (1979) • Information gathered at intake cannot be used in any guilt-finding process; juvenile or adult

  8. Waiver to Adult Court • Kent v. United States (1966) • Transfer is “critical stage” • Hearing, Counsel, access to records, statement of reasons supporting waiver • Breed v. Jones (1975) • Double Jeopardy • Cannot find delinquent and then waive to adult court • People vs. P.H. (1991): Gang Waiver

  9. Adjudication • In re Gault (1967) • In re Winship (1970) • McKeiver v. Pennsylvania (1971) • Lower Cases • Boyd v. State (1993) • if waived, adult rules apply • In re Marvin C. (1995) • State must prove juveniles under age 14 have capacity for intent

  10. Disposition--Death • Eddings v. Oklahoma (1982) • Mitigating circumstances must be considered • This evidence must be put on the record • Thompson v. Oklahoma (1988) • D.P. unconstitutional for those 15 or younger at the time of the offense • Stanford v. Kentucky (1989) • It is constitutional to execute those 16 or 17 years old at the time of their crime

  11. Dispositions—non-Death • United States ex rel. Murray v. Owens (1972) • Constitutional to adjudicate in JJS without jury trial and sentence to a young adult facility • Baker v. Hamilton (1972) • Placement in adult jail without total separation from adults is unconstitutional • A.S. v. State (1993) • Parents cannot be forced to pay restitution unless court demonstrates their lack of “good faith” in raising child

  12. Other Issues • Conditions of Confinement • Inmates of Boy’s Training School v. Affleck (1972) • Privacy Issues • Generally left to states, but no First Amendment right where state prohibits.

  13. So you see Timmy… • See tables in Champion book • Differences between adult and juvenile due process rights • Differences across states in the extent to which juveniles are granted d.p. rights • Half Empty of Half Full? • Feld: Worst of both worlds • Isn’t the opposite also possible?

More Related