Juvenile Court Case Paper

When a child is committed of a crime and must undergo punishment through the juvenile system they are being given the punishment with the thought of rehabilitation. As a child the goal for the state is to help them get back on their feet and stop the criminal behavior that is accruing in order to ensure that when they are an adult they will not still be committing these crimes. As soon as a minor has been committed of a crime and arrested for this crime the police submit an application for petition to Probation, probation them looks over the circumstances such as family life, history of crimes, and psychological state before deciding how the case should be handled. (Inside the Juvenile Justice System: 2014) If the case is thought to

Said offender McAnarney is, in fact, only a boy of 14 years old. To try him in the adult court would condemn him to serve his sentence in adult jails. One thing should be noted by the juvenile justice system: if a boy is sent into an adult jail with an adult cellmate, he is wont to see his cellmate as a role model. If the boy had been sent to a rehabilitation center instead, he would have had the companion of other children who are in similar position, and could thus be educated in their interests

Approximately two million adolescents a year are arrested and out of that two million, 60,000 of them are incarcerated according to the American Journal of Public Health. The 60,000 incarcerated adolescents each year are being tried as adults in court because of the serious crimes they have committed. The crimes they have committed are anything from armed robbery to murder. Some juveniles might be first time offenders and others might be repeat offenders. Crimes have always been a major issue in the United States and can cause controversy in the criminal justice system. Charging a minor as an adult in criminal court varies from state to state based on each state’s jurisdiction. Some states consider anyone up to the age of 18 still a juvenile and would not be charged as an adult in criminal court, but other states may charge a juvenile as an adult at the age of 16 or 17. Jordan (2014) states, “Although states already had methods for transferring youth to the adult system, as a result of the growing fear of juvenile violence, most states implemented new laws to increase the number of youth entering the adult criminal system’ (Bernard & Kurlychek, 2010; Torbet et al., 1996)” (p. 315). While it sounds beneficial to incarcerate more adolescents in the adult criminal justice system to avoid juveniles from committing crimes in the future, that is not always the case. Incarcerating these juveniles can be life changing in a negative

On November 15, 2015, I, Cpl. Lessane, along with Deputy Jordan, with the Hampton County Sheriff's Office, responded to 2427 Bamberg Highway, in the county of Hampton, regarding disturbance with neighbors. Upon arrival, Deputies made contact with the complainant, Brandy Davis, who stated her neighbor, Wanda Carroll, kids were being disrespectful. Deputies gathered the pertinent information needed to complete this report.

With this message directed towards juveniles, as well as the likely chance that juveniles whom are transferred to the adult criminal court system will result in some type of incarceration, this may lead to a deterrence of violent or misbehaved actions committed by juveniles in an attempt to avoid these prosecutions. These statements conducted by Urbina and White (2009), are statements to consider on the issue of a juveniles transfer to adult criminal court. Although there are strong facts to support this type of transfer for juveniles, Urbina and White (2009) also found that this might not be the best option in some cases. There have been studies that showed juveniles whom were transferred to the adult criminal court system and sent to adult jails were more likely to re-offend and with more serious crimes than did their juvenile counterparts (Urbina & White, 2009). With this study that was conducted, it adds doubt to the fact that juveniles should be transferred to the adult criminal court system. Although, at times, this may be the best option for serious and violent repeated offenders, it is not likely that this process will have a positive affect on the juvenile or the community. Urbina and White (2009) continue to lack strong argumentative evidence to show the exact times that transferring a juvenile to the adult criminal court system is the

The dilemma of whether or not to transfer juveniles to adult court has been a major topic, for many years, in the United States. Since 1899, judges have had the option to transfer juveniles to adult court. The major factor for transferring juveniles to adult court since then has been the seriousness of the offense. That being said, juveniles only make up a small portion of violent crimes in the United States. Only 16 percent of juvenile offenders in 2008 were arrested for violent crimes (Champion,2008). The problem is the determination of whether the crime is serious enough to be waived and transferred to adult court. Almost every state has statutory judicial waiver provisions, which grant juvenile judges the authority to transfer

The disposition comes after the adjudication. This will determine first of all if the child is delinquent and will also decide if the child needs rehabilitation, treatment or guidance. A judge can place a child on probation under the supervision of the Department of Juvenile Services at the disposition. They can also commit the child to the department or order restitution.

Today, the juvenile system primary goals are crime reduction and rehabilitation. The juvenile officials must assess whether youthful offenders are likely to commit crimes in the future and whether they can benefit from interventions. If these kids cannot benefit, then they will most like end up a delinquent. In most states delinquency is defined as the commission of a criminal act by a child who was under the age of 18 at that time (Virginia Rules). Most states allow youth to remain under the supervision of the juvenile court until the age of 21, but this depends on the type of crime that was committed. There has been many times where a juvenile case was transferred to an adult criminal court. This would have to be done thru a process called a waiver. A waiver is when a judge waives the protections that the juvenile court provides (Larry J. Siegel). Cases that

The court, at the sentencing hearing, shall consider specified factors in determining the appropriate sentence and be given greater discretion in determining an appropriate sentence. This bill extracts details from the Juvenile Court Act of 1987, which entails the cautions when handling the minor in custody and as the minor is released (Illinois General Assembly , 2015). When adolescence potency extended a peak more than 20 years ago, the country lost sureness in its ability to rehabilitate juveniles. Councils passed laws permitting more young offenders to be tried as adults. Since then, juvenile

The juvenile justice system is a foundation in society that is granted certain powers and responsibilities. It faces several different tasks, among the most important is maintaining order and preserving constitutional rights. When a juvenile is arrested and charged with committing a crime there are many different factors that will come in to play during the course of his arrest, trial, conviction, sentencing, and rehabilitation process. This paper examines the Juvenile Justice System’s court process in the State of New Jersey and the State of California.

There is no national law stating at what age a minor could be tried as an adult. All states have different regulations on treating a case of a minor that committed a crime. With fourteen states not even having a minimum age. There should be a national law that refers to the requirements for a minor to be tried as an adult. Questions like: what did the child do? Was it the child's’ intent to commit the crime he did? And most importantly Is the child old enough to comprehend the

Some jurisdictions require the child to be over a certain age and charged with a felony, while others permit waiver if the child is over a certain age regardless of offense. Still yet, others have no conditions. Juveniles can be tried in all stated in one of three ways: 1. Concurrent Jurisdiction: the prosecutor has the discretion of filing charge offenses in either juvenile or criminal court. 2. Excluded offenses: the legislature excludes from juvenile court jurisdiction certain offenses that are either very minor, such as traffic or fishing violations, or very serious, such as murder or rape. 3. Judicial waiver: the juvenile court waives its jurisdiction and transfers the case to criminal court. Barry Feld, Juvenile Law Scholar, suggests that waivers to adult court be mandatory for serious crimes. Those espousing the crime control model believe that the overriding purpose is protection of the public, deterrence or violent juvenile behavior, and the incarceration of serious youthful offenders in the adult criminal justice system. The rehabilitative justice model view this as an attack on the juvenile justice system, but crime control advocates consider such steps a necessary response to a rising juvenile violence rate. Life in Adult Prison The Southwest Multi County Corrections Center, a two-story adult jail is the largest maximum-security program for juveniles under federal authority. The BOP pays

As more minors are committing violent crimes, the question of whether they should be tried as adults has arisen. Children as young as 13 or 14 are committing violent crimes such as murder, rape, and armed robbery. Some of these children are being tried as adults while others are being tried as juveniles and receiving milder punishments. A juvenile offender may receive a few years in a juvenile detention facility and possibly probation following his release at age eighteen. An adult committing the same violent crime will receive a much harsher penalty, often years in jail, possibly a life sentence, with little or no chance of parole. The only difference between the two offenders is the age at which they committed the crime. Juveniles over

For example, in 1996 the legislature in the state of Missouri lowered the minimum age for transfer from fourteen to twelve (Zierdt, 1999, p.419). States in favor of this kind of shift justify the transfer because chronic juvenile offenders in rehabilitation centers will likely disrupt the reformation of other juvenile offenders as they are considered as a bad influence on them. It is thus, considered that in not transferring the juveniles in adult prisons, these chronic juvenile offenders disrupts the growth and development of other teens undergoing rehabilitation.

The nation’s first juvenile court was established in 1899 as a part of the Juvenile Court Act. It was founded on three principles: juveniles are not ready to be held accountable for their actions, are not yet fully developed, and can rehabilitate easier than adults. In all but three states, anyone charged with committing a criminal act before his or her eighteenth birthday is considered a juvenile offender. Now more than ever, states and countries have begun to question the reliability of the juvenile court. Some believe the juvenile court system should be abolished because of its insufficient gain to the community. Others believe children are not fully capable to understand the degree of their actions and the consequences that come from them and believe that juvenile courts are a necessity in the court system.