Juvenile Court Case Study

Petitioner was arrested when he was 16, he got charges for breaking and entering, robbery and rape. Petitioner, was subject to jurisdiction issues from the District of Columbia Juvenile Court, after full investigation, the court would waive jurisdiction over him and send him to trial for the charges. Petitioner's Lawyers filed a motion in the Juvenile Court for a hearing a waiver on charges, and to gain access to the Juvenile Court's Social Service file which was gathered on petitioner during his probation for his previous offense. The Juvenile Court would not rule on these motions. They entered an order wanting to waive jurisdiction, but after the full investigation was done. Petitioner was indicted in the District Court. He moved to dismiss the charges, but the Court overruled the motion, and petitioner was tried. He was convicted on six counts of breaking and entering, and robbery, but acquitted on two counts of rape by reason of insanity. petitioner raised, among other things, the validity of the Juvenile Court's waiver of jurisdiction.. (united, n.d.)

It is sad and depressing to hear when teenagers are involved in deplorable behavior and youth crimes are increasing worldwide. When a juvenile or youth is arrested under crimes such as a theft, murder, rape, DUI, drug possession, the hearings are conducted in a separate Juvenile Court that may charge them of serious penalties like fines, house arrest, jail, community service, a criminal record, probation, psychiatric evaluations, drug testing and treatment or counseling. Since a juvenile crime can have far reaching effect on his future, the court does not conduct a jury trial but exercises discretionary powers which most likely lead to some sort of rehabilitation only. To determine such cases, age, mental and physical maturity, history of criminal record of juvenile at time of crime and damages suffered by the accused play a very important role. In Dayton, Ohio if a child (below 18 years) has attained an age of 14 years or above at the time of crime, he can be tried in an adult court. All hearings in the beginning are held in a juvenile court to determine whether the case need to transferred to adult court for further legal proceedings to make a decision or finding more facts on the case. This process is normally termed as bindover, waiver or transfer of

18 Nov. 2015. This article speaks on why most juveniles should be tried as adults. Showing that when teens commit murder they receive less of a sentence than if an adult were to commit the same murder as the teen, the adult would most likely get a more time than a teen. The article show that New York has reduced their age to try juveniles as adults from the 16 to 13 years old.

In transferring, a juvenile to adult court there is a certain amount of criteria that needs to be followed. The first criteria is if the juvenile is dangerous to the community, the maturity of the offender, and the psychology findings of the offender, it helps to determine if the juvenile is qualified to be transferred to adult court. This information is to happen in the intake process upon the processing of the offender into custody. There were two different types of questionnaires that were sent out to the juvenile court judges. With doing a survey with juvenile court judges around the nation, only 44% responded back on what the criteria to transfer the offender to adult court. These surveys made the criteria form a standard that every juvenile judge follows in determining a transfer to adult court.

Any individual below the age of 18 can be termed as a child. However, any child above the age of 14 at the time of the crime can be tried as an adult. This age can even be lower and differs among states. For instance, the youngest ever recorded successful trial as an adult was of a 12-year-old (Alexford, 2015). Almost every such case starts in a juvenile court with a felony accusation. The court must direct hearings and make

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

Statutory law can require certain serious crimes, such as murder, be charged in adult court even if the defendant is a minor. In states where adult criminal courts have no jurisdiction in cases involving a juvenile defendant, or where both the juvenile courts and adult criminal courts have jurisdiction over cases involving certain crimes, prosecutors are allowed to decide whether to charge the case in juvenile court or adult criminal court.

As a criminal justice student, there are differences between juvenile and adult courts, I want to share my knowledge with Mallory and her parents so they will know what they are up against in court. Mallory is considered a juvenile, a juvenile is a young person who has not yet attained the age at which he or she is treated as an adult for purposes of the law. She is only 15 years old, and legally to be considered an adult is the age of 18. The juvenile court system has as its intended goal to reform troubled youth and help them reform into responsible and capable adults in the future. The adult court system, on the other hand, protects the general public by punishing those that violate the law, either through monetary fines or through incarceration.

Researchers have discussed that at the age between 12 and 15 is when a child starts to develop the understanding of their actions. Psychologically, their brain starts to advance into creating their own thought process. Dr. William Womack a Psychiatrist states that young children have not yet developed the mind set to value another human’s life. A minor who commits a crime at a young age should pay for the consequences as an adult would. Their thought process doesn’t start after they commit the crime, it starts before they commit the crime. I believe that when a minor commits a violent crime they know what they are doing.

The youth will enter a plea agreement. Normally a plea agreement depends solely on the juvenile’s willingness to follow the set out conditions. Such as a part of the plea agreement could be that the juvenile could have to obey curfews, pay the victim for damages or attend counseling. If there is not plea agreement then the judge could divert the case, which means, the judge keeps jurisdiction over the case while the child goes through a recommended program like, counseling or community service. If the child doesn’t complete the program the court could bring back formal charges. If the case is severe then the case will go to trial, in a juvenile case it is call an adjudicatory hearing. Just like an adult criminal trial, both sides will present their evidence and argue the case. Most states the cases are only heard by a judge not by a jury. If the judge determines the youth is delinquent or guilt, then a probation officer will evaluate the child. The judge will then decide the best course of punishment or rehabilitation, including, counseling, locked up in a juvenile detention facility, pay back the victim or probation. The judge could also order the child to return to court periodically to see if the child’s behavior is

According to Street Law, a juvenile is any person who is not yet an adult. In most states and the District of Columbia, individuals under 18 years of age are considered juveniles. The District of Columbia along with most states in the United States view any person under the age of 18 that has committed a crime as a juvenile criminal. Acts of a juvenile crime include but are not limited to: truancy, smoking, drinking, theft, rape, murder, defiance towards parents or guardian, etc. A juvenile criminal can only be held in a juvenile institution until the age of 21, no matter how gruesome their offense may have been.

If a juvenile, over fourteen has the ability and willingness to commit a violent crime they should be tried and punished as an adult. A fourteen year old knows right from wrong. He (or she) is able to tell whether they are committing a crime. If a juvenile is mature enough to commit an adult crime, they should be treated as an adult, and punished justly according to the adult law. The difference in age in two people should not determine their punishment if they have committed the same crime under the same or similar pretenses.

The difference between juvenile court and adult court have been distinct. The issue has been a controversial one for a long time. The two justice systems, juvenile court and adult court have been long established for decades. Both involve people accused of crimes with the basic individual rights in the court. According to Pacific Juvenile Defender Center, it stated, “Youth may be held under juvenile court jurisdiction from age 12 until age 21, or until age 25 if he or she is committed to the California division of juvenile justice.” (YLC, 2009) The purpose of juvenile court system was set up for those youths who are not as mature and cannot be held as adults. However, juvenile crimes are becoming more often and heinous, it is necessary to focus

Juveniles are not necessarily given every right afforded to adult criminal defendants. Let’s take a look at the right to “a trial by jury”. Juveniles do not have the right to a jury trial instead a Judge decides the juvenile cases. (McKeiver v. Pennsylvania, 1971) Taking into account that this is a worst case scenario, a minor adjudicated in juvenile court can face being sentenced to the

Juveniles committing crimes is not a new issued being introduced to society; actually, it has been an issue for centuries. However, the big question is, should juveniles be tried in adult courts? Before answering, take into consideration every possible scenario that could have led them to commit the crime. For instance, were they the leader in the act? Did they participate in the crime? Was the juvenile even aware of what was taking place? Were they peer pressured? Did they have any other choice at the time? There are so many other questions we could consider when making a decision here.