Juvenile Justice Case Paper

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.

Juveniles are individuals who have not reached adulthood, they are still considered to be children. For that reason, officers who work with juveniles need different skills then the ones used on an adult, to approach them. This paper will discuss skills and characteristics needed as an officer when working with juveniles, why officers need to possess skills that differ from officers who work with adults, and would an officer who has worked 20 or more years with adults successfully transition into becoming a successful juvenile officer.

As a contrast, there are many differences between the adult and juvenile justice system. These differences consist of the right to a jury, the right to post bail, leniency of evidence, different court proceedings, the right to a public trial, and rehabilitation efforts. As for the purpose of this paper, we will dissect the differences of the two systems. Many appeals have been filed under the notion that a right to a jury should be upheld for juvenile offenders. The courts have voted against this action time and time again. These appeals are made on the assumption that, as noted earlier, adult crimes should be tried as adult crimes. However, the court rules on this matter while keeping the rehabilitation efforts of the juvenile courts in mind, as opposed to the more punitive measures. Their desire to see kids treated as kids are defined with their upholding of the law, and pushing rehabilitation to its max. But should rehabilitation be the prime focus when the act is of adult capacity; even in a child’s body? I do not think so. What are the percentages of rehabilitation success with adults for committed capital offenses? How are they going to differ when a child partakes in them? I think there is a

The Juvenile Justice system, since its conception over a century ago, has been one at conflict with itself. Originally conceived as a fatherly entity intervening into the lives of the troubled urban youths, it has since been transformed into a rigid and adversarial arena restrained by the demands of personal liberty and due process. The nature of a juvenile's experience within the juvenile justice system has come almost full circle from being treated as an adult, then as an unaccountable child, now almost as an adult once more.

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.

Larry Darnell Booker was placed on indeterminate supervised probation on November 19, 2016, after evidence was found sufficient on charges of entering a vehicle and grand larceny. Larry was also ordered to 30 days of electronic monitoring, 75 hours of community service work, a substance abuse evaluation and restitution in the amount of $550.00. Larry successfully completed the community service work, electronic monitoring and the substance abuse assessment. Larry assessment indicated substance abuse treatment was necessary and Larry completed treatment with no issues. On December 14, 2016, evidence was found sufficient for a finding of guilt on a charge resisting arrest against Larry. Larry was ordered to remain on supervision and complete

This paper will address and summarize four different points from the juvenile arrests bulletin from 2001. Such points included in the summary are the overall decrease in juvenile arrests, the increase in drug offenses and simple assaults, implications for juvenile females and minorities, and last an assessment of the tracking of juvenile arrests as a method of measuring the amount of and trends in juvenile crime.

On 05/23/2018 at approximately 2226 hours, I, Deputy A. Martinez Vazquez (117015) responded to 211 Mission Rd., Oviedo, Seminole County, Fl. In reference to a disturbance inside of the residence. While in route to the residence, I was notified that the disturbance turned physical against a mother and daughter. Before I arrived to the residence I was notified that the 15 year old female juvenile was inside of her room.

This paper is an attempt to understand and point out the flaws in the legal system that has of late in many cases begun to treat juveniles in the same footing as adult offenders. There is a raging controversy over this move that makes young offenders to be tried and incarcerated just as if the crime was done by an adult. The arguments over this have been made in the Supreme Court and the land mark judgement Roper Vs Simmons (1995). However it is submitted that simple observations of the post procedure effects on young persons have not been verified or recorded properly. If this system continues, would it not be against the logic of creating the juvenile justice system

Although based on the adult criminal justice system, the juvenile justice process works differently. Juveniles can end up in court by way of arrest, truancy or for curfew violations or running away. A youth may also be referred to the juvenile court system by school officials or a parent or guardian for being continuously disobedient. The juvenile justice process involves several different steps including intake, detention, adjudication, disposition and aftercare following release from a juvenile correctional facility. In this paper we will breakdown the numerous steps involved in the juvenile justice process as well as compared some

This paper will discuss the history of the juvenile justice system and how it has come to be what it is today. When a juvenile offender commits a crime and is sentenced to jail or reform school, the offender goes to a separate jail or reforming place than an adult. It hasn’t always been this way. Until the early 1800’s juveniles were tried just like everyone else. Today, that is not the case. This paper will explain the reforms that have taken place within the criminal justice system that developed the juvenile justice system.

Although public safety is both a legitimate and justifiable concern, the proposed changes to the purposes clause would go against the primary purpose of the juvenile justice system, rehabilitation and treatment as opposed to punishment. During the 19th century, the American legal system tended to treat juveniles who violated the criminal law much as it did adult offenders. Consequently, if courts found children criminally responsible, they would then impose the same sentences, e.g. capital punishment, and committed these youths to the same penal facilities as they did adult criminals. Despite institutional innovation, states continued to try and punish juveniles as they would adults, practices of which appalled Progressive reformers. Accordingly, the progressives created the juvenile court as an informal welfare system and diversionary alternative to the criminal process. Rather than punish youth offenders for their crimes, juvenile court judges made dispositions in the child’s “best interests” as the state functioned as a parent of the child, under the legal doctrine of parens patriae.

The Juvenile System has been around for a long time. The primary reason behind separating Juvenile from adult criminals is quite simple; the judicial system believes that the children are less culpable for their irresponsive behavior and they could easily be reformed as compared to adult offenders. The crucial role of the judicial system is to critically investigate, diagnose, and recommend treatments for the Juveniles rather than accrediting them. However, because of the increasing number of juvenile arrest for crimes committed by persons considered as a child, the attention that the given to a crime involving juveniles, the decreasing trust to the juvenile system itself and the lauder roar of the society for a safer place to live in,

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.

The juvenile justice system was founded on the belief that children are different from adults; therefore, the justice system and corrections sanctions for juveniles should acknowledge the differences. “Rising juvenile crime rates during the 1970s and 1980s spurred state legislatures across the country to exclude or transfer a significant share of offenders under the age of eighteen to the jurisdiction of the criminal court” (Fagan, 2008). The acknowledgement of these differences should be the bases for a proper juvenile justice system. The examination of the juvenile justice’s systems history, trends, and causation theories will provide an insight into the future of the juvenile justice system.