Juveniles : The Criminal Justice System

That is why in Roper v. Simons, capital punishment for children was prohibited by the eighth amendment. In Graham v. Florida the eighth amendment also prohibited life sentence without parole for juvenile found guilty of non-homicide cases. This case further associated life sentence without parole for juvenile to death sentence. This suggested the second line of precedent that the court requires sentencing system to consider the details of the offence and characteristics of the defendant before sentencing him or her to death. The two line of precedents guide the court to conclude that life sentence without parole for juveniles in fringe

Christopher Simmons was charged with burglary and the murder of Shirley Crook. He and his two friends plotted to break into her home rob and murder her. One of his friends decided not to go through with the plot, but his other friend helped. They went in the middle of the night into her home bound her and threw her over the bridge. At trial with the evidence, videotaped confession from Simmons, and the testimony against him from his friend proving that it was a premeditated plan the jury recommended a death sentence. He appealed his case with counsel and felt his past history of a clean record and his troubled background should have been a factor in the sentencing. Simmons’s case worked its way to the courts and it was eventually overturned. According to Birckhead (2008), “With its decision in Roper v. Simmons,11 invalidating the imposition of the death penalty on offenders who were younger than eighteen when their crimes were committed,12 the Court has, perhaps, heralded yet another shift in the perspective of the legal system-and the culture at large-towards adolescents who commit crimes”(p.389). The Supreme Court ruled that the punishment now violates the Eighth Amendment 's prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment. Thus, they sentenced Simmons to life imprisonment without parole.

With the escalation of murders and rapes committed by minors as seen in recent years the people are looking for the right answer. Public concern over the effectiveness of the juvenile courts when dealing with these offenders has brought about change in the justice system. (Stolba, 2001). The courts now, are quicker to transfer a juveniles’ case to adult court than when the juvenile system was first formed. There stands a conflict of interests within the two court systems. Juvenile courts are to protect the rights of youths determined incapable of adult decisions. The primary concern is that the youth be rehabilitated and not become a repeat offender. Thus, protecting the child from incarceration with adult criminals and any possible future victims. The concerns of the adult court is to make sure the convicted offender pays for their crime and that the victim gets justice. Rehabilitation is not a primary concer of the adult justice system.

The Court found that Georgia’s system for applying the death penalty was “judicious” and “careful.” Gregg had gone through two trials – one to determine guilt and one for sentencing. Further, specific jury findings of “aggravating circumstances” were necessary to impose the death penalty. There was therefore no Eighth Amendment violation, and the death penalty was constitutional. The Court ruled, “The imposition of the death penalty for the crime of murder has a long history of acceptance in the United States (n.d.,Web).

There have been many studies conducted that examine ways in which the juvenile justice system responds to female offenders. Historically juvenile female offenders have been treated under status offense jurisdiction (Zahn et al., 2010, p. 10). United States Courts would exercise the principle of “parens patriae” to place the female in detention as a form of punishment for misbehavior (Sherman, 2012, pp. 1589-1590). This principle also remains prevalent as it pertains to how the juvenile justice system currently responds to juvenile female offenders.

Five years after Roper v. Simmons, this case decided that it is unconstitutional to give a non-homicide juvenile offender a sentence of life without parole without the chance of being able to mature and obtain rehabilitation if necessary (CITATION). A brief overview of this case involves a sixteen-year-old and three accomplices attempting to rob a restaurant. Graham was then prosecuted as an adult to the crime in which he pled guilty to and the result was that he received three years of probation. During his time on probation he was arrested again for armed burglary and attempted armed robbery. Because the crime was committed in Florida, he could either receive a minimum sentence of five years or a maximum sentence of life without parole. He was sentenced to the maximum for each charge which in turn was a sentence of life without parole.

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.

According to Caldwell (1961) the juvenile justice system is based on the principle that youth are developmentally and fundamentally different from adults. According to Mack (1909) the focus of the juvenile justice system has shifted from “was the crime committed” to “why did the child commit the crime”, “how can we help the child”. When performing as it is designed and up to the initial intentions, the juvenile court balances rehabilitation (treatment) of the offender with suitable sanctions when necessary such as incarceration. According to Griffin (2008) in some cases juveniles may be required to be “transferred” to adult court. In this paper I am going to discuss the three primary mechanisms of waiver to adult court: judicial waiver

Thousands of youths have to go through the Juvenile Justice System every year. Sentencing is unfairly given to many of these youths that end up going through The Juvenile Justice System has become a school for criminals. The sentencing has become biased. Barry C. Feld is one of the nation's leading scholars of Juvenile Justice. He received his Bachelor's degree from the University of Pennsylvania, his J.D. from the University of Minnesota, and his Ph.D. in sociology from Harvard University where he was a Russel Sage Foundation Fellow in Law and the Social Sciences ( “Feld, Berry | University of Minnesota Law School,” n.d.). He wrote the article Justice for Juveniles. Justice for Juveniles is an article outlining various issues and solutions

When thinking of reforming the juvenile justice system one has to think; what can we do to make this better for everyone involve? There are some programs that can be implemented when trying to make a change in the juvenile system. The main thing is getting parents or the guardian more involved in the child’s whereabouts. Secondly the community where the youth will have a place to go and have something more constructive to do to keep them out of trouble. Law enforcement can get involved in giving ride along and having visits to the local jails or prisons from the youth to talk to some of the inmates. Crime in life isn’t racist at all it has a no age limit, no certain gender and no social status for most of those whom decide to partake in a criminal activity. From the beginning juveniles have been an issue with law enforcement, the question has always arisen of whom will take control without cruel and unusual punishment and assist with the rehabilitation and prevention future crime actions.

Millions of juveniles are processed through the juvenile court system, and the number has been growing for years. Judges and court officials have been looking for many ways to come up with alternatives to incarceration. There are several different alternatives to incarceration for juveniles currently that will be discussed. Incarceration has an impact on the society as well, even for those who have not been in trouble with the law before which is one of the reasons why alternatives have been evolved. Tensions between the established principals and the proposed methods determined the way in which early incarceration alternatives were introduced into legislation.

The juvenile justice system is similar to the criminal justice system. This system is where juveniles are processed, and may be arrested after referrals for juvenile delinquency. Juvenile justice is very different in every state and can be very similar as well because every system has limited jurisdiction and that most focus on the offenders and not their offenses. Therefore, there are 51 juvenile justice systems in the United States. The United States has the juvenile justice system because children are very different than adults – in that they can be better receptive for change and also being easier to rehabilitate. Moreover, the main goal of the juvenile justice system is rehabilitation (Juvenile Law Center). The juvenile justice system is made up of police, courts, corrections, probation and parole services, as well as community-based programs to name a few (book).

“I used to believe are our future but now I realize that this, sadly isn’t the reality. Through laws that treat kids like adults, the government is throwing away the future of children in this country.” (D. Lee) An estimated 200,000 juveniles are tried as adults. The term juvenile refers to any young person under the age of 18. For most states in the United States, the age of majority is 18. While there are many things that juveniles are unable to do until they reach the age of 18, being charged as an adult for a crime is not amongst those things in some states. Juveniles are not allowed to vote, drink alcohol, or sign a legal contract, yet they can be charged and treated like adults when it comes to them being

In my own opinion, I consider juveniles as immature because they lack the ability to recognize the long term impact of their actions as they have decreased levels of responsibility. Therefore, the justice system should not charge juveniles in adult legal system and sentence them as adults.Trying juveniles as adults exposes the young offenders to state penitentiaries up to life in prison without parole and even sentenced to death. This raises a question on how truly effective treating juveniles as adults are to the young offenders. As the crimes committed by juveniles increase, there has been an outcry from the public and affected to prosecute juveniles accused of serious crimes as adults. It is true that juveniles do

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.