The Decision For Transfer A Youth

3437 Words14 Pages
The decision to transfer a youth to criminal court is a very sensitive subject to every individual who care about the young ones in society, because it pertains to our youths who are considered to be “the future.” Many will ask under what circumstances transfer should be allowed. Some believe that the best course of action regarding juvenile offenders is not transferring them to criminal court but rehabilitation – these individuals view punishment as a failed strategy for changing behavior, teaching skills, or developing new or more positive attitude and beliefs. While others believe that if they are old enough to do the crime, they should accept the court’s punishment. Over the years several young offenders have had their cases tried…show more content…
(http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Juvenile+Law). Youths are admitted to juvenile facilities for a broad range of issues, including status offenses, dependency, and criminal offenses. Juvenile courts have the power to relinquish its jurisdiction and have some young offenders tried in grown up courts. In Kent vs. United States, the Supreme Court held that where juvenile court jurisdiction is waived as a result of judicial waiver, a hearing with the essentials of due process must be provided, when jurisdiction is waived due to judicial waiver (Wizner, 1984). This case involved a sixteen year old juvenile that was tried and convicted in criminal court as an adult. Although his crimes was as severe as an adult (rape, burglary and robbery), the higher court saw it fitting to create a due process system for every court to be mindful of when allowing a youth to be transferred to grown up court by waiving their jurisdiction. Although it was “written in stone” many states did not find it necessary to abide by the rules and created their own legislative transfer (waiver). As a matter of fact there were jurisdictions where some district attorneys made transfer decisions that were not in-line with the safeguards mentioned in Kent vs. Unites States. The presence of this issue could rest in the fact that although the waiver system
Open Document