11 Probation and Parole in Juvenile Justice

History of Juvenile Court English common law considered children as chattel Children in America were exploited Child labor was an important part of economic life in the twentieth century Supreme Court reflected the prevailing belief in laisse-faire capitalism and would not interfere

Houses of Refuge First opened in New York in 1825 Provided housing and care for troublesome children Parens patriae Originally provided the Crown with the authority to administer the estates of landed orphans Became the legal basis for the juvenile court

Houses of Refuge In the American colonies, parens patriae concept gave almost complete authority over children to the state Ex Parte Crouse (1838) The Bill of Rights did not apply to children Concept originally applied only to dependent children, but was identified with the rehabilitation of delinquents

Child-Saving Movement Child savers Upper-class, well-educated, women with access to political and financial resources Juvenile court was result of their efforts Juvenile court movement satisfied the humanitarian impulses and most self-interested considerations

Emergence of Juvenile Court Illinois Juvenile Court Act of 1899 1st law creating a special comprehensive court for juveniles Consistent with the concept of parens patriae Nonpunitive approach over neglected and dependent children as well as delinquents Due process safeguards were absent in the juvenile court

Emergence of Juvenile Court Adult Criminal Court Juvenile Court Defendant Charges/indictment Arraignment Prosecution/trial Verdict Sentence Imprisonment Inmate/prisoner Parole Respondent Petition Hearing Adjudication Finding Disposition Commitment Resident Aftercare

Legal Decisions Juvenile court operated for decades without attention or adherence to due process requirements or scrutiny by the judicial branch of government Kent v. United States (1966) Court expressed concern over the lack of due process in the juvenile court Significant for changing the Supreme Court’s hands-off policy

Legal Decisions In re Gault (1967) Juvenile is entitled to: Written notice of the charges Right to counsel Protection against self-incrimination Right to confront and cross-examine witnesses Right to have written transcripts and appellate review

Legal Decisions In re Winship (1970) McKeiver v. Pennsylvania (1971) Applied reasonable doubt standard to juvenile proceedings McKeiver v. Pennsylvania (1971) Juveniles have no right to a jury trial Breed v. Jones (1975) Double jeopardy applies to juveniles - cannot be tired for same offense in adult and juvenile courts

Legal Decisions Schall v. Martin (1984) - Detention cannot be for purposes of punishment and must be strictly limited in time When juveniles are given adult-like protections, judges more readily depart from the rehabilitative model

Juvenile Court Procedures Systems differ from state to state and even within states Juvenile court typically handles four types of cases: Delinquency Behavior that, if engaged in by an adult, would constitute a crime

Juvenile Court Procedures Juvenile court typically handles four types of cases: Status offenses Behavior that, if engaged in by an adult, would not constitute a crime Provides the basis for governmental intervention Neglect or abuse Children who are subjected to neglect or abuse by parents or guardians

Juvenile Court Procedures Juvenile court typically handles four types of cases: Dependency Children who do not have parents or guardians available to provide proper care Situations that come to the attention of authorities are often handled in a manner that does not involve the formal justice apparatus

Intake Juveniles referred to juvenile court are processed through the intake section, which is usually staffed by juvenile court probation officers First decision to be made at intake is the custodial status of the youngster

Intake Intake permits the court to screen out cases not only on jurisdictional and legal grounds, but also on social dimensions

Intake At this stage, the probation officer has a dual function: Legal function Requires that the PO determine if the juvenile court has jurisdiction Also requires that the child and parents be advised of rights

Intake At this stage, the probation officer has a dual function: Social service function Involves the assessment of the child’s situation Can provide the basis for adjusting the case, handling it informally without the filing of a petition This happens in about 50% of the cases reaching the court

Intake Informal processing Juvenile can be placed under supervision of PO, usually for 90 days Requires an explicit or tacit admission of guilt If successfully completed, the juvenile may avoid further court processing If unsuccessful, the PO can file a petition to juvenile court

Preliminary Hearing Parties informed of the charges and their rights Guardian ad litem, advocate for the child, usually appointed Determines whether the child should remain in custody

Preliminary Hearing 1974 Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act “sight and sound” separation for juveniles under juvenile court jurisdiction

Adjudicatory Hearing Juvenile Trial Juvenile may offer plea to petition Evidence must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the delinquent act occurred Status offenses are proved by a preponderance of the evidence

Adjudicatory Hearing Juvenile Trial If sustained, the judge sets a date for a dispositional hearing and orders a predisposition report

Predisposition Report Conducted by the PO Similar to a presentence report May include: Reviews of court, school, police records Interviews with child, family members, teachers, employers, police, etc. Results of any psychological or psychiatric examinations Recommendations

Disposition Hearing Disposition refers to the sentence Traditionally, this stage had been based on the concept of parens patriae Dispositions were not based on justice but on rehabilitation Moving more toward a justice model (what the child deserves) rather than a social service model (what the child needs)

Status Offenders Juvenile court involvement has been the subject of controversy Those in support of court involvement argue that status offenders are not essentially different from delinquents Opponents argue that the court involvement stigmatizes the juvenile (negatively labeling the offender)

Status Offenders Research does not support the labeling argument Majority of status offenders did not become more serious delinquents Juveniles adjudicated in juvenile court on their first referral were less likely to have criminal records as adults than those whose referrals were delayed until further misbehavior

Juvenile Court Judges National Council of Juvenile Court Judges - provides training Some jurisdictions use referees or masters Specialized attorneys who represent the judge and hold certain juvenile court hearings

Dispositions Juveniles sometimes released to the custody of their parents Others placed in various private facilities

Dispositions Basic to disposition in juvenile court is concept of least restrictive alternative (disposition should not be more restrictive than that which will adequately serves the needs of the child)

Probation Supervision For those not seriously delinquent Juveniles will have to follow specified conditions PO will involve the family and meet with the young person on a regular basis Many orders of probation require restitution or community service

Group Home Residential treatment for non-serious juvenile offenders Can be publicly or privately operated Typical home – approximates large-single family dwelling Each resident has daily chores, attends local school Usually located in residential areas, but often meet resistance from the communities

Residential Treatment Center Private and public institutions that provide residential care for youngsters, with or without intervention of the court and devoid of coercive elements associated with correctional facilities Provide a wide variety of enriched services

Residential Treatment Center Private centers can mix adjudicated delinquents, status offenders, and voluntary clients

Secure Facilities/Training School Public institution that accepts all youngsters committed by the courts Committed based on four criteria Finding of fact Parents unable to control the child No other child welfare Child needs services available at the training school

Aftercare and Parole Aftercare planned release of a juvenile from a residential placement to supportive services in the community Aftercare supervision is similar to probation supervision Services usually provided by the same state agency that administers the juvenile training schools

Juveniles in Criminal Court All states have transfer laws that allow or require criminal prosecution of some young offenders, even though they have not reached jurisdictional age Annually 20,000 juvenile cases are transferred to criminal court

Juveniles in Criminal Court Three basic ways to transfer cases: Legislative exclusion Judicial waiver Prosecutorial discretion Only about 1.5 percent of petitioned delinquency cases are transferred to criminal court

Blended Sentence Tried as a juvenile with full rights If convicted, they are given an adult sentence, which is applied only if they do not satisfactorily complete the juvenile court disposition Depending on the state, youth tried in adult criminal court, may be sent to an adult or a juvenile institution

Key Terms House of refuge Parens patriae Legal function Status offenders Informal probation Guardian ad litem Petition Aftercare

Key Terms Training school Justice model Adjudicatory hearing Predisposition report Social service model Least restrictive alternative Residential treatment center “Sight and sound” separation

Key Terms Child saving movement Social service function