Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byCaleb Mottram Modified over 10 years ago
3
A juvenile is a young person not yet an adult 7-18 years of age Can be sentenced to life in prison but not death
4
1899 in Cook County, Illinois Juvenile corrections,16 th century Europe reform movement Poor children vs. rich children African Americans, Native Americans, and people who were considered the dangerous class 1825, the Society for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency 1899, Illinois passed the Juvenile Court Act of 1899 Parens patriae (a British doctrine that is literally the state as the parent)
5
J UVENILE COURT VS. ADULT D UE P ROCESS WAS DEEMED UNNECESSARY T REATMENT WAS SUPPOSED TO GO UNTIL THE JUVENILE WAS SAID TO BE “ CURED ” OR BECOME AN ADULT WHICH WAS SAID TO BE 21 1960’ S, THE S UPREME C OURT ORDERED THE JUVENILE COURTS BECOME MORE FORMAL A CCORDING TO THE J UVENILE D ELINQUENCY P REVENTION AND C ONTROL ACT OF 1968 STATED THAT CHILDREN CHARGED WITH NONCRIMINAL OFFENSES WILL NOT BE HANDLED IN THE COURT SYSTEM BUT OUTSIDE OF IT
6
J UVENILE COURT VS. ADULT D UE P ROCESS WAS DEEMED UNNECESSARY T REATMENT WAS SUPPOSED TO GO UNTIL THE JUVENILE WAS SAID TO BE “ CURED ” OR BECOME AN ADULT WHICH WAS SAID TO BE 21 1960’ S, THE S UPREME C OURT ORDERED THE JUVENILE COURTS BECOME MORE FORMAL A CCORDING TO THE J UVENILE D ELINQUENCY P REVENTION AND C ONTROL ACT OF 1968 STATED THAT CHILDREN CHARGED WITH NONCRIMINAL OFFENSES WILL NOT BE HANDLED IN THE COURT SYSTEM BUT OUTSIDE OF IT
7
Amended in the 1980’s Deinstitutionalization of status offenders and nonoffenders Separation of juvenile delinquents from adult offenders Encouraged community-based programs, diversion, and deinstitutionalization “Sight and sound separation” (no contact with adult offenders) “Jail and lockup removal”( juveniles can’t be in adult lockups) “Disproportionate confinement of minority youth”(reduce problems in the State)
8
Amended in the 1980’s Deinstitutionalization of status offenders and nonoffenders Separation of juvenile delinquents from adult offenders Encouraged community-based programs, diversion, and deinstitutionalization “Sight and sound separation” (no contact with adult offenders) “Jail and lockup removal”( juveniles can’t be in adult lockups) “Disproportionate confinement of minority youth”(reduce problems in the State)
9
Transfer provision- easier to transfer juvenile offenders to criminal court Sentencing authority- gave criminal and juvenile courts to expand on sentencing options Confidentiality- made juvenile records and proceedings more available Victim Rights-increase role of victims in juvenile court Correctional Programming- developing new programs
10
Juveniles held accountable for actions Provide effective deterrence Keep criminal activity out of the public Balance all attention Punishment severity = Criminal Act
11
Social Cultural Mental environmental Legal factors such as attitude, home life, education, and parents
13
Kent vs. United States 1966 Morris Kent, age 16 Charged with rape and robbery Confessed, Guilty Sentenced to 30-90 years in prison Attorney issued a dismissal Judge waived it Counsel should have full access to records Judge should have provide a written statement for waiver Due process to transfer in adult court In re Gault 1967 Gerald Gault, age 15 Probation for minor property crimes Prank telephone call to an adult neighbor Adult punishment- $50 fine and 2 months in jail Right to notice and counsel, to question witnesses, and to avoid self-incrimination Encourage States to give these rights but did not apply it to this case
14
In re Winship 1970 Samuel Winship, age 12 Charged with stealing $112 from a woman’s purse in a store Seen running from the seen Witnesses stated employee could not see the incident in the position they were in Adjudicated delinquent Reasonable Doubt Proof beyond a reasonable doubt was ruled to be used in Juvenile Court in delinquency cases “Save” not “punish” McKeiver vs. Pennsylvania 1971 Joseph McKeiver, age 16 Charged with robbery, larceny, and receiving stolen goods 20-30 other youths chased 3 other youths and took $.25 from them Requested a jury trial Adjudicated and put on probation Supreme Court ruled jury trials not required for Juvenile Court
15
Breed vs. Jones 1975 Gary Jones, age 17 Charged with armed robbery Judge waived jurisdiction Violated double jeopardy After adjudication, waivers can’t be used Oklahoma Publishing Company vs. District Court in and for Oklahoma City 1977 Press can report name and photograph of a youth in Juvenile Court Smith vs. Daily Mail Publishing Company 1979 Can’t stop the press from publishing a juvenile’s name Free Press Schall vs. Martin 1984 Gregory Martin, age 14 Charged with robbery, assault, and possession of a weapon Stole jacket and sneakers from a boy he hit on the head with a loaded gun while with 2 other youths Preventive “pretrial” detention of juveniles only allowed on certain issues
18
N O VIOLENT OFFENDER CONTACT = NO NEW TRADES LEARNED S EEN AS GOOD PEOPLE WHO JUST DID A BAD THING D IFFERENT PROGRAMS TO FIT INDIVIDUALS N O COMMUNITY, PEER, OR OTHER ABUSE I MPULSIVE BEHAVIOR IN THE BRAIN HAS DEVELOPED FURTHER THAN DECISION MAKING C ONTINUE TO LIVE LIFE OUTSIDE PRISON WORKING ON ISSUES
19
37 TIMES MORE LIKELY TO COMMIT CRIME IN / OUT J UVENILE D ETENTION C ENTER O FFENDERS WHO ARE IN JAIL LONGER DON ’ T TRY TO “ ONE UP ” JUVENILES OR VICE VERSA F EAR OF PUNISHMENT / DETERRENCE S OCIAL C ONTROL L ESS MONEY TO HOUSE INMATE W HAT IS A GOOD ENVIRONMENT ? B ALANCE T HOSE PEOPLE WHO DON ’ T GET A SECOND CHANCE BECAUSE A JUVENILE TOOK THAT AWAY P UNISHMENT FITS THE CRIME N O EASY WAY OUT
20
Bilchik, Shay. United States. Department of Justice. 1999 National Report Series. Washington D.C: 1999. Web.. Information for this Bulletin was taken from chapter 4 of Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 1999 National Report. For a full listing of sources for this chapter,see page 109 of the National Report.
Similar presentations
© 2024 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.