Juvenile Courts Unit VIII Discussed The Juvenile Court Syste ✓ Solved

Juvenile Courts Unit VIII discussed the juvenile court system.

Juvenile Courts Unit VIII discussed the juvenile court system. To explore more about this topic, write an essay investigating changes that were made to the juvenile system by the cases below. Determine what the system was like before and after the following cases: Kent v. United States, 383 U.S.); In re Gault, 387 U.S.); In re Winship, 397 U.S.); McKeiver v. Pennsylvania, 403 U.S.); Breed v. Jones, 421 U.S.); Oklahoma Publishing Co. v. District Court in and for Oklahoma City, 430 U.S.); Eddings v. Oklahoma, 455 U.S.); Schall v. Martin, 467 U.S.); Thompson v. Oklahoma, 484 U.S.); Stanford v. Kentucky, 492 U.S.); and Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S.). Your essay must be at least three pages in length. You are required to use your textbook and at least one outside source in your response. All sources used, including the textbook, must be cited and referenced according to APA Style.

Paper For Above Instructions

The juvenile court system in the United States has undergone significant transformations over the decades, primarily through landmark Supreme Court decisions that have ended precedence and established new standards for juvenile law. This essay will focus on major cases that influenced changes within the juvenile court system, establishing a more equitable legal framework for minors charged with offenses. The cases will be explored in chronological order, detailing the legal environment before and after each ruling.

Kent v. United States (1966)

Before the Kent decision, juvenile courts operated on an informal basis, with limited oversight from the higher courts. The case stemmed from the actions of a 16-year-old, Morris Kent, who was charged with robbery and rape. The Supreme Court ruled that juveniles have the right to a hearing before being transferred to adult court, emphasizing the importance of due process in juvenile proceedings. The impact of this ruling is that it set a precedent for greater protection of juveniles' rights, ensuring that the court considered their backgrounds and circumstances before making significant legal decisions regarding their future.

In re Gault (1967)

The landmark case of In re Gault expanded the rights of juveniles in the courtroom. Prior to this decision, juveniles had fewer rights compared to adult offenders, often resulting in a lack of proper legal representation. The Supreme Court held that juvenile defendants have the right to legal counsel, the right to confront witnesses, and the right to a fair trial. This marked a pivotal shift in the juvenile justice system, transforming it from a paternalistic approach to one that recognizes the need for due process.

In re Winship (1970)

In re Winship further delineated the rights of minors by establishing the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard in juvenile court, a standard comparable to that in adult criminal courts. Before this ruling, the standard of proof was lower, which could lead to wrongful convictions. The Supreme Court ruled that for a juvenile to be adjudicated delinquent, the state must meet the higher standard of proof, ensuring that there is substantial evidence before making a life-altering decision against a minor.

McKeiver v. Pennsylvania (1971)

While the prior cases strengthened the due process rights of juveniles, McKeiver v. Pennsylvania took a step back from these protections by ruling that there is no constitutional right to a jury trial in juvenile cases. The Court argued that juvenile courts have a different purpose than adult courts and that a jury would not be beneficial to juvenile proceedings. The ruling prompted discussions on the balance between protecting juvenile offenders and providing them with full legal rights.

Breed v. Jones (1975)

In Breed v. Jones, the Supreme Court addressed double jeopardy concerns within the juvenile system. The case involved a juvenile who had been tried in juvenile court and then was retried in adult court for the same crime. The Court ruled this practice violated the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The ruling underscored the protection of minors against being tried multiple times for the same offense, establishing buffer protections for juvenile defendants.

Oklahoma Publishing Co. v. District Court in and for Oklahoma City (1977)

This case expanded the scope of First Amendment rights for juveniles. The Supreme Court ruled that media should have access to juvenile court proceedings, reflecting the belief that transparency enhances accountability within the system. This ruling recognized that while juvenile records are generally sealed, media scrutiny remains essential in maintaining transparency and integrity within the juvenile justice process.

Eddings v. Oklahoma (1982)

In Eddings v. Oklahoma, the Court addressed the consideration of a juvenile's background during sentencing. The case involved a minor who was sentenced to death. The ruling determined that mitigating factors, such as age and mental health, must be considered in death penalty cases and that a juvenile's emotional and psychological state must be evaluated. This case set important precedents in juvenile sentencing and acknowledged that juveniles possess unique characteristics that differentiate them from adults.

Schall v. Martin (1984)

Schall v. Martin permitted preventive detention for juveniles when there is a perceived risk of re-offending or flight risk. The Court found that the state’s interest in protecting society could justify holding minors before trial. This decision remains controversial as it raises concerns about the rights of juveniles and whether preventive detention violates their liberty rights.

Thompson v. Oklahoma (1988)

In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that executing individuals who were under 16 at the time of their crimes constitutes "cruel and unusual punishment" prohibited by the Eighth Amendment. This decision reflected a growing recognition of the developmental differences between juveniles and adults, prioritizing rehabilitation over punishment in juvenile justice.

Stanford v. Kentucky (1989)

In contrast, Stanford v. Kentucky upheld the constitutionality of executing individuals who committed crimes at the age of 17. The decision drew criticism and debates regarding age limits in capital punishment, highlighting inconsistencies in the treatment of juveniles within the justice system.

Roper v. Simmons (2005)

The final case discussed, Roper v. Simmons, addressed the issue of the death penalty for juveniles. The Supreme Court ruled that it is unconstitutional to impose capital punishment on individuals who were under 18 at the time of their offense. This decision echoed developmental science and societal views regarding juvenile culpability, marking a significant shift towards a more rehabilitative approach in juvenile justice.

Conclusion

In conclusion, landmark Supreme Court cases have significantly impacted the juvenile court system in the United States. The evolution from a largely paternalistic system to one that recognizes the rights of juveniles illustrates society's changing perceptions of youth and accountability. These rulings have collectively laid the groundwork for a more nuanced, fair, and just approach to juvenile delinquency, fostering a legal environment that considers both the unique characteristics of minors and the interests of public safety.

References

• Kent v. United States, 383 U.S. 541 (1966).
• In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967).
• In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358 (1970).
• McKeiver v. Pennsylvania, 403 U.S. 528 (1971).
• Breed v. Jones, 421 U.S. 519 (1975).
• Oklahoma Publishing Co. v. District Court in and for Oklahoma City, 430 U.S. 308 (1977).
• Eddings v. Oklahoma, 455 U.S. 104 (1982).
• Schall v. Martin, 467 U.S. 253 (1984).
• Thompson v. Oklahoma, 484 U.S. 804 (1988).
• Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005).