Juvenile Justice

Question 1

Breed v. Jones (1975)

Answer 1

Double jeopardy applies to juveniles – they CANNOT be adjudicated in juvenile court and then tried as an adult in adult court for the same crimes

Question 2

Fare v. Michael C. (1979)

Answer 2

(1) Juvenile requests for probation officer presence during an interrogation does NOT trigger Miranda, (2) “Totality of the circumstances” standard in considering waiver of Miranda knowingly and voluntarily applies to juveniles

Question 3

G.J.I. v. State (1989)

Answer 3

Application of adult competency/due process protections DO NOT apply to juveniles

Question 4

Graham v. Florida (2010) *

Answer 4

Juveniles charged with non-homicidal crimes CANNOT be sentenced to LWOP, as it violates “cruel and unusual punishment” under the Eighth Amendment

Question 5

In re Gault (1967) *

Answer 5

Juvenile defendants face a loss of liberty when they are denied the same due process rights as adults charged with a crime.

Safeguards include: written notice, a right to counsel, and the right to confront witnesses and not self-incriminate.

“Due process” focus led to juvie court becoming more adversarial.

The “gault”/goal of juvie proceedings is to have the same constitutional rights as adults.

Question 6

In re Winship (1970) *

Answer 6

Provided the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard of proof to juvenile cases to ensure compliance with Fourteenth Amendment Due Process

The state must disprove affirmative defense claims (self-defense, duress, entrapment) beyond a reasonable doubt as well.

To “win” juvie cases, DA still has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

Question 7

Roper v. Simmons (2005) *

Answer 7

The execution of minors (convicted of capital offense) VIOLATES the “cruel and unusual punishment” protection in the 8th amendment

Question 8

Miller v. Alabama (2012)*

Answer 8

8th Amendment does not permit mandatory sentencing of a juvie offender (14 at time of crime) to life without parole.

Question 9

Kent v. United States (1966)*

Answer 9

Children have a right to a formal hearing before having their cases transferred to adult criminal court, and the formal hearing “must measure up to the essentials of due process and fair treatment” (i.e., does not need to conform with all requirements of criminal trial/admin hearing)

You kent/can’t transfer without a formal hearing.

Question 10

Thompson v. Oklahoma (1988)

Answer 10

Held that those <15 years old cannot be subjected to DP

Question 11

Breed v. Jones (1975)

Answer 11

SCOTUS held that if you formally adjudicate an individual in juvi court, it is double-jeopardy to try him/her as an adult

Question 12

Schall v. Martin (1984)

Answer 12

SCOTUS upheld NY statute that authorized pretrial detention of juvi, w/o probable cause, if there was a “serious risk” the juvi might commit an act which if committed by adult would constitute a crime.

Question 13

McKeiver v. Pennsylvania (1971)

Answer 13

Due Process caluse of 14th Am. does NOT assure the right to a trial by jury in the adjudicative phase of juvi delinquency proceedings.

Question 14

G.J.I. v. State (1989)

Answer 14

Juvi defendants need not be comp for adjudication

• At the heart of juvi justice system is assumption of incompetence
• The juvi justice system intended to provide tx for youthful offenders

Question 15

J.D.B. v. North Carolina (2011)*

Answer 15

Child’s age informs the Miranda custody analysis.