Juvenile Court process and possible dispositions
Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago Pages:5-10 Instructions:
Juvenile Court process and possible dispositions
http://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/facts-and-case-summary-re-gault
Facts and Case Summary – In re Gault
Facts and Case Summary: In re Gault 387 U.S. 1 (1967)
Facts:
Gerald (“Jerry”) Gault was a 15 year-old accused of making an obscene telephone call to a neighbor, Mrs. Cook, on June 8, 1964. After Mrs. Cook filed a complaint, Gault and a friend, Ronald Lewis,
were arrested and taken to the Children’s Detention Home. Gault was on probation when he was arrested, after being in the company of another boy who had stolen a wallet from a woman’s purse.
At the time of the arrest related to the phone call, Gault’s parents were at work. The arresting officer left no notice for them and did not make an effort to inform them of their son’s arrest. When
Gault’s mother did not find Gault at home, she sent his older brother looking for him. They eventually learned of Gault’s arrest from the family of Ronald Lewis. When Mrs. Gault arrived at the
Detention Home, she was told that a hearing was scheduled in juvenile court the following day.
The arresting officer filed a petition with the court on the same day of Gault’s initial court hearing. The petition was not served on Gault or his parents. In fact, they did not see the petition until more
than two months later, on August 17, 1964, the day of Gerald’s habeas corpus hearing. The June 9 hearing was informal. Not only was Mrs. Cook not present, but no transcript or recording was
made, and no one was sworn in prior to testifying. Gault was questioned by the judge and there are conflicting accounts as to what, if anything, Gault admitted. After the hearing, Gault was taken
back to the Detention Home. He was detained for another two or three days before being released. When Gault was released, his parents were notified that another hearing was scheduled for
June 15, 1964.
Mrs. Cook was again not present for the June 15th hearing, despite Mrs. Gault’s request that she be there “so she could see which boy that done the talking, the dirty talking over the phone.” Again,
no record was made and there were conflicting accounts regarding any admissions by Gault. At this hearing, the probation officers filed a report listing the charge as lewd phone calls. An adult
charged with the same crime would have received a maximum sentence of a $50 fine and two months in jail. The report was not disclosed to Gault or his parents. At the conclusion of the hearing,
the judge committed Gault to juvenile detention for six years, until he turned 21.
Gault’s parents filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, which was dismissed by both the Superior Court of Arizona and the Arizona Supreme Court. The Gaults next sought relief in the Supreme
Court of the United States. The Court agreed to hear the case to determine the procedural due process rights of a juvenile criminal defendant.
Procedure:
Lower Courts: The proceedings against Gault were conducted by a judge of the Superior Court of Arizona who was designated by his colleagues to serve as a juvenile court judge. Lower Court
Ruling: The juvenile court judge committed Gault to juvenile detention until he attained the age of 21. At that time, no appeal was permitted in juvenile cases by Arizona law; therefore, a habeas
petition was filed in the Supreme Court of Arizona and referred to the Superior Court for a hearing. The Superior Court dismissed the petition, and the Arizona Supreme Court affirmed.
Issue:
The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case to determine the procedural rights of a juvenile defendant in delinquency proceedings where there is a possibility of incarceration.
Ruling:
Reversed and remanded. In its opinion, the Court unanimously overruled Betts v. Brady.
Argued: January 15, 1963
Decided: March 18, 1963
Unanimous Decision: Justice Fortas wrote the opinion of the court. Justices Douglas, Clark, and Harlan each wrote concurring opinions.
Reasoning:
In its opinion, the Court underscored the importance of due process, stating that it “is the primary and indispensable foundation of individual freedom” and that “the procedural rules which have
been fashioned from the generality of due process are our best instruments for the distillation and evaluation of essential facts from the conflicting…data that life and our adversary methods
present.” In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1, 20 (1967). The Court noted that, had Gault been 18 at the time of his arrest, he would have been afforded the procedural safeguards available to adults. The Court
closely examined the juvenile court system, ultimately determining that, while there are legitimate reasons for treating juveniles and adults differently, juveniles facing an adjudication of delinquency
and incarceration are entitled to certain procedural safeguards under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
https://www.co.eau-claire.wi.us/departments/departments-a-k/children-s-court-services/juvenile-intake
Juvenile Court Intake
The Juvenile Court Intake Office is composed of Juvenile Court Intake workers. We receive all cases involving juveniles in the county who are alleged to have committed a crime. We also work with
juveniles who are habitually truant from school and juveniles who are uncontrollable in their homes. The Juvenile court process is outlined below.
The Juvenile Court Intake Office receives reports and referrals from Law Enforcement, Schools and Parents.
- Determine jurisdiction. Juvenile Code Chapter 938.24
- Is the child between ages of 10 and 17 years and is their Prima Facie jurisdiction that a crime was committed.-938.12
- Is child between ages 6 and 18 years old and has the child been habitually truant form school.-118.15
- Is the child uncontrollable and does the parent request to sign a petition asking for juvenile court jurisdiction. Typically parents in these cases are concerned due to their children running away from home, consuming illegal drugs, not attending school, destroying property at home, verbally or physically aggressive to others in the home. 938.13(6)
- Notify both parents/guardians and child of Intake Conference. If applicable-Notify victim of crime of Intake Conference-Determine restitution.
- Intake Conference: Meeting with the family
- Explain Juvenile Court process and possible dispositions
- Explain legal rights
- Determine if child is admitting to allegations in report.
- Assessment interview
- Discuss issues relating to the incident of delinquency, truancy, or uncontrollability.
- Discuss any family issues which relate to child’s behavior
- Drug and alcohol use
- School Performance
- Mental Health
- Discuss other issues which could be pertinent to the child
- Discuss various services available in the community
- Make Intake decision and determine direction of case
- Refer case to District Attorney or Corporation Counsel requesting petition be filed with the court.
- Enter into a Deferred Prosecution Agreement.
- Youth court
- Accountability Workshop
- Restitution
- Mental Health services
- Drug screens
- Parenting services
- Community Service work
- Counsel and release
- Other
- Complete Summary Report-Make appropriate referrals
The Juvenile Court Intake office is responsible to send out notices for juvenile court proceedings, prepare and maintain the court files, and assist the court in carrying out its duties.
https://mym.cdn.laureate-media.com/2dett4d/Walden/CRJS/2002/04/WJO/index.html
https://mym.cdn.laureate-media.com/2dett4d/Walden/CRJS/2002/04/WJO/index.html
https://mym.cdn.laureate-media.com/2dett4d/Walden/CRJS/2002/04/WJO/index.html
Juvenile Court process and possible dispositions
RUBRIC
Excellent Quality
95-100%
Introduction 45-41 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Literature Support
91-84 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Methodology
58-53 points
Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score
50-85%
40-38 points
More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.
83-76 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.
52-49 points
Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality
0-45%
37-1 points
The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.
75-1 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.
48-1 points
There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow Juvenile Court process and possible dispositions