Retrieved September 20, 2011, from Juvenile Transfer to Criminal Courts: http://www.ojjdp.gov Males, M. and D. Macallair (2000). “ The Color of Justice: An Analysis of Juvenile Justice Adult Court Transfers in California.” Washington, DC: Justice Policy Institute, January. Olson, J. K. (2005, May). Waiver of Juvniles To Criminal Courts. Retrieved September 20, 2011, from Judicial Discretion and Racial Disparity: http://www.cjcj.org/files/waiver_of.pdf Reverse Waiver.
It is unfair for American children to know that though they can be innocent, they are treated as adults when they turn thirteen in some states. Although children have to learn the difference between what is right and wrong in their first years of life, most of them do not have enough experience to show that they are capable of living within society independently. Nonetheless, when they commit a serious crime-accidentally or purposely, the state mandate allows the judicatures to try them as an adult. There is a flaw here because they do not have a set personality, nor they can readily understand how humans abide by the law, nor do they have the cognitive ability to understand how to live in society. This paper will argue that the idea of trying children for their crimes in the United States as an adult is too extreme.
Though an offender who was between seven and fourteen years of age was presumed as one who is not able to form the required criminal intent it gave the prosecutor room to prove otherwise. A house referred to as the New York House of Refuge was established by reformers in 1824, and it was meant to curb the problem of sending a child offender to an adult jail. In 1899 a juvenile court was established in Cook County, Illinois and another one in April 1905 in Birmingham (Shore). There was an educational reform movement that advocated for reform in juvenile justice. The movement was referred to as the Society for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency.
Retrieved November 19, 2013, from http://ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/asp/profile_display.asp Johnson, J. B., & Secret, P. E. (1990). “Race And Juvenile Court Decision Making Revisited.” Criminal Justice Policy Review, 4(2), 159-187. Lundivian, R. J., McFarlane, P. T., & Scarpitti, F. R. (1976). “Delinquency Prevention: A Description And Assessment Of Projects Reported In The Professional Literature.” Crime & Delinquency, 22(3), 297-308.
However, responsibility is divided between the state judicial and state executive branches (Center on Juvenile & Criminal Justice). Juvenile delinquency is behavior that if committed by an adult would constitute a crime or disorderly persons offense (Neubauer, 446). Every state has their own definition of adolescent offenders and decided in different ways how they should treat them. Under both California and New Jersey laws children are considered minors until the age of eighteen. In both N.J. ... ... middle of paper ... ...t neither they nor society are best served by treating young children like adults.
According to Caldwell (1961) the juvenile justice system is based on the principle that youth are developmentally and fundamentally different from adults. According to Mack (1909) the focus of the juvenile justice system has shifted from “was the crime committed” to “why did the child commit the crime”, “how can we help the child”. When performing as it is designed and up to the initial intentions, the juvenile court balances rehabilitation (treatment) of the offender with suitable sanctions when necessary such as incarceration. According to Griffin (2008) in some cases juveniles may be required to be “transferred” to adult court. In this paper I am going to discuss the three primary mechanisms of waiver to adult court: judicial waiver laws, statutory exclusion laws, and prosecutorial discretion or concurrent jurisdiction laws.
Works Cited Bernburg, J., Krohn, M. D., & Rivera, C. J. (2006). Official Labeling, Criminal Embeddedness, and Subsequent Delinquency: A Longitudinal Test of Labeling Theory. Journal Of Research In Crime & Delinquency, 43(1), 67-88. doi:10.1177/0022427805280068 McCarthy, B. (2002).
A juvenile criminal can only be held in a juvenile institution until the age of 21, no matter how gruesome their offense may have been. An illegal act that is committed by an adult, which is any person over the age of eighteen, is considered a crime. Acts such as disobedience, truancy, running away from home, smoking, and drinking are not considered as crimes for adults. Adult criminals receive public trials unlike delinquents or juvenile criminals. Adult criminals may receive sentencing such as life in prison or death, if suitable depending upon the nature of crime committed.
According to Mack (1909) the focus of the juvenile justice system has shifted from “how can we help the child”, “why did the child commit the crime” to “was the crime committed”. According to Griffin (2008) in some cases juveniles may be required to be “transferred” to adult court. The prerequisites for transfer to adult court are the duty to protect the public from violent youths, serious crime, and the lack of rehabilitation chance from the juvenile court. According to Flesch (2004) many jurisdictions handle the issue of serious juvenile crime by charging juveniles as adults. Charging a juvenile as an adult is done by a method which is called waiver to adult court.
(2004a, January). Evolving Standards of Decency. Retrieved May 22, 2010, from Cruel and Unusual Punishment: The Juvenile Death Penalty: http://www.abanet.org/crimjust/juvjus/EvolvingStandards.pdf ---, (2004b, January). Adoloscence, Brain Development and Legal Cupability. Retrieved May 2010, from American Bar Association: http://www.abanet.org/crimjust/juvjus/Adolescence.pdf Streib, V. L. (2004, April).