Waiver varies from jurisdiction, however, is common to find judicial waiver legislative offense exclusion and prosecutorial discretion. A judicial waiver occurs when a juvenile court judge transfers a case from juvenile to adult court, after conducting a hearing to determine whether a juvenile is amenable to treatment or poses danger to the community, in order to deny the juvenile the protections that juvenile jurisdictions provide. There is a two prong approach to waiver: dispositional (amenability) phase and adjudicating phase. Phase 1 is a hearing to determine probable cause and Phase 2 is to determine whether the best interest of the public and the juvenile would be served by waiving jurisdiction of the juvenile to the adult court. (kent) …show more content…
Johnny is 14 years old and has ample opportunity for a better childhood. It wasn’t until Johnny started hanging with the wrong people that his behavior became more aggressive than the average teenage boy. In the juvenile system, wraparound services can be provided for Johnny and his family. This includes but is not limited to social services, clinicians, probation officer’s who would assist vagina to decide what to do to secure the child’s best interest. Juvenile court services provide proper diagnosis and treatment to focus on Johnny’s character and lifestyle rather than the crime.
It would be in Johnny’s best interest to be transferred into the adult criminal system. Johnny has been suspended three times this year, once for fighting, once for smoking in the boys’ room, and once for listening to Brownsville Station on his iPod during class. In addition, Roman Catholic, the school that he barely attends, has scheduled an expulsion hearing. He stays out all hours of the night, ignores his curfew, doesn’t do his chores or schoolwork, and is disrespectful to his elders.
It is obvious that Johnny has not and will not be rehabilitated through the juvenile system. If Johnny has gone as far as disrespecting and harming his mother, there is no telling what he may do to someone else. The adult criminal system is best fit for Johnny because violent offenders cannot be
One of the fasting growing juvenile treatment and interventions programs are known as teen courts. Teen courts serve as an alternative juvenile justice, to young offenders. Non-violent, and mostly first time offenders are sentenced by their peers’ in teen courts. Teen courts also serve as juvenile justice diversion programs. Teen courts vary from state to state, and sometimes within the same state. With this program, all parties of the judicial setting are juveniles with the exception of the judge. Each teen court, is designed specifically to meet the needs of the community it serves. Teen courts were created to re-educate offenders throughout the judicial process, create a program with sanctions that will allow the youth not to have a juvenile record, and to also instil a sense of responsibility.
The age of the offender determines whether they meet the requirements for a judicial waiver offense. With that said not every state offers all three of the methods a juvenile can qualify for a waiver. In the process of judicial waiver offense the judge takes the final decision on waiving a case. There are other factors that affect the judge’s final decision. Aspects like the criminal history of the offender or the severity of the crime are crucial for the waiver to take place.
Vito, Gennaro F., and Clifford E. Simonsen. Juvenile justice today. 4th ed. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson/Prentice Hall, 2004. Print.
The Juvenile Justice system, since its conception over a century ago, has been one at conflict with itself. Originally conceived as a fatherly entity intervening into the lives of the troubled urban youths, it has since been transformed into a rigid and adversarial arena restrained by the demands of personal liberty and due process. The nature of a juvenile's experience within the juvenile justice system has come almost full circle from being treated as an adult, then as an unaccountable child, now almost as an adult once more.
Bishop, D., and Frazier, C. (2000).Consequences of Transfer. In J. Fagan and F. Zimring. (Eds.), The Changing Borders of Juvenile Justice: Transfer of Adolescents to the Criminal Court (pp. 227-276). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
juvenile justice” (Elrod & Ryder, 2011) is to detour juvenile crimes and not be so easy on
...ing beckoned in with the 21st century. While U.S.’s JLWOP laws are inconsistent with many human rights treatises and with international law, it is more important for our policies to be based on a thorough understanding of the issue- the most essential being a separation of the processes for juvenile and adult criminal offenders. With an emphasis on rehabilitation for juvenile offenders, and the goal of encouraging maturity and personal development after wayward actions, the futures of many teens in the criminal justice system can become much more hopeful.
In the last 42 years little to no changes have been made to correct the standards that govern punitive measures towards juvenile delinquency. Today juvenile law is governed by state and many states have enacted a juvenile code. However, in numerous cases, juveniles are transferred to adult court when juvenile courts waive or relinquish jurisdiction. Adolescents should not be tried in the adult court system or sentenced to adult penitentiary's on account of: teen brains are not mature which causes a lack of understanding towards the system, incarceration in an adult facility increases juvenile crime, and children that are sentenced to adult prison are vulnerable to abuse and rape.
...inal court system for the safety and protection of the juvenile, as well as the surrounding community. If a juvenile is likely to receive more help through the adult criminal court system, then this action should be proceeded with. If a juvenile is a very serious offender, or continues to repeat their criminal actions, then the juvenile court system is not having the proper affect on them; therefore they should be transferred to the adult criminal court system and processed with this way. Considering the life of a young adult will be altered, there are very serious circumstances to consider and is not to be taken lightly. The actions of the court may have long-standing, or harsh, affects on a juvenile. However, if this action of a transfer will be deemed the appropriate action to take for the juvenile and the community, then this is the action that must be preceded.
With increased media coverage of violent juvenile behavior, legislators began to pass laws to toughen up on juvenile crime. Many laws made it easier to waive juveniles into adult courts, or even exclude juveniles who had committed serious crimes from juvenile court jurisdiction. Furthermore, the sentences to be handed out for offenders were lengthened and made much more severe. As a result, the juvenile courts began to resemble the adult courts. Yet, this movement’s influence began to fade, and by the turn of the century, another shift had occurred. In the current juvenile courts, a balanced approach is emphasized. While the court deals with chronic and dangerous offenders with a heavy hand, needy youth who need help to get back on track are still assisted under the parens patriae philosophy. Restorative justice has come to be the preferred method of today’s juvenile courts. In an overall sense, the modern juvenile court has taken on a paternalistic view similar to parens patriae towards youths who are in need of guidance, while punitively punishing offenders who do not respond to the helping hand extended to
After reviewing the juvenile court recommendation, and the social study report, I think I have a basic understanding of why the juvenile acted the way he has. Starting with his family, he only has his mother, and has three siblings with two of them have had forms of supervision from the Waterloo police department. With the combination of then being evicted from their old home, coupled with bad grades, and the siblings with police records, it shows a clear indication how the juveniles life led to being placed on probation. When reading the investigation of the juvenile’s crimes, and backstory from the Waterloo police department, it is unsure to me if he will continue his criminal behavior. In the juveniles past, his first brush with law enforcement
In 1899, the nation’s first juvenile court for youth under the age of 16 was established in Chicago to provide rehabilitation rather than punishment. By 1925, following the Chicago model, all but two states had juvenile courts whose goals were to turn youth into productive citizens utilizing treatment that included warnings, probation, and training school confinement(Cox et al. 2014, p.2). Treatment lasted until the child was “cured” or turned 21. Although judges spoke with the offending children and decided upon the punishment, the lack of established rules and poor rehabilitation led to unfair treatment. In 1967 “ U.S. Supreme Court case of In re Gault held that juveniles were entitled to the same constitutional due process rights as adults, beginning a national reform in juvenile justice and the system was repaired to afford children many of the same rights that adults have in court” (Cox et al. 2014, p.4). Also, state legislatures passed laws to crack down on juvenile crime, as recently, states have attempted strike a balance in their approach to juvenile justice systems as research suggests that locking youth away in large, secure juvenile facilities is ineffective treatment towards different genders in which it doesn’t provide appropriate rehabilitation.
The quagmire of placing juveniles in adult facilities is the risk factors juveniles may experience while incarcerated. Being that juveniles are young and smaller to the adult offenders, they may be seen as a prey or easy target for rape, assault, mental issues which eventually leads to suicide. We must keep in mind that juveniles are youth meaning they are still a child, not an adult and should not be exposed to adult incarceration environment. Although it is cost saving to place juveniles and adults under one facility, it is unethical because they are not built and yet mentally ready and prepared to experience adult facilities. Alternative strategies are available to assist juvenile detainees such as healthcare, education, recreation, and work experience. The Juvenile Court Act of 1899 gave leniency to youth under the age of 16. Placing youth detainees with adult offenders will result in the reduction of rehabilitation services for youth, while increasing the rate of being a victim as a potential prey o...
Mental health treatment among juvenile is a subject that has been ignored by society for far too long. It has always been one of those intricate issues that lead to the argument of whether juveniles should receive proper treatment or imprisoned like any other criminals, and often trialed as adults. Many times, young people are often deprived of proper help (Rosenberg) However, we often overlook the fact that while they are criminals, they are still young, and fact or not, it is a matter of compassion that must be played from our side to help these youth overcome their harsh reality. As such, we do however see signs of sympathy shown towards juvenile. Juvenile health courts give help to youth to youth who have serious mental illness (Rosenberg). It is often asked in general, would mental health treatment cure juvenile criminals? In my opinion, when you look at the background of these young criminals, it is frequently initiated from negligence and feelings of betrayal (Browne and Lynch), of course leading to mental disorder. However, further zooming into their background, it is always proper treatment that saves them from their unfortunate circumstances. Research shows that giving juvenile criminals mental health treatment did not only reduce re-arrests but also further improve their ways of living among the society.
The focus of the juvenile justice system is to rehabilitate juvenile offenders, rather than to imprison and punish like the systems adult counterpart. According to Caldwell (1961) the juvenile justice system is based on the principle that youth are developmentally and fundamentally different from adults. This has lead to the development of a separate justice system for juveniles that was initially designed to assist troubled juveniles providing them with protection, treatment, and guidance. 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 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. This waiver allows adult criminal court to have the power to exercise jurisdiction over juveniles and handle the juvenile’s case as an adult’s case would be tried. According to Flesch (2004) a juvenile is both tried and if convicted of the crime the juvenile will be sentenced as an adult when his or her case is waived from the juvenile court. Waiver to adult court initially was viewe...