Comparing juvenile and adult courts: adjudication and transfer processes

¶ … Juvenile Courts and Adult Court

Overview of Juvenile Justice System

According to the Office of Justice Programs, the Juvenile Justice System has "undergone significant modifications during the last 30 years." (2013, p.1) The first U.S. juvenile court was established in 1899 in Chicago. In the early 1990s, it is reported that views of juvenile crime, which became an epidemic "fueled public scrutiny of the system's ability to effectively control violent juvenile offenders." (Office of Justice Programs, 2013, p.1) For this reason, there were changes in the legislative process adopted by the U.S. states reported to be part of an effort "to crack down on juvenile crime." (Office of Justice Programs, 2013, p.1) Approximately two-thirds of youth arrested are referred to a court with a juvenile jurisdiction for processing such crimes. The court may decide in some cases to refer juveniles to other agencies for services however, prosecutors have a choice to file some juvenile cases into adult criminal court. There are approximately 1 million juvenile delinquency cases processed each year by the juvenile court system.

II. Comparison of Juvenile and Adult Court

The differences between the juvenile court and the adult court includes that juveniles "are not prosecuted for committing crimes, but rather delinquent acts. When the delinquent acts are very serious, they may be considered crimes and the juvenile tried in the adult system." (LeMance, 2013, p.1) In addition, juveniles do not have a right to a public trial by a jury of their peers. The trial part of the case of a juvenile charged with a crime involves evidence being reviewed by the judge and the judge ruling on whether the juvenile is delinquent in what is called an adjudication hearing. (LeMance, 2013, paraphrased) If the juvenile is adjudicated as delinquent, the court determines the resulting action to be taken. The goal of juvenile court is rehabilitation unlike the goal of adult court when the defendant is found guilty, which is that of punishment. The juvenile court system focuses on serving the juvenile's best interests. (LeMance, 2013, paraphrased) The juvenile court is less formal that are adult courts. There are similarities that exist between the juvenile and adult court system. Included in these similarities are: (1) the right to counsel; (2) the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses; (3) the privilege against self-incrimination; (4) the right to notice of charges; and (5) the requirement that the prosecution provide proof "beyond a reasonable court before the person can be convicted." (LeMance, 2013, p.1)

III. Implication of Increasing Use of Waivers and Remanding Juveniles to Adult Court for Processing for Youthful Offenders

A judicial waiver involves the juvenile court judge transferring a case from juvenile court to adult court "in order to deny the juvenile the protections that juvenile jurisdiction provide." (Fagan and Zimring, nd, p.1) There is reported to be a growth in the complexities of transfer of juvenile cases to adult court. The problem is related to the fact that many states have afforded the prosecutor rather than the judge, with the ability to transfer juvenile cases to adult court. It is reported that many states have "either supplemented or replaced judicial wavier with proscriptive legislation. Such legislation automatically removes certain offenses from the jurisdiction of the juvenile courts for offenders of a certain age." (Fagan and Zimring, nd, p.2) The list of offenses is reported to be lengthy and to have resulted in "a sharp rise in the number of cases tried in criminal courts." (Fagan and Zimring, nd, p.2) Simultaneously, this is reported to provide the prosecutor power to make a selection of the charges that will be faced by an offender, referred to as "a large measure of invisible but very real discretion." (Fagan and Zimring, nd, p.2-3) It is additionally reported that some legislatures have "created system of 'blended jurisdictions'. (Fagan and Zimring, nd, p.3) These systems hear juvenile cases in a special division of the juvenile court and many times with jury trials and harsher penalties being available. In addition, it is reported that some jurisdictions "hold further hearings once the offender -- who has been placed in a juvenile corrections facility -- reaches 17 or 18 years of age, with the option to impose a new and longer sentence in an adult facility. Other jurisdiction may impose such a mixed sentence at the original hearing." (Fagan and Zimring, nd, p.1) It is reported that these blended systems "with ability to impose serious prison terms, appear to undermine the juvenile justice systems' commitment to the life opportunities of young offenders." (Fagan and Zimring, nd, p.3)

IV. Societal Implications of Abolishing Juvenile Court