Public defenders and juvenile outcomes in family court proceedings

Criminal Justice - Juvenile Court

FAMILY COURT OBSERVATIONS

The most surprising part of my observations at the Suffolk County Family Court was the assembly line quality the proceedings seemed to have. More often than not, the appearance in court is not exactly a routine matter for the juveniles involved or for their families. Besides the fact that the outcome of the proceedings could have dramatic effects on their lives, appearing in front of a judge in a courtroom is an intimidating experience and one of the most formal situations many people face.

Meanwhile, most of the attorneys appearing for the juveniles were public defenders. Everything about them, from their mannerisms, their familiarity with the courtroom personnel, and even their suits that clearly showed many workdays' worth of wrinkles contrasted with the importance of the court date for the parties involved. All of the attorneys carried accordion-style folders that clearly held dozens of files, each one possibly representing a very serious turning point in the lives of the individuals referenced on all that paperwork. The absolute relaxed, routine way that the attorneys shuffled the paperwork around seemed to contradict the sense of urgency and nervous anticipation that was so evident in the faces of some of the juveniles and all of the families.

In discussing the events and circumstances, both the attorneys and the judge referred to the juveniles' conduct as though everything that every one of them did to contribute to their predicament was the product of personal choice rather than a sign of deeper problems or an indirect attempt to ask for help. In some cases, it may very well have been the case that the juveniles simply chose to break rules or laws, but in just as many cases the juveniles seemed more troubled and their actions were not necessarily only the product of conscious choices.

On several occasions, the judge did seem to make an inquiry into motivation or reasoning, but the juveniles failed to give a coherent answer; it was clearly not a setting in which they felt comfortable opening up about their lives and issues. Instead of pursuing the matter to get a satisfactory answer, the judge just moved on to the ruling phase if the juvenile declined to give a full answer to questions or just responded "I don't know" or "I guess so" when it should have been obvious that there was much more to the story.

In another case, the judge asked a juvenile if he (the juvenile) knew why he was so angry at his mother. Everything about his body language, his facial expressions, and the way he stared at his mother suggested that he knew exactly why he purposely made his mother's life so difficult. Even as the juvenile responded "No Sir" he was glaring at his mother and obviously fighting back emotions. The judge accepted the answer and just turned his attention back to the attorney and started going over the dates of certain motions and appearances.