Law Commons^™

Easy Victims Of The Law: Protecting The Constitutional Rights Of Juvenile Suspects To Prevent False Confessions, Tayler Klinkbeil

Child and Family Law Journal

The inherently coercive nature of custodial interrogation is the very reason the Supreme Court handed down the famous Miranda v. Arizona decision; the court recognized the increased vulnerability that suspects under questioning are subjected to when placed in a situation designed to elicit incriminating information.¹ Legal scholars and judiciaries alike agree that the likelihood of police questioning resulting in a false admission of guilt or self-incriminating statements is disproportionately more probable if the subject of the questioning is a minor.² The constitutional protections that are afforded to juvenile suspects subjected to custodial interrogations are those set out in …

The Effects Of Adverse Childhood Experiences On The Future Of Our Youth, Patrick Cobb

Child and Family Law Journal

22.3 percent.¹ This is the percentage of the population of the United States under the age of 18. These three words should come to mind: growth, family, and safety. Unfortunately, just because these words come to mind, does not mean these are a reality for our youth. The Adverse Childhood Experience (ACEs) study explores our youth’s mental, emotional, and social well-being across a wide sample with some disturbing results.

As we de-code what exactly ACEs entails, we can learn to predict, diagnose, and ultimately prevent negative environments our youth are involved in. Prioritizing these prevention efforts can eventually lead …

Age Is Not Just A Number: Problems With Florida’S Statutory Minimum Age For Juvenile Delinquency And Why It Must Be Increased, Natalie Brooks

FIU Law Review

Under a Florida law enacted in 2021, any child over the age of six years old can be arrested and subjected to juvenile delinquency proceedings. Florida, as well as the United States in general, is an outlier when it comes to statutory minimum ages for juvenile delinquency. The most common and recommended minimum age internationally is fourteen years old, and many studies show that arresting, charging, and adjudicating children below the age of fourteen is counterproductive, as it leads to increased recidivism, potentially violates due process, and leaves lasting negative effects on children. This comment will discuss juvenile delinquency in …

Skinning The Cat: How Mandatory Psychiatric Evaluations For Animal Cruelty Offenders Can Prevent Future Violence, Ashley Kunz

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

In 2017, the Texas legislature amended Texas Penal Code § 42.092, which governs acts of cruelty against non-livestock animals. The statute in its current form makes torturing, killing, or seriously injuring a non-livestock animal a third degree felony, while less serious offenses carry either a state jail felony or a Class A misdemeanor charge.

While a step in the right direction, Texas law is not comprehensive in that it fails to address a significant aspect of animal cruelty offenses: mental illness. For over fifteen years, Texas Family Code § 54.0407 has required psychiatric counseling for juveniles convicted of cruelty to …

A More Just System Of Juvenile Justice: Creating A New Standard Of Accountability For Juveniles In Illinois, Brooke Troutman

Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology

For over a century, America’s legal system has made substantial reforms to change its treatment of adolescents. Every day, we see that our legal system treats adolescents differently from their adult counterparts. With regards to driving privileges, voting rights, and the ability to drink, our laws recognize that adults and adolescents are different and therefore require a different set of standards. America extended this treatment to the realm of juvenile justice in 1899, when Cook County, Illinois, created the country’s first juvenile court. Originating in this court was the overarching purpose of America’s juvenile justice system—rehabilitation of juvenile offenders. Though …

Virtual Shackles: Electronic Surveillance And The Adultification Of Juvenile Courts, Chaz Arnett

Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology

In recent years, there has been a groundswell of attention directed at problems within the American criminal justice system, led in part by Michelle Alexander’s groundbreaking book, The New Jim Crow, and most recently through the efforts of the Black Lives Matter movement. This increased focus on the harms of over-incarceration and net-widening, has had the benefit of introducing to the public other practices utilized in the criminal justice system, such as the widespread use of ankle monitors to track the location of defendants and released offenders. Yet, despite this greater attention, legal scholarship has only recently begun to grapple …

On The Ends And Means Of Protecting Youth In Juvenile Courts, Franklin E. Zimring

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Protecting America’S Children: Why An Executive Order Banning Juvenile Solitary Confinement Is Not Enough, Carina Muir

Pepperdine Law Review

Despite its devastating psychological, physical, and developmental effects on juveniles, solitary confinement is used in juvenile correctional facilities across the United States. This Comment posits that such treatment violates the Eighth Amendment’s Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause, the United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. It likewise argues that that President Obama’s recent Executive Order banning juvenile solitary confinement is simply not a powerful enough remedy and discusses why it must be paired with Congressional legislation or Supreme Court jurisprudence if it is to …

Chaining Kids To The Ever Turning Wheel: Other Contemporary Costs Of Juvenile Court Involvement, Candace Johnson, Mae C. Quinn

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

In this essay, Candace Johnson and Mae Quinn respond to Tamar Birckhead’s important article The New Peonage, based, in part, on their work and experience representing youth in St. Louis, Missouri. They concur with Professor Birckhead’s conclusions about the unfortunate state of affairs in 21st century America— that we use fines, fees, and other prosecution practices to continue to unjustly punish poverty and oppressively regulate racial minorities. Such contemporary processes are far too reminiscent of historic convict leasing and Jim Crow era efforts intended to perpetuate second-class citizenship for persons of color. Johnson and Quinn add to Professor Birckhead’s …

Criminal Prosecution And Section 1983, Barry C. Scheck

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Rights Of Youthful Offenders; In The Matter Of Gault, Robert M. Kunczt

Akron Law Review

After the decisions in Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U. S. 335 (1963), Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U. S. 436 (1966), and Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U. S. 478 (1964), which revealed the Supreme Court's solicitude of the constitutional rights of adults, it seemed improbable that the lower courts would long be permitted to continue ignoring the constitutional rights of juveniles. Thus the decision in the principal case, which represents a breakthrough in the assurance of a fair hearing to minors, comes as no surprise. The case holds that under the Fourteenth Amendment a juvenile has a right to notice of …

Certification Of Juveniles To Adult Court , Joseph N. Sorrentino, Gary K. Olsen

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Guidelines For Statutes For Transfer Of Juveniles To Criminal Court , Elizabeth W. Browne

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Coy V. Iowa: A Constitutional Right Of Intimidation, John A. Mayers

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Thompson V. Oklahoma: Debating The Constitutionality Of Juvenile Executions, Susan M. Simmons

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Cudgel Or Carrot: How Roper V. Simmons Will Affect Plea Bargaining In The Juvenile System , D. Brian Woo

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

In 2005, the United States Supreme Court held, in Roper v. Simmons, that the execution of convicted juveniles violated the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. In addressing the issue, the Court determined that a national consensus had developed against the execution of juveniles. Ultimately, a majority of the court decided that a national public consensus had been reached against the execution of juveniles under 18 in age. With Roper, no longer can juveniles of any age be executed. This decision will undoubtedly affect the entire juvenile penal system, from how cases enter the system, to …

On Statutory Rape, Strict Liability, And The Public Welfare Offense Model, Catherine L. Carpenter

American University Law Review

Statutory Rape. At the center of a long-standing debate on whether its commission should require proof of a criminal mens rea, the prosecution of statutory rape offers a revealing look at the struggle to demarcate the parameters of the public welfare offense doctrine. Specifically, with respect to statutory rape, disagreement is deep and entrenched on whether statutory rape should be categorized as a public welfare offense, which would render irrelevant defendant's lack of knowledge of the victim's age. And despite wholesale revamping of state statutory rape laws on issues of age, gender, and potential grading and punishment, the debate on …

The Age Of Criminal Responsibility In An Era Of Violence: Has Great Britain Set A New International Standard?, Stephanie J. Millet

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

With the alarming rise of juvenile crime and violence during the past decade, policymakers across the international community have struggled to develop effective juvenile criminal justice systems apart from the existing systems tailored to adults. The wide variations in methods and philosophies utilized in different states indicate that there is no consensus on the proper treatment of young offenders. Using the recent Bulger case as a focus, this Note examines two competing paradigms of juvenile justice found within the British juvenile justice system, with particular emphasis on the age of criminal responsibility. After discussing recent developments in Great Britain's juvenile …

The Court-Ordered Predisposition Evaluation Under Washington's Juvenile Justice Act: A Violation Of The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination?—Wash. Rev. Code § 13.40, Judith H. Ramseyer

Seattle University Law Review

This Comment analyzes the significance of the principles animating the constitutional privilege against self-incrimination by first looking at the purposes of Washington’s Juvenile Justice Act; second, by examining the status of the privilege against self-incrimination during sentencing; and third, by applying the values protected by the privilege to the use of predisposition psychological evaluations in Washington juvenile courts.

Note: Constitutional Chellanges To New York's Youthful Offender Statute, John M. Tyd

Fordham Urban Law Journal

New York's Youthful Offender Statute has been described as "humane and progressive legislation intended for the benefit of a youth who makes his first mistake and that he should not be branded as a criminal therefor..." In keeping with this philosophy, the statute provides a system whereby a youth (i.e., an individual between the ages of sixteen and eighteen) can avoid the serious consequences which result from being convicted of a crime. Upon determination that youthful offender status should be granted, the conviction is vacated and replaced with a youthful offender finding. Prior to 1975, those youths indicted for crimes …

Criminal Law--Juvenile Delinquency--Contributing Survives Constitutional Attack: Confusion Or Certainty, Michael Frank Pezzulli

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.