Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Institution
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Judges
Beyond “Children Are Different”: The Revolution In Juvenile Intake And Sentencing, Josh Gupta-Kagan
Beyond “Children Are Different”: The Revolution In Juvenile Intake And Sentencing, Josh Gupta-Kagan
Washington Law Review
For more than 120 years, juvenile justice law has not substantively defined the core questions in most delinquency cases—when should the state prosecute children rather than divert them from the court system (the intake decision), and what should the state do with children once they are convicted (the sentencing decision)? Instead, the law has granted certain legal actors wide discretion over these decisions, namely prosecutors at intake and judges at sentencing. This Article identifies and analyzes an essential reform trend changing that reality: legislation, enacted in at least eight states in the 2010s, to limit when children can be prosecuted …
Judicial Discretion Is Advised: The Lack Of Discretionary Appointments Of Counsel For Children In Washington State Dependency Proceedings, Marisa Forthun
Judicial Discretion Is Advised: The Lack Of Discretionary Appointments Of Counsel For Children In Washington State Dependency Proceedings, Marisa Forthun
Washington Law Review Online
State agencies initiate dependency proceedings when a child is alleged, often due to parental neglect or abuse, to be a dependent of the state. The state must intervene “[w]hen parents do not comply with [Child Protective Services] requirements, or when the state believes the child is at too great a risk to remain at home even if parents were to comply with services.” Dependency proceedings usually take place in juvenile courts and involve the local state agency, the parents, and the child. After the government files a petition alleging circumstances of neglect or abuse, “[t]he court issues temporary orders regarding …
Rethinking Appeals, Uri Weiss
Rethinking Appeals, Uri Weiss
Touro Law Review
This paper makes the point that a court decision that is open to an appeal is akin to a take-it-or-leave-it settlement proposal for both parties. For the case to not be appealed, both parties need to “take,” i.e., accept, this proposal. Thus, on one hand, if both parties cannot achieve a settlement by themselves, they usually benefit from the right to appeal. On the other hand, a right to appeal activates the regressive effects that characterize settlements, which also applies to lower-court decisions. For example, legal uncertainty has a regressive effect on lower-court decisions: if the judge wishes to block …