NCJ Number
64617
Journal
UCLA Law Review Volume: 26 Issue: 6 Dated: (AUGUST 1979) Pages: 1462-1499
Date Published
1979
Length
38 pages
Annotation
PROCEDURES FOLLOWED AT PREADJUDICATION DETENTION HEARINGS FOR JUVENILE DEFENDANTS IN CALIFORNIA ARE EXAMINED, AND SPECIFIC PROBLEMS IN THE PRODUCTION OF WITNESSES AND THE USE OF HEARSAY EVIDENCE ARE NOTED.
Abstract
IN CALIFORNIA AS IN ALL OTHER STATES, JUVENILES ARE PROCESSED SEPARATELY FROM ADULTS THROUGH THE JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM. THE LEGISLATION HAS AMENDED THE WELFARE AND INSTITUTIONS CODE TO INCLUDE DUE PROCESS SAFEGUARDS FOR JUVENILES AND HAS BROADENED THE SCOPE OF THE JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM TO PERMIT GREATER CONSIDERATION OF DETERRENCE AND RETRIBUTION GOALS. JUVENILE DETENTION REHEARINGS CONDUCTED IN CALIFORNIA DEVIATE FROM DICTATES OF BOTH STATUTORY AND CASE LAW IN TWO AREAS: INCONSISTENCY IN THE PRODUCTION OF WITNESSES, AND SEEMING APPROVAL OF COURT RELIANCE ON HEARSAY EVID ENCE IN ORDERING THE DETENTION OF A MINOR. A COMPROMISE PROPOSAL IS TO ADMIT HEARSAY INTO EVIDENCE BUT ONLY IF IT IS SWORN TO BY SOMEONE WITH PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF THE EVIDENCE AND IN THE PRESENCE OF INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY MEMBERS. USING THE ADULT MISDEMEANOR PROBABLE CAUSE HEARING AS A MODEL, A SIMILAR RELIABILITY REQUIREMENT FOR EVIDENCE AT JUVENILE DETENTION REHEARINGS CAN CONCEIVABLY SOLVE THE HEARSAY CONFLICT. ANY COMPROMISE ON THE PRODUCTION OF WITNESSES AND HEARSAY EVIDENCE SHOULD STRIKE A BALANCE BETWEEN PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS REQUIREMENTS AND INFORMALITY AND FLEXIBILITY CONCERNS. CASE LAW CITATIONS AND FOOTNOTES ARE PROVIDED. (DEP)