NCJ Number
31668
Journal
NOTRE DAME LAWYER Volume: 51 Issue: 1 Dated: (OCTOBER 1975) Pages: 22-47
Date Published
1975
Length
26 pages
Annotation
THE PROCESSES OF JUVENILE COURT DIVERSION ARE EXAMINED TO DETERMINE WHETHER SUCH CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AS THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL OR THE RIGHT TO A PROBABLE CAUSE DETERMINATION SHOULD BE EXTENDED TO THE DIVERSION STAGE.
Abstract
A BACKGROUND ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM, THE CONSTITUTIONAL STATUS OF THE JUVENILE COURTS, AND THE MOVEMENT TOWARD JUVENILE COURT DIVERSION ARE FIRST PROVIDED. THE SEQUENCE AND PROCEDURE OF JUVENILE DIVERSION ARE EXAMINED FOR THE TWO PRIMARY TYPES OF DIVERSION: POLICE SCREENING AND JUVENILE COURT INTAKE PROCEDURES. THE AUTHOR NOTES THAT MANY U.S. SUPREME COURT DECISIONS HAVE ESTABLISHED BASIC CONSTITUTIONAL PARAMETERS FOR JUVENILE COURTS. HE STATES THAT IN LIGHT OF THE BREAKDOWN OF THE PARENS PATRIAE PRINCIPLE, WHICH PREVIOUSLY ISOLATED THE JUVENILE SYSTEM FROM CONSTITUTIONAL SCRUTINY, DIVERSION MAY NOW BE VULNERABLE TO CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE. IN VIEW OF THIS, HE ANALYZES DIVERSION FROM A CONSTITUTIONAL PERSPECTIVE, INVESTIGATING SUCH ISSUES AS DUE PROCESS AT THE PREADJUDICATION STAGE, THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL DURING DIVERSION, AND THE RIGHT TO PROBABLE CAUSE DETERMINATION PRIOR TO DIVERSION. THE AUTHOR CONCLUDES THAT THESE PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS SHOULD BE EXTENDED TO THE DIVERSION PROCESS AND OFFERS FURTHER RECOMMENDATIONS TO IMPROVE SEVERAL NONCONSTITUTIONAL DEFICIENCIES IN THE DIVERSION OF THE JUVENILE OFFENDER.