NCJ Number
12130
Journal
CRIME AND CORRECTIONS Volume: 1 Issue: 1 Dated: (SPRING 1973) Pages: 17-25
Date Published
1973
Length
9 pages
Annotation
SIGNIFICANCE OF AND RATIONAL BEHIND THE JUDICIAL DECISION WHICH INCORPORATED THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL INTO JUVENILE COURT PHILOSOPHY.
Abstract
THE AUTHOR FIRST EXAMINES THE LIMITATIONS OF THE DOCTRINE OF PARENS PATRIAE, A CONCEPT WHICH SIGNIFIES THE PASSING OF AUTHORITY OVER AMERICAN CHILDREN FROM THE STATE TO THE JUVENILE COURT. FOLLOWING THIS DISCUSSION, A REVIEW IS PRESENTED OF THE SIX POINTS ARGUED ON APPEAL OF THE GAULT CASE. THE GAULTS APPEALED ON THE GROUNDS THAT WHEN THEIR 15 YEAR OLD SON WAS TAKEN INTO CUSTODY FOR ALLEGEDLY MAKING OBSCENE PHONE CALLS, THERE HAD BEEN NO NOTICE OF CHARGES AND NO RIGHT TO COUNSEL. HE HAD NOT BEEN ALLOWED TO CONFRONT WITNESSES, HAD NO RIGHT AGAINST SELF INCRIMINATION, HAD NOT RECEIVED TRANSCRIPTS OF THE PROCEEDINGS, AND HAD NO RIGHT TO APPELLATE REVIEW. THE EVENTUAL SUPREME COURT RULING WAS THE BEGINNING OF LEGAL SAFEGUARDS FOR JUVENILES. IN ADDITION, THIS CASE STRUCK A BLOW AT THE PRACTICE OF HAVING THE CHILD'S OFFICIAL REPRESENTATIVE IN COURT, THE PROBATION OFFICER, BRING CHARGES AGAINST HIM. INCLUDED ARE A BIBLIOGRAPHY, AND DATA TWO STUDIES INDICATING THE PRESENCE OF COUNSEL IN CASES BEFORE AND AFTER THE GAULT DECISION. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)