JUVENILE DEFENDANT IN FEDERAL SYSTEM NOT ENTITLED TO COUNSEL OR HEARING AT TIME DETERMINATION IS MADE BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL TO PROCEED AGAINST HIM AS AN ADULT

• NCJ Number: 11565
• Journal: Columbia Law Review Volume: 73 Issue: 6 Dated: (OCTOBER 1973) Pages: 13311341
• Author(s): K BOXER
• Date Published: 1973
• Length: 11 pages
• Corporate Author: Columbia University
• Publication Format: Article
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: *This document is currently unavailable from NCJRS.

Annotation

ARGUMENT THAT CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS AFFORDED JUVENILE OFFENDERS SHOULD BE UNIFORM IN BOTH STATE AND FEDERAL SYSTEMS.

Abstract

THE AUTHOR ANALYZES A RECENT FEDERAL CASE WHICH, RELYING ON THE JUDICIARY'S HANDS-OFF POLICY TOWARD PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETIONARY DECISIONS, REFUSED TO GRANT A JUVENILE RIGHTS TO COUNSEL AND A HEARING ON THE FEDERAL PROSECUTOR'S DECISION TO TRY THE DEFENDANT AS AN ADULT. SHE CONTENDS THAT THE COURT'S DECISION WHICH DISTINGUISHED THIS CASE FROM A SUPREME COURT CASE WAS ERRONEOUS. THE SUPREME COURT HAS HELD THAT IN WAIVER OF JUVENILE PROCEEDINGS CASES, WHERE BY STATUTE THE CHOICE WAS LEFT TO THE DISCRETION OF THE JUVENILE COURT, THE DEFENDANT MUST BE GRANTED CERTAIN RIGHTS, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO A HEARING AND TO COUNSEL. THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, HOWEVER, HELD THAT WHERE THIS DECISION IS MADE BY THE PROSECUTOR, AN AGENT OF THE EXECUTIVE, DUE PROCESS RIGHTS DO NOT ATTACH. THE ARTICLE CONCLUDES THAT SUCH HOLLOW DISTINCTIONS ARE DESTRUCTIVE OF JUSTICE.