Bond Hearing Reflection

In September of 1961, a woman from District of Columbia had an intruder break into her apartment. While the invader of the home was there, they had taken her wallet, and also raped the woman. During the investigation of the crime, the police had found some latent fingerprints in the apartment. The police then established and processed the prints. The prints were then connected back to 16 year old Morris A. Kent.

This particular article talks about a Connecticut Governor by the name of Dannel P. Malloy wanting to get the state approved to consider treating young offenders as juveniles until they are twenty-one. Mistrett made a comment stating, “Here they go asking for 21. It makes sense, it aligns with what brain science tells us and I think it 's a good path forward” (Mistrett). It seems like she agrees with what Malloy is trying to get across to the state, but young offenders should have that psychological sense to want to stop committing crimes before things get worse. The adult age starts at eighteen and continues on; sometimes, you have to consider a young offender as an adult depending on what crime was committed.

The case People v. Smith was finally decided by the Supreme Court of Michigan in 1991. The case involved the defendant Ricky Franklin Smith whom pled guilty to breaking and entering and of being a habitual offender, fourth offense (People v Smith, 1991). The judge sentenced Smith to 6 to 30 years imprisonment for the Habitual Offender charge. Ricky Franklin Smith after sentencing requested to be resentenced because his juvenile record, which had been expunged, was considered by the judge for sentencing. The Michigan Court of Appeals agreed with the sentencing; however, when the case went to the Supreme Court of Michigan, they reversed the decision because the sentencing should not have been based on the defendant’s prior expunged juvenile record.

Meditation instead of a detention- How misbehaved or disrupting kids are handled in Robert W. Coleman Elementary school We are all familiar with that creepy room where disruptive children are sent where they have the chance to reconsider and reflect on everything bad they have done. However, people attending even one day in the detention room will confess that they reflect on nothing, but trying to get out of there or talking to another detention mate without being caught. So, long story short, children sent on detention don’t learn a valuable lesson about well-behaving and prospects in life. But, what if we told you that some schools have a different approach towards disrupting and misbehaving children- mediation.

Juvenile Detention Centers are the facilities that the government use for children that do not know how to act and are steadily getting in to trouble with either the law or in school. Some facilities do meet the requirements of education but then there are some that do not have the books or the technology to help the kids with their education. Then there are some facilities that don’t discipline the children in these facilities like they are suppose to; some let the kids do almost whatever they want and guards tend to get “cool” with the inmates, and give them more privileges than others. A juvenile commits a crime usually because of the people they surround themselves with or the things they see others doing, only because they do not realize that when you commit a crime there is always consequences that come with that crime and they do not think that because, in most cases the people they see doing illegal activity haven’t got caught.

Typically, when a judge decides to waive the protective rights the juvenile court has on a youthful offender it is for more serious crimes. This can also be applied to minors who have been in and out of the juvenile justice system. Fagan (2008) states that in some instances, transfer decisions made by juvenile courts to try juveniles in adult criminal court was primarily based on the severity of the offense. Some juvenile cases depending upon the severity or nature of the offense are transferred to adult criminal court through a process called a “wavier”.

Some juvenile cases can be transferred to adult court through a process called "waiver”. Usually juvenile cases that are subject to waiver involve more serious crimes and incidents.. Although being tried as an adult has its pros and cons. A juvenile being tried as an adult has more constitutional protections then a juvenile case. However there is more potential for a more severe sentence and the possibility of serving time in an adult correctional facility.

While the state of Mississippi, my home state, does provide for the expungement of juvenile records, the actual process of expungement is rare. The reason for this is the state laws, which govern the sealing of all juvenile records. Even though the state law calls for the sealing of juvenile records, juvenile adjudications can be taken into consideration, by judges of the circuit courts, when determining sentences. This records can also be used, and disseminated to others, usually by court order of the youth court. Section 43-21-263 of the Mississippi Code of 1972, provides for the sealing of all juvenile court records, once a person has reached 20 years of age.

There are several challenges facing the juvenile justice system. In the past years prior to the 21st century there are difficult cases and justifying situations that truly can’t be ignored when it comes to deciding the fate of a juvenile. The stress that juveniles are presented with in today’s society are unbelievable and the it gets to the point to where a lot of factors can affect the lives of our children such as an unstable environment, more pressure into substance abuse, and no reliable sources of community help. While juveniles are having a harder time today they are involving their self in actions at even a younger age. An ordinary result of these hardships along with the daily life is frustrating at their age.

4 – Question #11: (Ch 9) Juveniles may be represented by several different types of individuals in court, this includes: court-appointed and private lawyers, public defenders, special advocates, and guardian ad litem – who represents the juvenile often depends on the case its self. To begin, a court appointed lawyer may either be an attorney or a public defender – both of which represent defendants who do not have the financial income or money to obtain a private lawyer. An attorney is typically drawn from a roster of practicing attorneys in the jurisdiction of the case. On the other hand, a public defender is a full-time salaried employee.

Prisons: Who are more likely to end up in prison and why? The sociological perspective I chose was the Conflict Theory Perspective. The Conflict Theory Perspective purposes that Conflict theorists would examine whatever situation at hand to see how it promotes social inequality. According to the textbook, Conflict theorists make it their mission to find the underlying existing strains that exist today amongst society.