They know at the time of doing the crime that it is wrong and they still go through with they're are doing. If it is a parents problem, then they should have their children taken away from them for not teaching them the right values and not setting a good example. If we start trying our teenagers as adults then in time we will see a decrease in the amount of parents that mistreat their kids. Those parents will have learned that they have to take responsibility, even at a young age for their actions and they will teach their children that. This will cause those teenagers to know what it wrong before they ever have to learn by going to prison.
INTRODUCTION Juvenile justice is the area of criminal law related to persons not old enough to be held accounted for criminal acts, nearly all states; juvenile justice is applicable to those under eighteen years old. Juvenile law is mainly controlled by the juvenile codes of states. The main aim of the juvenile justice is rehabilitation rather than punishment. Juvenile justice is administered through a juvenile or family court, however, but juvenile court does not have authority in cases in which minors are charged as adults, where parental neglect or loss of control is the issue, the juvenile court may search for foster homes for the juvenile, treating the child as the ward of the court.
“New Orleans prosecutors are seeking life without parole [for juvenile offenders] in half of all cases; in West Baton Rouge Parish, 100 percent,” (“Justice for the Youngest Inmates”). Whenever a minor is found guilty of committing a crime, he or she must go through the processes of the juvenile justice system. There has been much controversy over how young criminals should be punished and corrected for breaking the law. The goal of the juvenile justice system is to rectify the mistakes that youths have committed in order to produce functional, well-mannered members of society. However, juveniles are often treated poorly after being tried and come out of the detention facilities in a worse condition than when they entered.
Make special arrangements for children and young Offenders, 7. Consider alternative arrangements for parents with dependent children, particularly mothers with Babies, 8. Identify mental illness and drug addiction and divert those affected to appropriate medical, or other care, 9. Reduce sentence lengths and ensure consistent sentencing Practice, and 10. Develop opportunities for parole or other forms of early release and assist prisoners on release to prevent their return to prison.”
Mandatory minimum sentencing requires a minimum sentence based on the crime that the offender committed (Levinthal, 2012). The majority of the laws involved illicit drug activity and is based on the amount of the substance that was in the individual’s possession. Unlike general sentencing, the judge involved in the mandatory minimum sentencing must follow strict guidelines that are provided. The judge cannot decrease the term of the sentence, no matter the circumstances that are involved in the matter.
Winnebago County Social Services helps one to recognize the influence it will have on future cases. Randy DeShaney was sent to jail for his actions; however, his time spent in jail was relatively short. Melody DeShaney was granted custody of Joshua, who now suffers permanent brain damage. In 1986 the number of child abuse cases reported doubled. (“The Battered Child” 7) Five years later, in Daniels v. Williams, the Court considered Joshua’s case when deciding, "to the extent that it states that mere lack of due care by a state official may 'deprive ' an individual of life, liberty, or property under the Fourteenth Amendment."
Today, I will focus on three types of special needs offenders and describe each one in depth – the juveniles behind bars, the gay and lesbian inmates and their sexuality and sexual correction behind bars, and then finish up with inmates under protective custody. Juveniles, most likely, will be testified in juvenile court and then end up being held in their respective juvenile corrections. That does not always happen though, they could end up being charged as an adult. Their age usually helps decide that –
Discussion 1: Legal Rights of Juveniles in Custody Introduction Dealing with juvenile offenders presents special problems not faced by the police when they deal with adult offenders. This fact sometimes conflicts with their primary policing mission, which is law enforcement. Beginning the early nineteenth century, juvenile delinquents in the United States were treated the same as adult criminal offenders. When found guilty of offenses they were given punitive sentences analogous to those imposed on adult offenders.
Kids were put in juvenile for the most simplest minor offenses. Offenses such as arguing and disrespecting adults to getting into school fights. These little incidents were so minor and could had been resolved easily, yet teens got prison time for minor crimes. According to William Ecenbarger in his book Kids For Cash, he writes about the many different offenses that kids got into and how they were punished and treated for their minor offenses and put into juvenile, and how Judge Mark Ciavarella took advantage of this. Cases like a fifteen year old boy who gets charged for a misdemeanor for showing disrespect to his grandfather and being placed on probation.
A second-degree rape charge occurs when a person whom is 18 years or older has sexual intercourse with a child under the age of fifteen. If the perpetrator is 18 and the child is 15, then any charges would be mitigated due to the age difference being under four years during the time of the offense. Second-degree rape is punishable by law up to seven years in prison and is a class D felony. First-degree rape is defined by sexual intercourse with someone under the age of eleven or someone under the age of thirteen if the perpetrator is age eighteen and older. Once charged with first-degree rape, the perpetrator will spend a minimal of five to a maximum of twenty-five years in prison and is a class B
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.
This week, I was able to attend court each day I was present in the office. Tuesday, I observed Bond Hearings. During this process, the judge asks the defendants various questions while taking their guilty plea, such as their highest grade completed, age, ability to read and write, were the under the influence of any illegal substances, the charges presented against them and if they were satisfied with the representation of their attorney. One of the common themes with most defendants is that they did not complete high school, which in my opinion directly correlates the probability of committing and crime with education. There was also an individual who originally was going to be sentenced under the first offenders act, but after the judge gave the discloser that he could be sentenced up to ten years if he did not comply with the terms and conditions given by the court, he decided that he did not want to take the first offenders act.
The first major court case to influence our treatment of juveniles today was the Kent v. United States. The case overall, made an impact on the treatment of juveniles today because now juveniles have a right to an attorney, the parents must be notified and either parents or a lawyer must be present during an interrogation, and juveniles must be reminded of his or her right to silence. The main thing that this case influenced was that courts must allow juveniles the right to defend themselves and to be heard when transferring a juvenile over to the adult system. A second major court case was In re Gault.
There have been several courts in many states that have lowered the ages at which youths could be tried in adult criminal courts and expanded the ranges of young offenders that are subject to adult adjudication and punishment; at the same time, the severity of the penalties available to the juvenile court increased (Grisso, 2003). With the current legal developments have raised an important issue of developmental capacities needed to participate effectively in their trials (Grisso, 2003). Although courts and legislatures in some states have determined that youths adjudicated in juvenile and criminal courts must be competent, but there has been little recognition that youths in criminal court may not meet these standards due to developmental
The juvenile court system is a fixture of the justice system with many moving parts. Each component and member of the court system are essential in carrying out their common goal. By helping operate a complex system built to rehabilitate juveniles, these people, and the programs they run, prevent juveniles from reoffending, benefit them, and help them towards the path of becoming a productive member of society. For as long as juveniles have existed, so has the need for discipline.