Juvenile Court Transfer Laws Essay

For a juvenile to transfer into the adult court system a juvenile must be charged as a youthful offender. Youthful offenders often pose a threat to the community and/ or have committed a violent crime. State legislation has passed youthful offender laws permitting juveniles to be charged as an adult in criminal proceedings.

A Bureau of Justice Statistics conducted a study in 40 of the nation’s largest urban communities. “It was found that an estimated 7,100 juvenile defendants were charged with felonies in adult criminal court in 1998. Of these 40 county criminal courts, juveniles were 64% more likely than adults to be charged with a violent felony. These juvenile defendants were generally treated as serious offenders, as 52% did not receive pretrial release, 63% were convicted of a felony, and 43% of those convicted received a prison sentence. States have expanded the mechanisms by which juveniles can be charged in criminal courts. In 1998, statutory exclusion was the most common method (42%) used to charge juveniles defendants compared to the more traditional use of juvenile waiver (24%). In the 40 counties in 1998, 62% of the juvenile felony defendants were black, 20% were white, 16% were Hispanic, and almost 2% were of another race” (“Bureau of Justice Statistics”).As time goes on, crime rates of youths

The Juvenile Justice Delinquency Prevention and Protection Act (JJDPA) was established in 1974 and was the first federal law that dealt comprehensively with juvenile delinquency to improve the juvenile justice system and support state and local efforts at delinquency prevention. This paper will assess the JJDPA and summarize its purpose and implementation and enforcement. Next, there will be a discussion of the historical context of the policy; followed by a focus of the latent consequences. Finally there will be a vignette as to how this Act has affected a person or family as well as personal reflection toward the policy.

The juvenile justice system has made numerous of ethical issues when managing juvenile offenders. The issue with the juvenile justice system is the laws and rules that govern it. It has led to years of controversial debate over the ethical dilemmas of the juvenile corrections system, and how they work with youth offenders. The number of minors entering the juvenile justice system is increasing every month. The reasons why the juvenile justice system faces ethical dilemmas is important and needs to be addressed: (1) a vast proportion of juveniles are being tried and prosecuted as adults; (2) the psychological maturation of the juvenile to fully comprehend the justice system; and (3) the factors that contribute to minorities being adjudicated in the juvenile justice system are more likely than White offenders. These three ethical issues that are rising in the juvenile justice system will be further examined.

If juveniles aren’t tried in adult court they get off of the crime they committed easier. There are many children who recommit the crime after they are released from juvenile detention, and the ones released from jail are less likely to the crimes they did before. If the children are tried in adult court they are more likely to be sentenced to periods of incarceration. If a child is tried in adult court or in criminal court depends on what the crime was and how old the person offending was. The children who commit serious that aren’t tried in criminal court often reoffend and end up back where they were

There are many children in the world who are being put behind bars and detained for alleged wrongdoing without protections they are entitled to. Throughout the world, children are charged and sentenced for actions that should not be considered as adult crimes. Here in the United States, the minimum age of criminal responsibility is age 12. Law enforcement officials and those in the juvenile justice system nationwide tend to mistreat underage individuals by trying cases while working through the lens of an adult. Unfair punishments are still handed down domestically, which is in violation of Supreme Court law. The following articles specifically address the idea that juvenile justice is unethical. In the article, “Juvenile Justice & Adolescent

Childress, S. (2016, June 2). More States Consider Raising the Age for Juvenile Crime. Retrieved from PBS: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/more-states-consider-raising-the-age-for-juvenile-crime/

The decision to try a juvenile as an adult varies drastically across the globe as each country or state has its own set of laws and principles regarding the approach taken to juveniles in the court system that differ from those of other countries (Juvenile Vs Adult). In countries like India and France, there are sometimes entirely separate courts (France’s being called Juvenile Assize) and certain amendments that allow for those aged 16-18 who have committed “heinous” offenses to be tried as adults (Singhl). Places such as Iran and the Middle East try everyone as though they are the same, so minors can receive equal trials and sentences as adults (Mostafaei). Considering there is a range of policy and court differences, and for the purposes

Day, S. (2014). Runaway Man: A Journey Back to Hope. New York: Library of Congress.

There are five ways in which a juvenile can be prosecuted in adult court. One way is through a judicial wavier, this is allowed in most states, where judges have the discretion to have a youth’s case tried in the adult criminal court. The second way is through statutory exclusion, twenty-nine states automatically require a juveniles’ case to be tried in the adult court based on the age of the youth and/or the alleged crime. The other three ways are allowed in fewer states and include direct file or “prosecutorial discretion” where juvenile court judges the decision to have a youth 's case tried in the adult criminal court. There also mandatory waivers in few states which require juvenile court judges to automatically transfer a youth 's case to adult criminal court for certain offenses or because of the age or prior record of the offender. Lastly, in some states; there are age of majority statutes which automatically prosecute sixteen and/or seventeen years old depending on the state as adults (Campaign for Youth

Transfers, waivers, and certifications are all a formal procedures of moving a juvenile to adult court for trial instead of allowing them to remain in juvenile court. By moving a juvenile to adult court, it is then possible for harsher punishments to be imposed, for just deserts and severe punishments for violent offenders, fairness in administering punishments suitable because of one’s actions, a deterrent to decrease juvenile violence, less leniency compared to the juvenile court system, and a way for juveniles to accept responsibility for their actions. The process of transferring juvenile cases to adult courts is done through several different

Juveniles tried as adults must assume the same consequences as any other criminal and are subject to state prisons with inmates much higher and that have probably committed crimes much more tortuous then you could ever have. These minors between the ages of nine to twenty according to the offence committed or of the number of times that are prosecuted and believe that it is immutable. They are exposed to the harsh

Should juveniles get treated as adults that’s one of the biggest controversy in our nation now days, with many juveniles committing crimes that are inconceivable according to their age. Judges have the last word on how to treat this young people. Many people argue that “the teens that are under eighteen are only kids, they won’t count them as young adults, not until they commit crimes. And the bigger the crime, the more eager this people are to call them adults” (Lundstrom 87). This is why people can’t come to a decision as how these young people should be treated like. As adults or as juveniles, according to how serious is the crime they committed.

In an age where juvenile crime has escalated from simple truancy to more serious crimes such as mass school shootings some would agree it is time to abolish juvenile courts or modify the system at the very least. Because of the seriousness of juvenile crime in this day and age, most states have already lowered the age limit for juvenile court jurisdiction from 17 years and are prosecuting more children as adults depending of the seriousness of the crime. Some criminal justice and child welfare scholars argue that younger children do not have the mental capability or experience to weigh the consequence of committing a crime and much less understand the implications of a criminal record in their future. Furthermore, they note that most juveniles grow out of criminal behavior as they mature out of the system and in

Can you imagine waking up behind closed walls and bars? Waking up to see your inmate who is a 45-year-old bank robber and you are a 14-year-old minor who made a big mistake. This is why minors who have committed crimes should not be treated the same as adults. Some reasons are because the consequences given to minors in adult court would impact a minor’s life in a negative way. If a minor is tried through a juvenile court, they have a greater chance of rehabilitation.