Morris Kent Case

840 Words4 Pages

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. The prints the connected back to when Kent was first entering the system back in 1959 for his earlier crimes. Kent at this time had already been on probation due to crimes committed two years prior to this case. Morris Kent at the age of 14, had first come into contact with breaking the law when he was placed on probation for breaking …show more content…

The District of Columbia courts needs to waive and remit before he is able to be tried. At this time there was a motion filed to have him receive the case waived. The judge filed for a ‘full investigation’, which lead to Kent’s case being waived from the juvenile courts. He was then tried in the District Court. The jury found Kent guilty of six counts of housebreaking and robbery. The verdict was not found to be guilty with the counts of rape due to reason of insanity. Morris Kent was sentenced 30 to 90 years in prison and also some time in Saint Elizabeth's Hospital. Kent’s lawyer believed that the investigation was not thoroughly completed and that the indictment should be dismissed. Due to the findings of Kent’s mental issues they concluded that the waive was inappropriate. He said that Kent was denied his constitutional rights due to the fact he was a minor. It wasn't until March 21st, 1966 a decision on the case was made. By the time there was a decision made on the case, Morris Kent was already 21 and the waiver was ruled to be invalid. The case went back to the courts for more clearance on the …show more content…

Due to Kent at the time being on probation, his past criminal history and the crimes that he was arrested for the right way to handle the charges would be through being charged as an adult. In cases like these with juveniles, it is best if the judge waives the case, so that it can be taken to a higher court. Taking a juvenile's case to be tried as an adult can be a good thing because there are times where the juveniles don't get the proper punishment for the crimes they've committed. I believe that when it comes to juveniles and they commit a severe crime they need to be punished just as if they were an adult. Juveniles don’t always get the proper charges to the fact they are under the age of 18. The juvenile courts need to go off of the seriousness of the case. In my opinion, if juveniles don’t get the proper charges, then there is always a chance that the juvenile could always continue to commit crimes. In this case, I believe Kent did not fully get his basic due process rights that should be granted to him. He was never fully investigated, which lead to the waiver eventually being

Show More

More about Morris Kent Case

Open Document