Juvenile Court System

Introduction To begin with, a juvenile court is a special trial court that deals with children and adolescents convicted of crimes and most importantly, intervene in delinquent behavior through police court. They are specifically a correctional institution. In brief, it handles cases of delinquent behavior and dependency. There has and is still ongoing debate on the definition of who is a juvenile. However, a juvenile under eighteen years qualifies for juvenile court procedure. In fact this is referred to as the majority age and it is not accurate and applicable to the legislations of different states. Based on this fact, the American Juvenile Court Act requires that a juvenile court emphasize a legitimate interest in the child which

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics in 2010, seventy- thousand and eight hundred juveniles were incarcerated and approximately five hundred thousand were brought for detention. Nevertheless, for these reasons, this paper examines the current state of the American Juvenile Court System. Additionally, it discusses the issues of whether or not the future juvenile justice is best served only in adult court system. Given the current high profile debate with regard to American Juvenile Justice System, it is worth mentioning the requirements of the Juvenile Court Act pp. 557 – 563. The provision of the Juvenile Act D.C. code 11 -914 (1961), now 11 – 1553 (supp. IV, 1965), ‘’if a child sixteen years of age or older is charged with an offence which would amount to a felony in the case of an adult, or any child charged with an offense which it committed by an adult is punishable by death or life imprisonment the judge may, after full investigation, waive jurisdiction and order (388 U.S 541, 548), such child held for trial under the regular procedure of the court which would have jurisdiction of such offense it committed by an adult, or such court may exercise the powers conferred upon the juvenile upon the juvenile court in this subchapter in conducting and disposing of such cases.’’ Kent v. Read, 14 U.S. App D.C.330, 316, f.2d 331

For these reasons, critics of juvenile court system maintain strongly that the judicial system should ensure and put in place a uniform sentencing structure similar to adult courts for young offenders. Evidently, they revealed that imposing minimum sentencing for juveniles has been so far ineffective deterrent. Furthermore, the court has failed in its rehabilitation mission. Furthermore, according to critics, it could also be said that, there is strong evidence juvenile offenders commit crimes with malicious aforethought. In addition, this strong evidence should lead to greater formal charges in adult courts rather than juvenile courts. Adult courts offer better protection to the society and moreover, juvenile serious offenders are held accountable and responsible for their actions. Additionally, they argue that, if serious juvenile offenders with criminal history are sentenced there is the likelihood they will be a social