skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 66000 Find in a Library
Title: DUE PROCESS DILEMMA - PRETRIAL DETENTION IN JUVENILE DELINQUENCY PROCEEDINGS
Journal: JOHN MARSHALL JOURNAL OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE  Volume:11  Dated:(1978)  Pages:513-547
Author(s): P A SHAMBUREK
Corporate Author: John Marshall Law School
United States of America
Date Published: 1978
Page Count: 35
Sponsoring Agency: John Marshall Law School
Chicago, IL 60604
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: AN EXAMINATION OF PRETRIAL DETENTION STANDARDS AND COURT DECISIONS ON DUE PROCESS IN JUVENILE PROCEEDINGS DEMONSTRATES THAT DETENTION PRACTICES ARE UNFAIR AND THAT JUVENILES ARE ENTITLED TO BAIL RIGHTS.
Abstract: BEGINNING IN THE LATE 19TH CENTURY, JUVENILE COURTS SHIFTED TO BECOME INFORMAL PROCEEDINGS DESIGNED TO PROMOTE PROTECTION, CARE, AND REHABILITATION. HOWEVER, THE SUPREME COURT HAS DECIDED THAT DUE PROCESS SHOULD BE INCORPORATED INTO JUVENILE PROCEEDINGS. A SURVEY OF 51 JURISDICTIONS SHOWED THAT THE MAJOR STANDARDS FOR JUVENILE DETENTION WERE TO INSURE THE OFFENDER'S PRESENCE AT TRIAL, TO PROTECT THE JUVENILE, AND TO PROTECT THE COMMUNITY. DETENTION HARMS THE JUVENILE IN THE PREADJUDICATORY STAGE BECAUSE IT DISRUPTS DAILY PATTERNS AND INTRODUCES JUVENILES TO ATTITUDES AND EXPERIENCES OF MORE SOPHISTICATED CRIMINALS. IT ALSO PREJUDICES THE OUTCOME OF A TRIAL BY HINDERING CONTACT BETWEEN DEFENDANT AND ATTORNEY AND INSINUATING THAT THE DEFENDANT IS GUILTY. AN ANALYSIS OF SUPREME COURT DECISIONS SHOWS THAT IN QUESTIONS OF DUE PROCESS, THE COURT DETERMINES WHETHER A PARTICULAR PROCEDURE PROTECTS THE JUVENILE FROM INHERENT UNFAIRNESS AND GOVERNMENTAL OPPRESSION. THE COURT THEN EXAMINES THE EFFECT THAT AN ADULT PROCEDURAL RIGHT WOULD HAVE ON THE JUVENILE COURT'S PROTECTIVE ROLE. THE RIGHT TO BAIL APPEARS TO BE GUARANTEED BY THE 8TH AND 14TH AMMENDMENTS. A RIGHT TO PREADJUDICATORY RELEASE PROVIDED BY BAIL WOULD NOT IMPAIR EXISTING JUVENILE PROCEDURES NOR DIMINISH ANY SPECIAL BENEFITS ACCORDED TO JUVENILES. BECAUSE JUVENILES ARE USUALLY POOR, THEIR RIGHT TO RELEASE SHOULD BE CONDITIONED ON NONMONETARY FACTORS, SUCH AS A PROMISE TO RETURN TO COURT OR ADULT SUPERVISION. FOOTNOTES ARE PROVIDED. (MJM)
Index Term(s): Bail/Financial Release; Judicial decisions; Juvenile court procedures; Juvenile detention; Juveniles; Right to Due Process; US Supreme Court
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=66000

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.