Teen Trouble: Juveniles and the Law

that youth are fundamentally different than adults, in terms of psychological development, their level of responsibility, as well as their potential for rehabilitation. Juvenile judges, at the bequest of excellent juvenile lawyers, have been more concerned with administering individualized justice on the child’s behalf than with jumping through procedural hoops intended to guarantee due process. Many states, like Missouri, see successful reintegration of youth into society as the primary goal of the juvenile criminal justice system – without compromising public safety. Few would consider all 16- or 17-year-olds mature.

However, recent attitudinal changes have hardened the juvenile criminal justice system’s approach. As juvenile offense rates skyrocketed in the 1990s, many legislatures responded with a “get tough” approach. In the mid-1990s Utah’s legislature passed the “Serious Youth Offender Act,” which mandated that certain teenage offenders could be transferred to the criminal justice system to be tried as adults. This Act abandoned any attempt at juvenile court rehabilitation of certain categories of offenders – including some first-time offenders.

Connecticut and California have followed Utah’s example. Both states will treat 16- and 17-year-olds as adults if judges see fit. In the most serious crimes, the two states even treat 14- and 15-year-olds as the adults that few psychiatrists believe they are.

The information in the article is not intended to substitute for the legal expertise and advice of your attorney. We encourage you to discuss any decisions about litigation with an appropriate legal expert.

Pages: 1 2