NCJ Number
73251
Journal
West Virginia Law Review Volume: 78 Issue: 3 Dated: (1976) Pages: 428-440
Date Published
1976
Length
13 pages
Annotation
The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Breed v. Jones, which held that waiver of juvenile jurisdiction after adjudication of delinquency violates the Constitution's double jeopardy clause, is examined in its impact on West Virginia law.
Abstract
In the California case of Breed v. Jones, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, once again extended constitutional guarantees in juvenile proceedings. The Court held that Jones' criminal trial, which followed waiver of juvenile court jurisdiction after an adjudication of delinquency, violated the double jeopardy clause of the fifth amendment. Although the State argued that the waiver of juvenile court jurisdiction after adjudication of delinquency was continuing rather than double jeopardy, the Supreme Court emphasized that jeopardy refers to 'risk' and not to punishment. While 'risk' has traditionally been regarded as the risk of proceedings which may end with criminal punishment, the term is equally applicable to the processes of a juvenile hearing, since both proceedings subject the accused to heavy pressures and the possibility of grave sanctions. West Virginia has never recognized a relationship between criminal and juvenile proceedings wth regard to jeopardy. The settled rule in West Virginia has been that the trial but a proceeding to relieve the youth of a criminal trial but a proceeding to relieve the youth of a criminal trial. The State legislature must revise the State's juvenile judicial code; the option of waiver to a criminal trial must be removed from the postadjudication methods of disposition available to the juvenile court. Casenotes are provided.