NCJ Number
86127
Journal
Criminal Justice Journal Volume: 4 Issue: 1 Dated: (Fall 1980) Pages: 181-198
Date Published
1980
Length
18 pages
Annotation
This note explores the role of the juvenile probation officer in California's juvenile justice system and its implications with regard to the juvenile's right to due process of law.
Abstract
The purpose of the juvenile justice system is to rehabilitate minors so that they become productive adults. The system is designed to avoid the stigma of criminal charges. Thus, some procedural rights provided adults charged with crime are denied the minor since the proceedings are not criminal in nature. To eliminate abuse of this system, the United States Supreme Court ruled in In re Gault (1967) that for a juvenile hearing for the purpose of determining delinquency, when incarceration is a possibility, due process of law must be afforded. Rights provided under the Gault ruling are extended further in two recent California decisions, In re Wayne H. (1979) and Fare v. Michael C. (1979). In Wayne, the California Supreme Court ruled that statements made to probation officers are protected and cannot be used against the minor. In Fare, the court held that the probation officer is a State employee and a peace officer whose interests are at least partly allied with the prosecution. The court stated that the probation officer cannot be truly independent in advising the client. These cases indicate that the California Supreme Court views the role of the probation officer more liberally than does the U.S. Supreme Court, and that attention to due process must continue. The court recognized that juvenile probation officers may greatly influence the disposition of the case, and that probation officers have awesome power over the lives of juveniles referred to the department. The article provides 113 footnotes.