Observational Study of a Juvenile Court (From Juvenile Delinquency - A Justice Perspective, P 109-122, 1985, Ralph A Weisheit and Robert G Culbertson, eds. - See NCJ-99489)

• NCJ Number: 99498
• Author(s): J D Walter; S A Ostrander
• Date Published: 1985
• Length: 14 pages
• Sale Source: Waveland Press, Inc.
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: Reprinted from Juvenile and Family Court Journal, V 33, N 3 (August 1982), P 53-69

Annotation

This observation study of a large metropolitan area juvenile court analyzed hearings for 627 juveniles and concluded that juvenile court officials were still not in full compliance with the Gault ruling regarding juveniles' due process rights.

Abstract

Over a 10-week period, some 40 trained volunteers from civic organizations attended juvenile court sessions to observe the proceedings and complete questionnaires. Of the 627 juveniles whose hearings were observed, 88 percent were official hearings and 12 percent were unofficial. Most youths had individual hearings, but one in five were heard in a group. The median time for a hearing was 15 minutes, but the length varied according to type of hearing and charge. Of the youth whose hearings were observed, over half were white, nearly three out of four were male, and 70 percent were between 15 and 18 years old. One-third had an attorney. More than three out of four, without presence of counsel, were advised of their right to attorney, to remain silent, to awareness of consequences, and to subpoena and cross-examine witnesses. Whether a youth was brought to court for delinquency or status offenses was unrelated to race or area of residence. More than two out of three juveniles had been in court before. In nearly half the cases, youths were adjudicated delinquent. With the exception of previous record and school record, court rulings appeared to be based on unique features of the case. The most frequent disposition was probation for nearly half the youths. One of three was referred to the state youth commission for placement in a public institution, but about half of these placements were suspended. In addition to finding that not all youth were advised of their constitutional rights, the study concluded that the parens patriae perspective was still firmly entrenched in the court and that attorneys were not particularly effective in the juvenile court because they were unfamiliar with procedures and unprepared. The article contains 14 footnotes.