TRIAL OF JUVENILES AS ADULTS UNDER THE ILLINOIS CRIMINAL CODE

• NCJ Number: 18193
• Author(s): S MERCER; R FAHEY
• Date Published: Unknown
• Length: 35 pages
• Corporate Author: Chicago Law Enforcement Study Group
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

REPORT ON A RESEARCH PROJECT DESIGNED TO EXAMINE THE ENTIRE JUVENILE TRANSFER PROCESS IN RESPECT TO THE ACTUAL PRACTICE, THE STATUTE, AND ALTERNATIVES TO THE PRESENT PRACTICE.

Abstract

PART ONE OF THIS REPORT DESCRIBES THE TRANSFER PROCEDURE AS IT EXISTS IN COOK COUNTY, SURVEYS CASES OF YOUTHS WHO WERE TRANSFERRED TO CRIMINAL COURT, AND EXAMINES THE STANDARDS AND LEGAL PROCEDURE BEHIND THE DECISION TO TRANSFER. RESEARCHERS CONCLUDED THAT PRACTICE IN COOK COUNTY DIFFERS SIGNIFICANTLY FROM THAT OUTLINED IN THE STATUTE IN THAT THE JUVENILE COURT JUDGE PLAYS ALMOST NO ROLE IN THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS. PART II EXAMINES THE TRANSFER STATUTE AND THE CASE LAW INTERPRETING IT TO DETERMINE WHY THE JUDGE ASSUMES SUCH A MINIMAL PART IN THE TRANSFER PROCEDURE. IT IS ARGUED THAT THE PRINCIPLE REASONS FOR THE NON-PARTICIPATION OF THE JUDGES IN THE TRANSFER DECISION ARE THE ABSENCE OF STANDARDS FOR THE DECISION AND THE FAILURE OF THE STATUTE TO GUIDE A JUDGE IN PROSECUTING HIS OBJECTION. RESEARCHERS SUGGEST THAT THESE DEFECTS PROBABLY LEAVE THE STATUTE UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND EXAMINE POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE ILLINOIS PROCEDURE. SUGGESTIONS INCLUDE HAVING THE JUDGE, RATHER THAN THE STATE'S ATTORNEY, MAKE THE DECISION TO TRANSFER; INCORPORATING THE HOLDINGS OF KENT V. UNITED STATES AND THE CASES WHICH FOLLOWED IT INTO THE LANGUAGE OF THE STATUTE ITSELF; AND SETTING AN ABSOLUTE AGE IN THE DEFINITION OF JUVENILE UNDERWHICH NO YOUTH MAY BE TRIED AS AN ADULT. OTHER ALTERNATIVES INVOLVED VARYING THE AGE FOR MANDATORY JUVENILE COURT JURISDICTION AND THE OFFENSES WHICH THE STATE'S ATTORNEY MAY TRANSFER. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)