NCJ Number
143610
Journal
Criminal Law Bulletin Volume: 29 Issue: 4 Dated: (July-August 1993) Pages: 317-355
Date Published
1993
Length
39 pages
Annotation
This analysis of the United States Supreme Court's 1992 decision limiting the maximum sentence for a juvenile to no more than that which may be imposed on an adult sentenced under the guidelines concludes that the majority applied only a partial solution to the problem being considered and failed to call for the reform necessary to address properly the unique circumstances of juvenile defendants.
Abstract
Following the promulgation of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines and prior to the Court's decision in United States v. R.L.C., a juvenile could be sentenced to a term longer than an adult for committing an identical crime. The Supreme Court decision imported the Federal Sentencing Guidelines into juvenile sentencing, thereby violating clearly expressed legislative intent of the Crime Control Act. The introduction of adversarial dispositional proceedings into the juvenile forum also violated the legislature's intent that those proceedings remain informal and protective. The dissent of Justices O'Connor and Blackmun called for the handling of juveniles as a separate group. In view of these points, Congress should overrule the Court's decision and should lead the movement for national juvenile justice guidelines in a way that extricates juveniles from the strictures of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines and promotes the traditional rehabilitative ideal. Footnotes