Ainsworth J E
Seattle University School of Law, Tacoma, WA, USA.
Future Child. 1996 Winter;6(3):64-74.
During the 1960s and 1970s, the Supreme Court issued a number of decisions guaranteeing certain procedural rights to juveniles. This article assesses the impact of these decisions on the actual practices of the delinquency jurisdiction of the juvenile court. Studies show that, by and large, the procedural mandates have not been met. A key example is the fact that a significant percentage of juveniles still do not receive effective legal representation. This article also explores the potential disadvantages to juveniles of no constitutional right to a jury trial in juvenile court, waivers into the adult criminal court system, and diversion programs. Because of the juvenile court's resistance to reform, a number of juvenile justice scholars are advocating the abolition of its jurisdiction over delinquency cases. The article concludes with various viewpoints on this current controversy.
在20世纪60年代和70年代,最高法院发布了一系列保障青少年某些程序权利的裁决。本文评估了这些裁决对少年法庭犯罪管辖权实际做法的影响。研究表明,总体而言,程序要求并未得到满足。一个关键的例子是,相当大比例的青少年仍然没有得到有效的法律代理。本文还探讨了青少年在少年法庭没有宪法规定的陪审团审判权、被移交至成人刑事法庭系统以及转处计划等方面可能面临的不利因素。由于少年法庭抵制改革,一些青少年司法学者主张废除其对犯罪案件的管辖权。文章最后总结了关于当前这一争议的各种观点。