Carl Le'Darrell Reeds
CJ 463 A
Dr. Pass
Kent v. United States (1966)
Citation: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, (1966). 383 US 541
Procedural History: Kent, a 16-year-old boy, was arrested and questioned by the police in connection with several incidents involving robbery and rape. After Kent confessed to involvement in the crimes the juvenile court waived its jurisdiction, allowing him to be tried as an adult in district court. This decision was based solely off of his criminal past as a youth.
Issue: Was the juvenile court’s waiver of jurisdiction valid? Was the statutory requirement of a “full investigation” been met?
Rule: The Supreme Court decided there was not an adequate examination preceding the adolescent court waiver of
…show more content…
This case appears to shed light on a situation where many juveniles before Kent could have not been given the right protection of due process under the 5th and 14th amendment in the constitution.
In re Gault (1967)
Citation: Kent v. United States, 383 U. S. 541, 562 (1966)
Procedural History: Gault was taken into custody on a compliant that he had made lewd telephone calls to his neighbor. He was taken into custody while his parents was at work and they was not notified and came home looking for him.
Issue: Were the procedures used to commit Gault constitutionally legitimate under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment? Should juveniles have the same due process rights as adults?
Rule: The court ruled that all children under the age of 18 should have the same rights as adults.
Analysis: these requirements included adequate notice of charges, notification of both the parents and the child of the juvenile's right to counsel, opportunity for confrontation and cross-examination at the hearings, and adequate safeguards against