This case was categorized under the criminal law, because the defendant was against the Crown. Pelz, 18, was caught taking a bag of chips worth $1.89 on May of 2001, and was charged for theft under. After failing to appear for fingerprinting and two court dates, along with a previous unpaid fine of $55 from another theft under crime, Pelz appeared at court. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 60 days in prison, but soon applied for a bail and appealed by stating that his sentence was excessive.…
On 12/16/2016, Courtney Barnthouse contacted the Pasco Sheriff`s Office by telephone to report a Petit Theft.…
Frank Smith was accused of castrating hostages and killing an inmate and was indicted on both kidnapping and murder charges, but these charges were dismissed. He stated, these alleged accusations were untrue and that it was not the amount of money but it was about clearing his…
Shortly after the courts created larceny by trick, they created the crime of obtaining property by False Pretenses. Before, a defendant who induced a person to part with the title to property could escape prosecution because the victim transferred not actual possession of the property but only title to the property. This commercial form of taking was made illegal under the law of false pretenses.…
“In order to determine which juveniles are appropriate for criminal court jurisdiction, states have established various criteria. Typically, the juveniles have to meet certain age and offense criteria” (Elroy & Ryder, 2014).…
Semple, J. & Woody, W. (2011). Juveniles tried as adults: the age of the juvenile matters.…
Justice Brennan’s opinion in, In re Winship, explicitly recognized the reasonable doubt standard for criminal defendants. 7 That opinion elevated the protection associated with the longstanding application of the proof beyond a reasonable doubt standard in criminal prosecutions to constitutional status.8 After Winship, as a general rule, under the due process clauses of both the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, the prosecution must prove to a jury, beyond a reasonable doubt, every fact necessary to constitute the crime, the state has charged the defendant.9 The Supreme Court has struggled, however, over the past three decades to find the precise contours of this constitutional protection. Despite repeated attempts, the Supreme Court continues to struggle to find the appropriate balance between protecting defendant rights10 and ensuring legislative autonomy in the drafting of criminal statutes.11 The long line of Sixth Amendment cases considering which factual questions must be resolved by juries beyond a reasonable doubt and which questions may be resolved by judges by a preponderance of evidence “has produced a bewildering series of distinctions.”12…
When a case is introduced into court, a judge determines if it should be handled formally or informally. This decision is often based on the severity of the offense, and the youth's law breaking history. (Snyder, 1999)…
The U.S. Supreme Court has recognized that juveniles have many of the constitutional due process rights afforded adult defendants: the right to counsel, the right to notice of the charges against them, the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses, and the right against self-incrimination. In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967). Juveniles also have the right to have the alleged offense proven beyond a reasonable doubt. In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 368 (1970). The North Carolina Juvenile Code provides additional statutory rights to juveniles, such as the right to have a parent present during in-custody interrogation, the presumption of indigency, and confidentiality of juvenile court records. G.S. 7B-2101(a), -2000(b), -3000(b). The principal rights are discussed in this chapter, although it is not intended to be exhaustive.…
The judicial system was created to protect and hold stability in society which is why two systems were put in place, the juvenile system and the adult system. However, recently the boundaries for these two systems are growing weaker as serious juvenile offenders are getting tried in adult court. Juveniles are not authorized to drink alcohol, sign a document, gamble at a casino or vote till they are an adult. Regardless to the crime they have committed, a juvenile is a juvenile and an adult is an adult, therefore sixteen year olds should not be tried in adult court. Sixteen year olds being tried in adult court is wrong because they are able to effectively reform, their brains are not sufficiently developed and they are vulnerable to adult prisons.…
This paper will examine the history of the Juvenile Court system and its intended purposes, the history of capital punishment being used against minors, court decisions both in limiting capital punishment for youthful offenders, as well as upholding states rights to sentence juveniles to death. Most importantly, we will analyze possible factors that contributed to the decision of Roper v Simmons such as the international community's opposition of the juvenile death penalty and the majority consensus of the American public in outlawing this practice.…
"... almost every state has made it easier to try juveniles as adults. Congress provided additional encouragement to this trend in 1998 by making some federal grants contingent on states having policies allowing for the prosecution of those over the age of 14 as adults." (p. 4)…
Given that 16- and 17-year olds as a group are less mature developmentally than adults, imposing capital punishment on such adolescents does not serve the judicially recognised purposes of the sanction…
In this paper, I will look at current scholarly thought to determine the effectiveness of trying juveniles as adults in a court of law. In extreme instances, juveniles of a broad range of ages have committed violent crimes that the criminal justice system has determined to be impossible to have been committed by the accepted frame of mind of a juvenile. These juveniles were tried in adult court and sentenced accordingly. The purpose of my research is to examine juveniles who have been tried as adults and to discuss its strengths and weaknesses. I will analyze the information that I gather and will provide a strong case that this practice is appropriate. Many people believe that some crimes are so terrible that the courts should focus on the type of offense and not on the age of the accused.…
Maroney, Terry A. “Should Juveniles Be Tried As Adults?” Vanderbilt University Law School, 8 Jan 07, https://law.vanderbilt.edu/news/should-juveniles-be-tried-as-adults/. Accessed 21 Feb 17…