Lebovits, Gerald

English

bepress Legal Repository

Juvenile Justice or Injustice? The Debate Over Reform

St. John's University School of Law

Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development Volume 14 Issue 3 Volume 14, Summer 2000, Issue 3 Article 2 June 2000 Juvenile Justice or Injustice? The Debate Over Reform Gerald Lebovits Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/jcred Recommended Citation Lebovits, Gerald (2000) "Juvenile Justice or Injustice? The Debate Over Reform," Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development: Vol. 14 : Iss. 3 , Article 2. Available at: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/jcred/vol14/iss3/2 This Symposium is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development by an authorized editor of St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact selbyc@stjohns.edu. PANEL ONEJUVENILE JUSTICE OR INJUSTICE?THE DEBATE OVER REFORMGERALD LEBOVITS*The debate over juvenile justice or injustice, as many contend,is as ancient as the saga of Cain and Abel. Is discipliningchildren the best way to rear them, as commentators over theages and even today suggest? What of the competing view, that*Gerald Lebovits received an LL.M. (In Criminal Justice) from NYU School of Law in1986, an M.C.L. from Tulane School of Law in 1980, and an LL.L from the University ofOttawa Law School in 1979. He is a principal court attorney in Supreme Court, CriminalTerm, New York County. Previously a Senior Staff Attorney with The Legal Aid Societyin New York City, since 1989 he has been an Adjunct Professor of Law at New York LawSchool, where he currently teaches Memo & Brief Writing and Drafting Judicial Opinions,and is the Moot Court Faculty Advisor.Gerald Lebovits is the Secretary of the New York State Network of Bar Leaders and Co-Chair of the Legislation Subcommittee of the Children and the Law Committee of theAssociation of the Bar of the City of New York. He previously served as President of theAssociation of Small Claims Arbitrators of the New York City Civil Court. He haspublished on legal issues relating to children, criminal law & procedure, judicial ethics,civil practice, and legal research.348 ST. JOHN'S JOURNAL OF LEGAL COMMENTARYso long as we protect society in some measure we spare the childand ourselves when we spare the rod? The controversy over howto handle errant children takes on special significance not merelywhen we consider how, whether and to what extent parentsshould discipline, but especially when we consider how, whether,and to what extent the state should or may discipline children.There is no debate that children are our most preciouscommodities. Less accepted is what the state should do withchildren accused of acts that would be crimes if committed byadults. What of adjudication? Much has happened since theUnited States Supreme Court decided the far-reaching In reGalt, in 1967, the Court's first exploration into federal dueprocess rights for juveniles.2 We still continue the experimentwith many exceptions of granting juveniles many, though not all,adjudication rights in the perceived hope that juveniles can berehabilitated in a less formal, seemingly quasi-criminal, setting.Reformers continue to argue passionately, however, on all sidesof the question. Some advocate full adult protections forjuveniles in fact-finding proceedings.3 Others, at a different endof the spectrum, advocate moving more and more juvenile casesto adult courts, not so much to assure due process, but rather topermit dispositions and sentencing fit for adults.4Moreover, what do we do about dispositions?5 What should be1 387 U.S.1, 30-31 (1967) (holding Due Process Clause of Fourteenth Amendmentrequires juvenile court delinquency hearings to measure up to essentials of due processand fair treatment, specifically that juveniles are entitled to notice of charges, right tocounsel, right to remain silent and right to confront and cross-examine witnesses).2 See generally Janet L. Dolgin, The Fate of Childhood: Legal Models of Children andthe Parent-Child Relationship, 61 ALB. L. REV. 345, 366 (1997) (discussing how JusticeFortas, writing for Court in Gault, framed decision as necessary reaction to pervasivefailure ofjuvenile court system to safeguard children's interests).3 See generally Janet E. Ainsworth, Re-Imagining Childhood and Reconstructuringthe Legal Order: The Case for Abolishing the Juvenile Court, 69 N.C. L. REV. 1083, 1120(1991) ("rreating juveniles differently from adults-by denying them jury trials, forexample-violates the consistency norm of equal treatment for all and reminds the youngthat they do not have all of the rights assigned to full-fledged members of the society").4 See, e.g., George Bundy Smith & Gloria M. Dabiri, The Judicial Role in theTreatment of Juvenile Delinquents, 3 J.L. & POL'Y, 347, 364 (1995) (illustrating howgenerally held public perceptions concerning extent and nature of juvenile crime haveresulted in get-tough public sentiment toward delinquency that has led to new laws andpolicies, including prosecuting younger children as adults for certain crimes).5 See, e.g., N.Y. FAMILY CT. ACT § 350.3 (McKinney 1998). Dispositional hearing issimilar to sentencing in adult criminal trial. Id. After child has been adjudicateddelinquent, dispositional hearing is held to decide whether case should be dismissed, childshould be placed on probation, or child should be placed in an out-of-home placement. Id.[Vol. 14:347JUVENILE JUSTICE OR INJUSTICE?done following a fact-finding adverse to the juvenile?6 Reformersargue over the fundamental issues of rehabilitation, protectingsociety, and punishment. The future of countless thousands ofour youths, as well as our own, rests on how this national debateis resolved.The four speakers who will address these issues are anillustrious quartet. Our first speaker is New York StateSupreme Court Justice Michael Corriero, who will provide aproposed model of juvenile justice in the 21st Century. Analumnus of St. John's University and this great law school,Justice Corriero was a prosecutor and criminal defense counselbefore taking the bench in 1980. As the justice presiding over theYouth Part in New York County, he hears felony prosecutions ofyouths in adult court. Speaker, author, and Chair of the JuvenileJustice Committee of the Association of the Bar of the City ofNew York, he also decided the first case I ever handled in court.His impartiality and demeanor have defined for me ever sincewhat it means to be a great judge.6 See, e.g., N.Y. FAMILY CT. ACT § 342.1 (McKinney 1998). Fact-finding is similar totrial in adult criminal court. Id. Child will be adjudicated delinquent if court finds thatallegations in petition (paper charging delinquency offense) are supported by evidencebeyond reasonable doubt. Id.2000]

https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1269&amp;context=jcred

Juvenile Justice or Injustice? The Debate Over Reform

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

bepress Legal Repository

St. John's University School of Law