Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967), Term Paper

Open, View, and/or
Download this Document

Total Length: 959 words ( 3 double-spaced pages)

Total Sources: 3

Page 1 of 3

(387 U.S. 33). Furthermore, the notice requirement meant that allegations had to particular. (387 U.S. 33). The juvenile and his parents did not get notice until the hearing on the merits, which meant that it was not timely notice. Furthermore, Arizona had no provision protecting children's right against self-incrimination, but the Court determined that a juvenile is at greater risk of self-incrimination than an adult.

The Court also looked at the Sixth Amendment, which provides that:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed; which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense. (U.S. Const. amend. VI).

Therefore, it clearly requires that a person in a criminal prosecution have the right to counsel, and had been interpreted as requiring a court to notify a defendant of his right to counsel. However, the Court was required to determine whether juvenile proceedings were criminal prosecutions for the purposes of the Sixth Amendment.

The Arizona juvenile code appeared to permit the probation officer to represent the child's interests in a delinquency proceeding.

Stuck Writing Your "Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967)," Term Paper?

View All Our Example Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967), Term Paper

Have A Custom Example Essay Written

(387 U.S. 35).

However, the arresting officers and the probation officers were the same in Arizona; "they initiate proceedings and file petitions which they verify, as here, alleging the delinquency of the child, and they testify, as here, against the child." (387 U.S. 36). Therefore, the Court determined that neither the probation officer nor the judge could represent the child as counsel. The juvenile was facing the loss of liberty and therefore needed "the assistance of counsel to cope with problems of law." (387 U.S. 36). As a result, the Court concluded that:

the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires that, in respect of proceedings to determine delinquency which may result in commitment to an institution in which the juvenile's freedom is curtailed, the child and his parents must be notified of the child's right to be represented by counsel retained by them, or, if they are unable to afford counsel, that counsel will be appointed to represent the child. (387 U.S. 41).

Furthermore, the fact that the juvenile's parent was aware that she could have retained counsel could not constitute a waiver of either the mother or the son's right to counsel. (387 U.S. 42). In addition, the Court examined the juvenile's rights to the confrontation and cross-examination of witnesses, and determined that a juvenile's rights had the same constitutional protection as adults......

Show More ⇣

     Open the full completed essay and source list


OR

     Order a one-of-a-kind custom essay on this topic


sample essay writing service

Cite This Resource:

Latest APA Format (6th edition)

Copy Reference
"Gault 387 U S 1 1967 " (2008, March 28) Retrieved May 22, 2024, from
https://www.aceyourpaper.com/essays/gault-387-us-1-1967-31140

Latest MLA Format (8th edition)

Copy Reference
"Gault 387 U S 1 1967 " 28 March 2008. Web.22 May. 2024. <
https://www.aceyourpaper.com/essays/gault-387-us-1-1967-31140>

Latest Chicago Format (16th edition)

Copy Reference
"Gault 387 U S 1 1967 ", 28 March 2008, Accessed.22 May. 2024,
https://www.aceyourpaper.com/essays/gault-387-us-1-1967-31140
   

Open, View, and/or
Download this Document
order custom essay example