Juvenile and Adult Courts: A Comparative Analysis - Essay Example

Juvenile and Adult Courts: A Comparative Analysis (Add (Add (Add Juvenile and Adult Courts: A Comparative AnalysisIn the United States, the adjudication process of transferring a juvenile to the adult court system is based on three laws namely automatic legislative exclusion or statutory exclusion, judicial discretionary, and prosecutorial discretionary. Some states follow only one transfer law whereas some other states practice a combination of two transfer laws. In addition to these established juvenile transfer laws, some states follow the “once an adult always an adult” ruling.

Under the automatic legislative exclusion method, all decisions regarding transferring of a juvenile to adult court are taken out of the court. For this approach, criminal prosecution is determined by the state legislature. As McGowan (2008) points out, juveniles are automatically transferred from juvenile courts to adult courts when they reach a particular age limit; and states such as New Mexico and New York practice only automatic transfer law. Under the judicial discretionary transfer law, only courts have the power to determine whether or not a juvenile is to be transferred to adult court.

It has been stated that all proceedings against a juvenile must be initiated in the juvenile courts. McGowan (2008) also states that before transferring a juvenile to the adult court, the juvenile judge considers many factors like severity of the crime, maturity level of the juvenile, and the juvenile’s amenability to treatment. Here, the juvenile judge’s formal approval is necessary for the transfer to take place. Missouri practices this transfer law. In case of prosecutorial discretionary transfer law, the prosecutor has the authority to take a decision about the transfer of a juvenile to the adult court.

Under this statute, the juvenile judge does not have to give a formal consent for the transfer. Here, the factors to be considered prior to the transfer are up to the prosecutor. The prosecutorial discretionary transfer law is in practice only in the State of Nebraska. Studies indicate that juvenile waiver and transfer practices can have adverse effects on a young person’s life. When a juvenile is prosecuted in a criminal court, it increases his/her chance of exposure to same penalties as adults; and as a result of these provisions, juveniles may face death penalty, imprisonment in State prison, and a permanent criminal record with many attendant disabilities (Juvenile Justice Reform Initiatives in the States 1994-1996, n.d). In contrast, juveniles prosecuted in juvenile courts may be released at the age of 21 and they would get rehabilitative treatment in a juvenile setting.

Furthermore, when a juvenile is released from a juvenile facility, his/her juvenile records will be expunged and hence his/her future career will not be affected. In addition, studies suggest that the rate of recidivism is high among juveniles that are criminally prosecuted and punished in an adult facility as compared to juveniles prosecuted in juvenile facility. “Other studies have also found that youth incarcerated in adult institutions are five times more likely to be sexually assaulted, twice as likely to be beaten by staff and 50 percent more likely to be attacked with a weapon than their counterparts in a juvenile facility” (Juvenile Justice Reform Initiatives in the States 1994-1996, n.d). Hence, juveniles must not be transferred to an adult court unless they belong to the category of most violent offenders.

ReferencesJuvenile Justice Reform Initiatives in the States 1994-1996. (n.d). Juvenile transfer to criminal court. Retrieved from http://www.ojjdp.gov/pubs/reform/ch2_j.html#note263 McGowan, A. (2008). Juvenile transfer laws that states use. Yahoo Voices. Retrieved from http://voices.yahoo.com/juvenile-transfer-laws-states-use-814881.html?cat=17