In re gault
Download
1 / 11

In Re Gault - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 187 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

In Re Gault. Julie Martinez Block 2. “Neither the Fourteenth Amendment nor the Bill of Rights is for adults alone”. In Regards to Gault. Argued Tuesday, December 6, 1966 Decided Monday, May 5, 1967.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha

Download Presentation

In Re Gault

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


In Re Gault

Julie Martinez

Block 2


“Neither the Fourteenth Amendment nor the Bill of Rights is for adults alone”


In Regards to Gault

  • Argued Tuesday, December 6, 1966

  • Decided Monday, May 5, 1967

"Facts and Case Summary: In Re Gault." USCOURTS.GOV. United States Court, n.d. Web. 28 Oct. 2013.


Summary

  • Gerald Gault (15) was arrested for making an obscene phone call

  • No notice given to parents

  • Sent to reform school until he was 21

"Facts and Case Summary: In Re Gault." USCOURTS.GOV. United States Court, n.d. Web. 28 Oct. 2013.


Public Policy

  • Juveniles over 14 tried as adults

  • Juveniles did not receive Due Process

Friedman, Benjamin E. "Protecting Truth: An Argument for Juvenile Rights and a Return to In Re Gault." UCLA Law Review. UCLA Law Review, n.d. Web. 28 Oct. 2013.


Arguments of Plaintiff

  • Gault represented by Mr. Norman Dorsen

  • Arizona Juvenile Court was unconstitutional

  • Gault was denied procedural rights

IN RE GAULT. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 22 October 2013. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1966/1966_116>.


Argument of Defendant

  • Arizona defended by Mr. Frank A. Parks

  • Juvenile be treated like an adult

  • Opportunity to avoid self incrimination would interfere with investigation

IN RE GAULT. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 22 October 2013. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1966/1966_116>.


Third Party Amicus Curiae Briefs

  • American Parents Committee four Gault

  • Merritt W. Green for the Ohio Association of Juvenile Court Judges

    • Urged affirmance

IN RE GAULT. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 22 October 2013. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1966/1966_116>.


Supreme Court Ruling

  • 8 to 1 in favor of Gault

  • Case violated 14th Amendment

  • Court failed to meet child’s best interest

  • Precedent- Granted juveniles procedural rights

"Facts and Case Summary: In Re Gault." USCOURTS.GOV. United States Court, n.d. Web. 28 Oct. 2013.


Dissenting Opinion

  • Mr. Justice Stewart

  • Juvenile proceedings are not criminal trials

  • Juvenile court and criminal court have opposite missions

http://www.csustan.edu/cj/jjustice/CaseFiles/In-re-Gault.pdf


Long Term Effects

  • Every juvenile case afterwards was changed

  • Juveniles must be given Due Process

Patton, William W. "HISTORY OF JUVENILE COURTS." StateUniversity.com. State University, n.d. Web. 28 Oct. 2013.


  • Login