In the late nineteenth century, the juvenile court system was established in this country to deal with youths who had committed criminal offenses, were likely to do so, or were otherwise in need of state supervision. Contrary to the criminal system, the juvenile courts began with articulated goals of treatment and rehabilitation. In theory, the state, acting through the juvenile system and under the doctrine of parens patriae, would shield the juvenile from the harsh reality of the criminal courts by placing him within a paternalistic judicial framework with a vast spectrum of remedies and a minimum of procedural formalities
The Supreme Court of the United States has held that a Maryland juvenile rule that allows the state ...
In the 1986 legislative session, the Virginia General Assembly attempted to produce a constitutional...
To argue that the adjudicated child is not punished as the adult offender but is provided care, pr...
Both the United States Constitution\u27 and the Constitution of Virginia recognize the right of an i...
THE FIFTH AMENDMENT prohibition against double jeopardy is designed to protect both federal and stat...
On June 20, 1966, the United States Supreme Court noted that it had probable jurisdiction in the cas...
Since 1899, the year in which the state of Illinois established a separate statutory framework for a...
Progressive reformers envisioned a therapeutic juvenile court that made individualized treatment dec...
The Juvenile Court system was conceived and established at the turn of the century, although belated...
The juvenile court, representing the parens patriae power of the state, was created in order to remo...
The Supreme Court of the United States has held that where a juvenile is charged with the commission...
The original purpose of the juvenile court was to create a forum, separate from the adult courts, in...
This Article attempts to provide an analytical framework for identifying the punitive aspects of the...
The 1967 United States Supreme Court decision In re Gault 1 precipitated a procedural revolution tha...
For over sixty years, courts consistently found notions of due process inapplicable in juvenile proc...
The Supreme Court of the United States has held that a Maryland juvenile rule that allows the state ...
In the 1986 legislative session, the Virginia General Assembly attempted to produce a constitutional...
To argue that the adjudicated child is not punished as the adult offender but is provided care, pr...
Both the United States Constitution\u27 and the Constitution of Virginia recognize the right of an i...
THE FIFTH AMENDMENT prohibition against double jeopardy is designed to protect both federal and stat...
On June 20, 1966, the United States Supreme Court noted that it had probable jurisdiction in the cas...
Since 1899, the year in which the state of Illinois established a separate statutory framework for a...
Progressive reformers envisioned a therapeutic juvenile court that made individualized treatment dec...
The Juvenile Court system was conceived and established at the turn of the century, although belated...
The juvenile court, representing the parens patriae power of the state, was created in order to remo...
The Supreme Court of the United States has held that where a juvenile is charged with the commission...
The original purpose of the juvenile court was to create a forum, separate from the adult courts, in...
This Article attempts to provide an analytical framework for identifying the punitive aspects of the...
The 1967 United States Supreme Court decision In re Gault 1 precipitated a procedural revolution tha...
For over sixty years, courts consistently found notions of due process inapplicable in juvenile proc...
The Supreme Court of the United States has held that a Maryland juvenile rule that allows the state ...
In the 1986 legislative session, the Virginia General Assembly attempted to produce a constitutional...
To argue that the adjudicated child is not punished as the adult offender but is provided care, pr...