• Refine Query
  • Source
  • Publication year
  • to
  • Language
  • No language data
  • Tagged with
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • About
  • The Global ETD Search service is a free service for researchers to find electronic theses and dissertations. This service is provided by the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations.
    Our metadata is collected from universities around the world. If you manage a university/consortium/country archive and want to be added, details can be found on the NDLTD website.
1

Changing Patterns of Juvenile Justice in District One Juvenile Court, Utah, as Affected by the 1967 U.S. Supreme Court Decision on Gault

Mickelson, Ruth V. 01 May 1970 (has links)
A determination was made of the degree to which the four requirements of Gault were met in District I of the Utah Juvenile Court between July l, 1967 and June 30, 1969. The requirements handed down in 1967 by the U. S. Supreme Court were as follows: (a) guarantee to the right of notice given to the juvenile himself and to his parents; (b) right to counsel , representation by counsel in juvenile delinquency proceedings; (c) right to confrontation and cross-examination by prosecuting witness; and (d) privilege against self- incrimination in juvenile delinquency proceedings. Observable procedures indicate that sustained effort is being made by District I, Utah, toward affording protection of basic legal rights to juvenile court clients and their families. However, the juvenile court records, as the source of information for this study, show the four requirements of Gault as being met only in part during the period of time specified. It was also found that, with only two changes, the Utah Juvenile Court Act of 1965 would have already been fulfilling, in Utah, the requirements provided by the subsequent 1967 U.S. Supreme Court decision on Gault. These two recommended changes were, first, a provision requiring that it be recorded whether or not the child was notified of his rights; and second, that a provision be added to record the name of the complainant, his presence, and if his testimony was used during the proceeding.

Page generated in 0.0842 seconds