The right to counsel in juvenile court: The conundrum of attorneys as an aggravating factor at disposition

Justice Quarterly

Volumn 27, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 713-741

  Feld, Barry C ^a   Schaefer, Shelly ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA LAW SCHOOL   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

Juvenile courts; Law reform; Right to counsel; Status offenses

Indexed keywords

EID: 77955401822     PISSN: 07418825     EISSN: 17459109     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/07418820903292292     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. Aday, D. P., Jr. (1986). Court structure, defense attorney use, and juvenile court decisions. Sociological Quarterly, 27, 107-119.
2. ABA. (1995). A call for justice: An assessment of access to counsel and quality of representation in delinquency proceedings. Washington, DC: American Bar Association Juvenile Justice Center.
3. American Bar Association (ABA). (1993). America's children at risk: A national agenda for legal action. Washington, DC: American Bar Association Presidential Working Group on the Unmet Needs of Children and their Families.
4. Barrett, D. R., Brown, W. J. T., & Cramer, J. M. (1966). Juvenile delinquents: The police, state courts and individualized justice. Harvard Law Review, 79, 775-810.
5. Berkheiser, M. (2002). The fiction of juvenile right to counsel: Waiver in the juvenile courts. Florida Law Review, 54, 577-686.
6. Bonnie, R., & Grisso, T. (2000). Adjudicative competence and youthful offenders. In T. Grisso & R. G. Schwartz (Eds.), Youth on trial: A developmental perspective on juvenile courts (pp. 73-104). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
7. Bookser, S. M. (2004). Making Gault meaningful: Access to counsel and quality of representation in delinquency proceedings for indigent youth. Whittier Journal of Child & Family Advocacy, 3, 297-328.
8. Bortner, M. A. (1982). Inside a juvenile court: The tarnished ideal of individualized justice. New York: New York University Press.
9. Bray, T. M., Sample, L. L., & Kempf-Leonard, K. (2005). Justice by geography: Racial disparity and juvenile courts. In D. F. Hawkins & K. Kempf-Leonard (Eds.), Our children, their children: Confronting racial and ethnic differences in american juvenile justice (pp. 23-82). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
10. Brooks, K., & Kamine, D. (2003). Justice cut short: An assessment of access to counsel and quality of representation in delinquency proceedings in Ohio. Washington, DC: American Bar Association Juvenile Justice Center.
11. Burruss, G. W., Jr., & Kempf-Leonard, K. (2002). The questionable advantage of defense counsel in juvenile court. Justice Quarterly, 19, 37-68.
12. Campbell, D. T., & Ross, H. L. (1968). The Connecticut crackdown on speeding: Time-series data in quasi-experimental analysis. Law & Society Review, 3, 33-53.
13. Canon, B. C., & Kolson, K. (1971). Rural compliance with Gault: Kentucky, a case study. Journal of Family Law, 10, 300-326.
14. Celeste, G., & Puritz, P. (2001). The children left behind: An assessment of access to counsel and quality of legal presentation in delinquency proceedings in Louisiana. Washington, DC: American Bar Association Juvenile Justice Center.
15. Clarke, S. H., & Koch, G. G. (1980). Juvenile court: Therapy or crime control, and do lawyers make a difference? Law & Society Review, 14, 263-308.
16. Cooper, N. L., Puritz, P., & Shang, W. (1998). Fulfilling the promise of In re Gault: Advancing the role of lawyers for children. Wake Forest Law Review, 33, 651-679.
17. Crippen, G. L. (2000). Can the courts fairly account for the diminished competence and culpability of juveniles? A judge's perspective. In T. Grisso & R. Schwartz (Eds.), Youth on trial: A developmental perspective on juvenile justice (pp. 403-434). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
18. Duffee, D., & Siegel, L. (1971). The organization man: Legal counsel in the juvenile court. Criminal Law Bulletin, 7, 544-553.
19. Engen, R. L., & Steen, S. (2000). The power to punish: Discretion and sentencing reform in the war on drugs. American Journal of Sociology, 105, 1357-1395.
20. Feld, B. C. (1984). Criminalizing juvenile justice: Rules of procedure for the juvenile court. Minnesota Law Review, 69, 141-276.
21. Feld, B. C. (1988a). The Juvenile court meets the principle of offense: Punishment, treatment, and the difference it makes. Boston University Law Review, 68, 821-915.
22. Feld, B. C. (1988b). In re Gault Revisited: A Cross-state Comparison of the Right to Counsel in Juvenile Court. Crime & Delinquency, 34, 393-424.
23. Feld, B. C. (1989). The right to counsel in juvenile court: An empirical study of when lawyers appear and the difference they make. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 79, 1185-1346.
24. Feld, B. C. (1991). Justice by geography: Urban, suburban, and rural variations in juvenile justice administration. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 82, 156-210.
25. Feld, B. C. (1993). Justice for children: The right to counsel and the juvenile courts. Boston: Northeastern University Press.
26. Feld, B. C. (1995). Violent youth and public policy: A case study of juvenile justice law reform. Minnesota Law Review, 79, 965-1128.
27. Feld, B. C. (1999). Bad kids: Race and the transformation of the juvenile court. New York: Oxford University Press.
28. Feld, B. C. (2003a). The constitutional tension between Apprendi and McKeiver: Sentence enhancements based on delinquency convictions and the quality of justice in juvenile courts. Wake Forest Law Review, 38, 1111-1224.
29. Feld, B. C. (2003b). Race, politics, and juvenile justice: The Warren court and the conservative "backlash," Minnesota Law Review, 87, 1447-1577.
30. Feld, B. C. (2006). Juveniles' competence to exercise Miranda rights: An empirical study of policy and practice. Minnesota Law Review, 91, 26-100.
31. Ferster, E., Courtless, T., & Snethen, E. (1971). The juvenile justice system: In search of the role of counsel. Fordham Law Review, 39, 375-412.
32. Flicker, B. (1983). Providing counsel for accused juveniles. New York: Institute of Judicial Administration.
33. GAO (General Accounting Office). (1995). Juvenile justice: Representation rates varied as did counsel's impact on court outcomes. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
34. Grisso, T. (1980). Juveniles' capacities to waive Miranda rights: An empirical analysis. California Law Review, 68, 1134-1166.
35. Grisso, T. (1981). Juveniles' waivers of rights: Legal and psychological competence. New York: Plenum Press.
36. Grisso, T. (1997). The competence of adolescents as trial defendants. Psychology, Public Policy & Law, 3, 3-32.
37. Grisso, T., Steinberg, L., Woolard, J., Cauffman, E., Scott, E., Graham, S., et al. (2003). Juveniles' competence to stand trial: A comparison of adolescents' and adults' capacities as trial defendants. Law & Human Behavior, 27, 333-363.
38. Guevara, L., Herz, D., & Spohn, C. (2008). Race, gender, and legal counsel: Differential outcomes in two juvenile courts. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 6, 83-104.
39. Guevara, L., Spohn, C., & Herz, D. (2004). Race, legal representation and juvenile justice: Issues and concerns. Crime & Delinquency, 50, 344-371.
40. Handler, J. F. (1965). The juvenile court and the adversary system: Problems of form and function. Wisconsin Law Review, 1965, 7-51.
41. Harlow, C. W. (2000). Defense counsel in criminal cases. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice.
42. Harris, D. J. (1994). Due process vs. helping kids in trouble: Implementing the right to appeal from adjudications of delinquency in Pennsylvania. Dickinson Law Review, 98, 209-235.
43. Jones, J. B. (2004). Access to counsel. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
44. Juvenile Justice Task Force. (1994). Final report. St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Supreme Court.
45. Juvenile Representation Study Committee. (1991). Report to the Minnesota Supreme Court. St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Supreme Court.
46. Kempf-Leonard, K., Pope, C., & Feyerherm, W. (1995). Minorities in juvenile justice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
47. Klein, M. (1979). Deinstitutionalization and diversion of juvenile offenders: A litany of impediments. Crime and Justice, 1, 147-201.
48. Knitzer, J., & Sobie, M. (1984). Law guardians in New York state: A study of the legal representation of children. Albany, NY: New York State Bar Association.
49. Lefstein, N., Stapleton, V., & Teitelbaum, L. (1969). In search of juvenile justice: Gault and its implementation. Law & Society Review, 3, 491-562.
50. Lemert, E. M. (1971). Instead of court: Diversion in juvenile justice. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
51. Merton, R. K. (1936). The unanticipated consequences of purposive social action. American Sociological Review, 1, 894-904.
52. Minnesota Supreme Court Research and Planning. (1995). Statistical Highlights 1994 Minnesota State Courts. St. Paul, MN: State Court Administration.
53. Minnesota Supreme Court Research and Planning. (2000). Statistical Highlights 1999 Minnesota State Courts. St. Paul, MN: State Court Administration.
54. Morris, N., & Tonry, M. (1990). Between prison and probation: Intermediate punishments in a rational sentencing system. New York: Oxford University Press.
55. National Juvenile Court Data Archive. (2007). National Juvenile Court Data Archive. Retrieved May 10, 2009, from http://ojjdp.ncjrs.gov/ojstatbb/njcda/
56. Peterisilia, J., and Turner, S. (1993). Intensive probation and parole. Crime and Justice, 17, 281-335.
57. Platt, A. (1977). The child-savers: The invention of delinquency (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
58. Podkopacz, M. R., & Barry, C. F. (2001). The back-door to prison: Waiver reform, "blended sentencing," and the law of unintended consequences. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 91, 997-1071.
59. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice. (1967a). The challenge of crime in a free society. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
60. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice. (1967b). Task force report: Juvenile delinquency and youth crime. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
61. Puritz, P., & Brooks, K. (2002). Kentucky: Advancing justice: An assessment of access to counsel and quality of representation in delinquency proceedings. Washington, DC: American Bar Association Juvenile Justice Center.
62. Puritz, P., Scali, M., & Picou, I. (2002). Virginia: An assessment of access to counsel and quality of representation in delinquency proceedings. Washington, DC: American Bar Association Juvenile Justice Center.
63. Puritz, P., & Shang, W. (2000). Juvenile indigent defense: Crisis and solutions. Criminal Justice, 15, 22-28.
64. Puzzenchara, C., Adams, B., Snyder, H., & Kang, W. (2007). Easy access to FBI arrest Statistics 1994-2005. Retrieved May 10, 2009, from http://ojjdp.ncjrs.gov/ojstatbb/ezaucr/
65. Redding, R. E., & Frost, L. E. (2001). Adjudicative competence in the modern juvenile court. Virginia Journal of Social Policy & the Law, 9, 353-409.
66. Rothman, D. J. (1980) Conscience and convenience: The asylum and its alternative in progressive America. Boston: Little, Brown.
67. Sanborn, J. B., Jr., & Salerno, A. W. (2005). The juvenile justice system: Law and process. Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury.
68. Schlossman, S. (1977). Love and the American delinquent: The theory and practice of "progressive" juvenile justice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
69. Schur, E. M. (1973) Radical non-intervention: Rethinking the delinquency problem. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
70. Snyder, H., & Sickmund, M. (2006). Juvenile offenders and victims: A national report 2006. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
71. Stapleton, V., & Teitelbaum, L. (1972). In defense of youth: A study of the role of counsel in American juvenile courts. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
72. Sutton, J. R. (1988). Stubborn children: Controlling delinquency in the United States. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
73. Tanenhaus, D. S. (2004). Juvenile justice in the making. New York: Oxford University Press.
74. Weldon, M. M. (1996). Fiscal restraints trump due process: Children's diminishing right to counsel in Minnesota. Journal of Law & Inequality, 14, 647-688.