-
1
-
-
24544434707
-
As ex-theorist on young "superpredators
-
N.Y. Times, Feb. 9
-
The term "superpredator" refers to a since-debunked stereotype created by the national media in the 1990s that still persists to this day and portrays youthful offenders as violent, unfeeling, fledgling career criminals without any prospect for rehabilitation. See Elizabeth Becker, As Ex-Theorist on Young "Superpredators, " Bush Aide Has Regrets, N.Y. Times, Feb. 9, 2001, at A19.
-
(2001)
Bush Aide Has Regrets
-
-
Becker, E.1
-
3
-
-
79957796474
-
-
Juvenile Justice Project of La., Juv. Just. Project La. (July 19)
-
Wayne's account is a theoretical example based on a conglomerate of actual cases with which the authors are familiar. For similar stories of transfer involving real cases from Louisiana, see Juvenile Justice Project of La., The Children of Transfer, Juv. Just. Project La. (July 19, 2010), http://jjpl.org/new/index.php?s=the+children+of+transfer.
-
(2010)
The Children of Transfer
-
-
-
4
-
-
79957807890
-
-
La. Const, art. V, § 19
-
La. Const, art. V, § 19.
-
-
-
-
5
-
-
79957810183
-
-
Id
-
Id. Article V, section 19 provides, in pertinent part: [T]he legislature may (1) by a two-thirds vote of the elected members of each house provide that special juvenile procedures shall not apply to juveniles arrested for having committed first or second degree murder, manslaughter, aggravated rape, armed robbery, aggravated burglary, aggravated kidnapping, attempted first degree murder, attempted second degree murder, forcible rape, simple rape, second degree kidnapping, a second or subsequent aggravated battery, a second or subsequent aggravated burglary, a second or subsequent offense of burglary of an inhabited dwelling, or a second or subsequent felony- grade violation of Part X or X-B of Chapter 4 of Title 40 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950, involving the manufacture, distribution, or possession with intent to distribute controlled dangerous substances, and (2) by two-thirds vote of the elected members of each house lower the maximum ages of persons to whom juvenile procedures shall apply, and (3) by two-thirds vote of the elected members of each house establish a procedure by which the court of original jurisdiction may waive special juvenile procedures in order that adult procedures shall apply in individual cases.
-
-
-
-
6
-
-
79957795548
-
-
Id
-
Id.
-
-
-
-
7
-
-
79957875901
-
-
Lucy S. McGough & Kerry Triche, Louisiana Children's Code Handbook 2009-2010, at 448 (2009). For a more general discussion of these and other types of waiver not employed in Louisiana, such as blended jurisdiction and "once an adult always an adult" systems
-
(2009)
Louisiana Children's Code Handbook 2009-2010
, pp. 448
-
-
McGough, L.S.1
Triche, K.2
-
8
-
-
3142701009
-
Juvenile offenders in the adult criminal justice system
-
see Donna M. Bishop, Juvenile Offenders in the Adult Criminal Justice System, 27 Crime & Just. 81 (2000).
-
(2000)
Crime & Just.
, vol.27
, pp. 81
-
-
Bishop, D.M.1
-
9
-
-
84933475878
-
Juvenile and criminal justice systems' responses to youth violence
-
196
-
See Barry C. Feld, Juvenile and Criminal Justice Systems' Responses to Youth Violence, 24 Crime & Just. 189, 196 (1998).
-
(1998)
Crime & Just.
, vol.24
, pp. 189
-
-
Feld, B.C.1
-
10
-
-
79957868423
-
-
La. Child. Code Ann. art. 305(A) (Supp. 2010)
-
La. Child. Code Ann. art. 305(A) (Supp. 2010).
-
-
-
-
11
-
-
79957814906
-
-
Id
-
Id.
-
-
-
-
12
-
-
79957872102
-
-
art. 61
-
La, Code Crim, Proc, Ann, art. 61 (2003) ("Subject to the supervision of the attorney general, as provided in Article 62, the district attorney has entire charge and control of every criminal prosecution instituted or pending in his district, and determines whom, when, and how he shall prosecute.").
-
(2003)
La, Code Crim, Proc, Ann
-
-
-
13
-
-
79957823087
-
-
Feld, supra note 7, at 197
-
See Feld, supra note 7, at 197.
-
-
-
-
14
-
-
70350007864
-
-
art. 305(B)
-
La, Child, Code Ann, art. 305(B). The enumerated offenses are: (a) Attempted first degree murder; (b) Attempted second degree murder; (c) Manslaughter; (d) Armed robbery; (e) Aggravated burglary; (f) Forcible rape; (g) simple rape; (h) second degree kidnapping; . . . (j) Aggravated battery committed with a firearm; (k) A second or subsequent aggravated battery; (l) A second or subsequent aggravated burglary; (m) A second or subsequent offense of burglary of an inhabited dwelling; (n) A second or subsequent felony-grade violation of Part X or X-B of Chapter 4 of Title 40 of the Louisiana Revised statutes of 1950 involving the manufacture, distribution, or possession with intent to distribute controlled dangerous substances.
-
La, Child, Code Ann
-
-
-
15
-
-
79957799438
-
-
Id
-
Id.
-
-
-
-
16
-
-
79957825784
-
-
Id
-
Id.
-
-
-
-
17
-
-
79957812653
-
-
Id.
-
Id. neither the statute nor case law specifically addresses whether electing to file a petition in juvenile court settles the issue of jurisdiction with finality and bars the prosecution from subsequently waiving the youth to adult court via indictment or bill of information. However, the Louisiana Supreme Court in State v. Hamilton apparently found it to be of no moment that the prosecution had indeed filed a petition in juvenile court prior to filing a bill of information because it ultimately allowed the waiver of the juvenile without any discussion of or reference to the previously filed petition outside of the statement of facts. 676 So. 2d 1081 (La. 1996). The question of whether the state can change its mind as to prosecutorial waiver once a petition has been filed remains open despite the court's tacit acceptance of the occurrence in Hamilton.
-
-
-
-
18
-
-
70350007864
-
-
art. 305(B)(3)
-
La. Child. Code Ann. art. 305(B)(3). The statute is silent as to the appropriate remedy for the state's failure to take any action during this time period. However, in Hamilton, the Louisiana Supreme Court rejected arguments that the time limit imposed by article 305(B)(3) is jurisdictional in nature so as to preclude the ability to transfer a juvenile to criminal court once the 30-day time period has elapsed. 676 So. 2d 1081. Rather, the Court held that "[t]he proper remedy for an untimely filing of a bill of information or indictment under [article] 305(B)(3) should be release without bail rather than the quashing of charges against the defendant."
-
La. Child. Code Ann.
-
-
-
19
-
-
70350007864
-
-
Id. at 1084, art. 305(B)(3) with La. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 701 (Supp.)
-
Id. at 1084 (comparing La. Child. Code Ann. art. 305(B)(3) with La. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 701 (Supp. 2010)
-
(2010)
La. Child. Code Ann.
-
-
-
20
-
-
70350007864
-
-
art. 843
-
and La. Child. Code Ann. art. 843 (2004)). As a result, the only time constraint on prosecutorial waiver is the normal prescriptive period (the civil law equivalent of a statute of limitation) for the charged offense.
-
(2004)
La. Child. Code Ann.
-
-
-
21
-
-
79957832169
-
-
Feld, supra note 7, at 198
-
See Feld, supra note 7, at 198.
-
-
-
-
22
-
-
70350007864
-
-
art. 857(A) (Supp.)
-
La. Child. Code Ann. art. 857(A) (Supp. 2010). The enumerated offenses are: (1) First degree murder; (2) Second degree murder; (3) Aggravated kidnapping; (4) Aggravated rape; (5) Aggravated battery when committed by the discharge of a firearm; (6) Armed robbery when committed with a firearm; . . . (8) Forcible rape if the rape is committed upon a child at least two years younger than the rapist.
-
(2010)
La. Child. Code Ann.
-
-
-
23
-
-
79957831435
-
-
Id
-
Id.
-
-
-
-
24
-
-
79957864230
-
-
Id. art. 858 (2004)
-
Id. art. 858 (2004).
-
-
-
-
25
-
-
79957821500
-
-
McGough & Triche, supra note 6, at 30
-
A recent amendment to article 305 of the Children's Code even allows the juvenile court to hold transfer hearings for individuals who were charged with article 857 offenses as juveniles but have reached the age of 21 years without disposition of the case due to a continued mental incapacity to proceed. Id. art. 305(E)(2) (Supp. 2010); see McGough & Triche, supra note 6, at 30.
-
-
-
-
26
-
-
70350007864
-
-
art. 862(A)(2)
-
La, Child, Code Ann, art. 862(A)(2) (2009). The criteria are: (a) The age, maturity, both mental and physical, and sophistication of the child. (b) The nature and seriousness of the alleged offense to the community and whether the protection of the community requires transfer. (c) The child's prior acts of delinquency, if any, and their nature and seriousness. (d) Past efforts at rehabilitation and treatment, if any, and the child's response. (e) Whether the child's behavior might be related to physical or mental problems. (f) Techniques, programs, personnel, and facilities available to the juvenile court which might be competent to deal with the child's particular problems. Id.
-
(2009)
La, Child, Code Ann
-
-
-
27
-
-
79957821946
-
-
Id. art. 857(B) (Supp. 2010)
-
Id. art. 857(B) (Supp. 2010).
-
-
-
-
28
-
-
79957877179
-
-
id. arts. 858-61, 863-64 (2004)
-
See id. arts. 858-61, 863-64 (2004). As of 2008, article 857 of the Children's Code also allows adults who are charged with offenses they allegedly committed as children to be tried as adults if the prescriptive period for the offense has not lapsed. Said individuals may be tried and sentenced as adults regardless of whether jurisdiction could have been waived for the offense when they were juveniles, except that if the offense were not waivable, the individual's incarceration may not exceed the maximum amount of time he or she could have received as a juvenile. Id. art. 857(C) (Supp. 2010);
-
-
-
-
29
-
-
79957837589
-
-
State v. Havis (La.)
-
see also State v. Havis, 874 So. 2d 153 (La. 2004) (involving a defendant who was convicted at age 21 for a crime committed when he was 14 years old).
-
(2004)
So. 2d
, vol.874
, pp. 153
-
-
-
30
-
-
79957873034
-
-
1906 La. Acts 134
-
1906 La. Acts 134.
-
-
-
-
31
-
-
79957828709
-
-
Id.
-
Id.
-
-
-
-
32
-
-
79957839959
-
-
In re Parker, 55 (La.)
-
see also In re Parker, 43 So. 54, 55 (La. 1907).
-
(1907)
So.
, vol.43
, pp. 54
-
-
-
33
-
-
79957853982
-
-
1908 La. Acts 96, 99
-
1908 La. Acts 96, 99 (amending the Louisiana Constitution of 1898). The amendment was designed to substitute the 1906 statute in its entirety because of a technical defect in the earlier statute that made it constitutionally unenforceable in the Parish of orleans.
-
-
-
-
34
-
-
79957865455
-
-
State v. Howard, 52 So. 539 (La. 1910)
-
State v. Howard, 52 So. 539 (La. 1910), overruled in part by State v. Dabon, 111 So. 461 (La. 1927). The court also suggested in dicta that other capital crimes would similarly be excluded from the jurisdiction of juvenile courts, stating: If the Legislature, in enacting Act No. 83 referred to, had contemplated that children less than 17 years of age, charged with the crime of murder by indictment, should be tried before the juvenile court, the statute would certainly have provided for such trials therein; but the act fails to do so. Cases in which children are charged with the commission of a crime carrying with it the death penalty are nowhere referred to. Id. at 354-55. Curiously, the court's opinion did not reference the supplanted act of 1906, which did contain an explicit statutory waiver provision for certain offenses, and so did not consider whether the exclusion of those same specific exceptions in the replacement bill drafted just two years later was purposeful given that context.
-
-
-
-
35
-
-
79957815379
-
-
La. Const, of 1913, art. CXVIII, § 3
-
La. Const, of 1913, art. CXVIII, § 3.
-
-
-
-
36
-
-
79957802849
-
-
La. Const, of 1921, art. VII, § 52
-
La. Const, of 1921, art. VII, § 52.
-
-
-
-
37
-
-
79957843852
-
-
1920
-
Capital crimes during this period included willful murder, rape, poisoning with intent to commit murder, any type of battery with a dangerous weapon while lying in wait with the intent to commit murder, and certain types of kidnapping. Solomon Wolff, Constitution and Statutes of Louisiana 388-96 (1920).
-
Constitution and Statutes of Louisiana
, pp. 388-396
-
-
Wolff, S.1
-
38
-
-
79957837141
-
-
La. Const, art. V, § 19 (amended 1979)
-
La. Const, art. V, § 19 (amended 1979) ("Except for a person fifteen years of age or older who is alleged to have committed a capital offense or attempted aggravated rape, the determination of guilt or innocence, the detention, and the custody of a person who is alleged to have committed a crime prior to his seventeenth birthday shall be exclusively pursuant to special juvenile procedures which shall be provided by law.").
-
-
-
-
39
-
-
79957861167
-
-
La. Const, art. V, § 19 (amended 1994)
-
La. Const, art. V, § 19 (amended 1994). Under this formulation, the legislature could only create a system of waiver for seven enumerated offenses contained in the constitutional provision: "first or second degree murder, manslaughter, aggravated rape, armed robbery, aggravated burglary or aggravated kidnapping." Id.
-
-
-
-
40
-
-
79957809269
-
-
1980 La. Acts 1113, 1114
-
1980 La. Acts 1113, 1114.
-
-
-
-
41
-
-
79957867315
-
-
State v. Leach, 425 So. 2d 1232 (La. 1983)
-
See State v. Leach, 425 So. 2d 1232 (La. 1983);
-
-
-
-
42
-
-
79957850782
-
-
So. 2d (La.)
-
see also State v. Penque, 439 So. 2d 1060 (La. 1983).
-
(1983)
State v. Penque
, vol.439
, pp. 1060
-
-
-
43
-
-
79957816536
-
Perique
-
See Perique, 439 So. 2d at 1062 (distinguishing State ex rel. Hunter, 387 So. 2d 1086 (La. 1980)
-
So. 2d
, vol.439
, pp. 1062
-
-
-
44
-
-
79957821059
-
-
U.S.
-
and Kent v. United States, 383 U.S. 541 (1966)).
-
(1966)
Kent v. United States
, vol.383
, pp. 541
-
-
-
45
-
-
79957829016
-
-
Id. at 1063
-
Id. at 1063. However, subsequent Louisiana Supreme Court rulings have continued to refer to a general rule of "non-criminal treatment" of juveniles.
-
-
-
-
46
-
-
79957877178
-
-
In re C.B., 396 (La.)
-
See, e.g., In re C.B., 708 So. 2d 391, 396 (La. 1998). Furthermore, the relevance of this distinction is unclear since the ruling in Hunter was specifically predicated not upon the subsequently amended Article V of the Louisiana Constitution, but upon the due process clause, which has not been amended.
-
(1998)
So. 2d
, vol.708
, pp. 391
-
-
-
47
-
-
79957807889
-
Hunter
-
See Hunter 387 So. 2d at 1086.
-
So. 2d
, vol.387
, pp. 1086
-
-
-
48
-
-
79957815868
-
Perique
-
Perique, 387 So. 2d at 1064.
-
So. 2d
, vol.387
, pp. 1064
-
-
-
49
-
-
79957840403
-
-
Id
-
Id.
-
-
-
-
50
-
-
70350007864
-
-
art. 305(A)(1), (B)(1) (Supp.)
-
Id. However, unlike the statute analyzed by the court in Perique, the current wording of Louisiana Children's Code article 305 makes it clear that a child facing either legislative or prosecutorial waiver "is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the juvenile court until" the divesting event occurs. La, Child, Code Ann, art. 305(A)(1), (B)(1) (Supp. 2010).
-
(2010)
La, Child, Code Ann
-
-
-
51
-
-
79957844314
-
-
1991 La. Acts 706, 717-18
-
1991 La. Acts 706, 717-18. At the time, Louisiana Children's Code article 305(A) and (B) provided: A. (1) When a child is sixteen years of age or older at the time of the commission of first degree murder, second degree murder, aggravated rape, or aggravated kidnapping, he is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the juvenile court until either: (a) An indictment charging one of these offenses is returned. (b) The juvenile court holds a continued custody hearing pursuant to Articles 819 and 820 and finds probable cause that he committed one of these offenses, whichever occurs first. (2) Thereafter, the child is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the appropriate court exercising criminal jurisdiction for all subsequent procedures, including the review of bail applications and the child shall be transferred forthwith to the appropriate adult facility for detention prior to his trial as an adult. B. (1) When a child is fifteen years of age or older at the time of the commission of first degree murder, second degree murder, or aggravated rape, he is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the juvenile court until either: (a) An indictment charging one of these offenses is returned. (b) The juvenile court holds a continued custody hearing pursuant to Articles 819 and 820 and finds probable cause that he committed one of these offenses, whichever occurs first.
-
-
-
-
52
-
-
79957806865
-
-
Id
-
Id.
-
-
-
-
53
-
-
79957821058
-
-
Id. at 717-19
-
Id. at 717-19.
-
-
-
-
54
-
-
79957801968
-
-
Id. at 717
-
Id. at 717.
-
-
-
-
55
-
-
84872454295
-
-
art. V, § 19
-
La. Const. art. V, § 19. The added offenses are: [A]ttempted first degree murder, attempted second degree murder, forcible rape, simple rape, second degree kidnapping, a second or subsequent aggravated battery, a second or subsequent aggravated burglary, a second or subsequent offense of burglary of an inhabited dwelling, or a second or subsequent felony-grade violation . . . involving the manufacture, distribution, or possession with intent to distribute controlled dangerous substances.
-
La. Const.
-
-
-
56
-
-
79957808824
-
-
Id
-
Id.
-
-
-
-
57
-
-
79957856338
-
-
1974 La. Acts 1312, 1313-14
-
1974 La. Acts 1312, 1313-14. For the next decade and a half until the creation of the Children's Code, the laws regulating judicial transfer would be contained and modified within Title 13 of the Revised Statutes from sections 1571.1 to 1571.4. The Code of Juvenile Procedure, which went into effect on January 1, 1979, contained an article entitled "Juvenile jurisdiction over children; exceptions," but the article did not contain any substantive or procedural changes and merely referenced cases transferred pursuant to procedures in sections 1571.1 to 1571.4 as exceptions to the exclusive original jurisdiction of the juvenile courts. 1978 La. Acts 508, 518.
-
-
-
-
58
-
-
79957861166
-
-
1974 La. Acts 1312
-
1974 La. Acts 1312. The statute provides: A. Effective January 1, 1975, after a petition has been filed alleging delinquency based on conduct which is designated a crime or public offense by the statutes of the United States, of this state, or by ordinance of local political subdivisions exercising general governmental functions, the court, before hearing the petition on its merits, may transfer the alleged offender for prosecution to the appropriate court exercising criminal jurisdiction if the district attorney, the alleged offender, or the court on its own motion, files a transfer petition and the following conditions are met: (1) The child has attained the age of fifteen years or more at the time of the alleged conduct; (2) A hearing on whether the transfer should be made is held in conformity with R.S. 13:1571.2; (3) Notice in writing of the time, place and purpose of the hearing is given to the child and his parents, tutor, or other custodian at least ten days before the hearing; and (4) The court finds that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the child is not amenable to treatment or rehabilitation through facilities available to the juvenile court. (5) The child has previously been adjudicated a delinquent by the commission of any of the following offenses: second degree murder, manslaughter, negligent homicide, simple rape, armed robbery, aggravated battery, aggravated burglary, aggravated arson and aggravated kidnapping. B. The transfer terminates the jurisdiction of the juvenile court over the child with respect to the delinquent acts alleged in the petition. C. No child, either before or after attaining the age of seventeen shall be prosecuted in criminal court for an offense which was allegedly committed by the child who had not then attained the age of seventeen unless the case has been transferred to criminal court as provided herein, or except as otherwise provided by law.
-
-
-
-
59
-
-
79957875763
-
-
Id. at 1313-14
-
Id. at 1313-14.
-
-
-
-
60
-
-
79957793808
-
-
Id.
-
Id. in addition to the notice requirement contained in section 1571.1(A)(3), sections 1571.2 through 1571.4 contained several other important procedural protections related to transfer hearings, such as a right to have the transfer hearing recorded if requested, the right to counsel, the right to confront witnesses, the right to introduce evidence, and the right to appeal.
-
-
-
-
61
-
-
79957856337
-
-
1974 La. Acts at 1313-14
-
1974 La. Acts at 1313-14.
-
-
-
-
62
-
-
79957874340
-
-
1975 La. Acts 764, 765
-
1975 La. Acts 764, 765.
-
-
-
-
63
-
-
79957802423
-
-
State v. Everfield (La.)
-
See, e.g., State v. Everfield, 342 So. 2d 648 (La. 1977). In Everfield, a juvenile defendant challenged his judicial transfer to adult court for the offense of armed robbery, alleging that section 1571.1 was unconstitutional because it exceeded the authority of Article V, Section 19 of the Louisiana Constitution, violated the separation of powers doctrine contained in Article II, Section 2, and infringed upon his equal protection and due process rights under both the federal and state constitutions.
-
(1977)
So. 2d
, vol.342
, pp. 648
-
-
-
64
-
-
79957865456
-
Everfield
-
Everfield, 342 So. 2d at 652.
-
So. 2d
, vol.342
, pp. 652
-
-
-
65
-
-
79957859221
-
-
1978 La. Acts 1136, 1137
-
1978 La. Acts 1136, 1137.
-
-
-
-
66
-
-
79957807889
-
Hunter
-
1088 (La.)
-
State ex rel. Hunter, 387 So. 2d 1086, 1088 (La. 1980), superseded by constitutional amendment, La. Con. art. V, § 19 (amended 1994);
-
(1980)
So. 2d
, vol.387
, pp. 1086
-
-
-
67
-
-
79957822784
-
-
State v. Perique, 1062 (La.)
-
see also State v. Perique, 439 So. 2d 1060, 1062 (La. 1983). The singular, probable cause- based standard was analyzed by the court under the original wording of the 1974 constitution rather than the new wording of Article V, Section 19, which was amended months before the decision in Hunter to enumerate specific offenses for which the legislature was granted broad authority to create rules regarding transfer. However, the legislature quickly revised the statute mooting the issue before any challenges to the sole standard could be brought under the more expansive authority of the amended constitutional article. 1980 La. Acts 1113, 1114-16.
-
(1983)
So. 2d
, vol.439
, pp. 1060
-
-
-
68
-
-
79957793316
-
-
1980 La. Acts at 1115
-
1980 La. Acts at 1115.
-
-
-
-
69
-
-
79957860200
-
-
Id
-
Id.
-
-
-
-
70
-
-
79957858736
-
-
Id.
-
Id. ("The court shall consider the chronological age of the child. The younger the child, the greater shall be the burden on the state to show unsuitability for juvenile jurisdiction or, that based on the past conduct of the child that the child is not amenable to treatment and rehabilitation. The court shall consider the maturity of the child, both mental and physical, whether the child has committed other serious felonies, and such other criteria as the court deems relevant.").
-
-
-
-
71
-
-
79957820119
-
-
Id. at 1115-16
-
Id. at 1115-16.
-
-
-
-
72
-
-
79957854906
-
-
1991 La. Acts 706
-
1991 La. Acts 706. Sections 1 to 16 of Act 235 enacted the Louisiana Children's Code. Section 17 repealed the Louisiana Code of Juvenile Procedure and provisions related to juvenile courts found in Title 13 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes.
-
-
-
-
73
-
-
79957794272
-
-
1991 La. Acts 706, 856
-
1991 La. Acts 706, 856.
-
-
-
-
74
-
-
79957852230
-
-
Id. at 857-58
-
Id. at 857-58.
-
-
-
-
75
-
-
79957817430
-
-
So. 2d 655-56 (La.)
-
These criteria were first enumerated by the Louisiana Supreme Court in its opinion in State v. Everfield, 342 So. 2d 648, 655-56 (La. 1977)
-
(1977)
State v. Everfield
, vol.342
, pp. 648
-
-
-
76
-
-
79957821059
-
-
U.S. 566-67
-
and were adapted from a list contained in a policy memorandum issued by the District of Columbia Juvenile Court which was appended to the opinion of the United States Supreme Court in Kent v. United States, 383 U.S. 541, 566-67 1966).
-
(1966)
Kent v. United States
, vol.383
, pp. 541
-
-
-
77
-
-
79957858290
-
-
McGough & Triche, supra note 6, at 454-55
-
See McGough & Triche, supra note 6, at 454-55.
-
-
-
-
78
-
-
79957834542
-
-
1993 La. Acts 1493, 1502-03
-
1993 La. Acts 1493, 1502-03.
-
-
-
-
79
-
-
79957839488
-
-
Id. at 1503
-
Id. at 1503.
-
-
-
-
80
-
-
79957813537
-
-
Id. at 1502-03
-
Id. at 1502-03.
-
-
-
-
81
-
-
79957810666
-
-
1994 La. Acts 710, 712-13
-
1994 La. Acts 710, 712-13.
-
-
-
-
82
-
-
79957861601
-
-
Id
-
Id.
-
-
-
-
83
-
-
79957855874
-
-
Id
-
Id.
-
-
-
-
84
-
-
79957812139
-
-
1997 La. Acts 2079
-
1997 La. Acts 2079.
-
-
-
-
85
-
-
79957864722
-
-
2001 La. Acts 675, 677
-
2001 La. Acts 675, 677. The elimination of aggravated oral sexual battery from the list of enumerated offenses resulted from the repeal of the offense itself from the criminal code by Act No. 301 of 2001 due to its being subsumed under the crime of rape.
-
-
-
-
86
-
-
79957800389
-
-
McGough & Triche, supra note 6, at 451
-
McGough & Triche, supra note 6, at 451.
-
-
-
-
87
-
-
79957821499
-
-
1991 La. Acts 706, 718-19
-
1991 La. Acts 706, 718-19. Article 305(C) and (D) provided: C.(1) When a child who is sixteen years of age or older at the time of the commission of manslaughter, armed robbery, or aggravated burglary is arrested for one of these offenses, he is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the juvenile court until whichever of the following occurs first: (a) An indictment charging one of these offenses is returned. (b) A bill of information charging one of these offenses is filed. (2) The district attorney shall have the discretion to file a petition alleging one of these offenses in the juvenile court or alternatively, to obtain an indictment or file a bill of information. if the child is being held in detention, the district attorney shall make his election and file the indictment, bill of information, or petition in the appropriate court within thirty calendar days after the child's arrest, unless the child waives this right. (3) if an indictment is returned or a bill of information is filed, the child is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the appropriate court exercising criminal jurisdiction for all subsequent procedures, including the review of bail applications, and the child shall be transferred forthwith to the appropriate adult facility for continued custody prior to his trial as an adult. D.(1) When a child who is fifteen years of age or older at the time of the commission of manslaughter is arrested, he is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the juvenile court until whichever of the following occurs first: (a) A manslaughter indictment is returned. (b) A bill of information charging manslaughter is filed. (2) The district attorney shall have the discretion to file a petition alleging manslaughter in the juvenile court or, alternatively to obtain an indictment or file a bill of information. if the child is being held in detention, the district attorney shall make his election and file the indictment, bill of information, or petition in the appropriate court within thirty calendar days after the child's arrest, unless the child waives this right. (3) If an indictment is returned or a bill of information is filed, the child is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the appropriate court exercising criminal jurisdiction for all subsequent procedures, including the review of bail applications, and the child shall be transferred forthwith to the appropriate adult facility for detention prior to his trial as an adult.
-
-
-
-
88
-
-
79957795547
-
-
Id
-
Id.
-
-
-
-
89
-
-
79957792838
-
-
1994 La. Acts 710, 710-12
-
1994 La. Acts 710, 710-12. The offenses were: (a) Attempted first degree murder; (b) Attempted second degree murder; (c) Manslaughter; (d) Armed robbery; (e) Forcible rape; (f) Simple rape; (g) Second degree kidnapping; (h) A second or subsequent aggravated battery; (i) A second or subsequent aggravated burglary; (j) A second or subsequent offense of burglary of an inhabited dwelling; (k) A second or subsequent felony-grade violation of Part X or X-B of Chapter 4 of Title 40 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950 involving the manufacture, distribution, or possession with intent to distribute controlled dangerous substances.
-
-
-
-
90
-
-
79957839958
-
-
Id. at 711
-
Id. at 711.
-
-
-
-
91
-
-
79957836655
-
-
see supra note 64
-
It should also be noted that Act 959 of 1995 added the offense of aggravated burglary as subsection (e) of article 305(B)(2) but redundantly left a second or subsequent aggravated burglary as subsection (j). 1995 La. Acts 2597. Also in 1995, the legislature added aggravated oral sexual battery and aggravated battery committed with a firearm to the list of enumerated offenses subject to prosecutorial waiver. 1995 La. Acts 2647, 2647-48. The current list of enumerated offenses was adopted when the legislature removed aggravated oral sexual battery from the list in 2001. 2001 La. Acts 675, 677; see supra note 64.
-
-
-
-
92
-
-
79957801036
-
-
State v. Simms, 148-49 (La.)
-
See State v. Simms, 571 So. 2d 145, 148-49 (La. 1990) ("Probable cause to arrest exists when the facts and circumstances within the officer's knowledge are sufficient to justify a man of ordinary caution in believing that the person to be arrested has committed a crime. The determination of probable cause, although requiring something more than bare suspicion, does not require evidence sufficient to support a conviction. Probable cause, as the very name implies, deals with probabilities. The determination of probable cause, unlike the determination of guilt at trial, does not require the fine resolution of conflicting evidence that a reasonable doubt or even a preponderance standard demands, and credibility determinations are seldom crucial in deciding whether the available evidence supports a reasonable belief that the person to be arrested has committed a crime." (citations omitted)).
-
(1990)
So. 2d
, vol.571
, pp. 145
-
-
-
93
-
-
79957815867
-
-
Bishop, supra note 6, at 94
-
Reverse waiver functions as an opportunity for criminal court judges to return jurisdiction to the juvenile court after a hearing. Reverse waiver is usually reserved for cases in which the juvenile court lost jurisdiction under legislative, prosecutorial, or some other form of waiver in which there was no prior opportunity for a judicial determination of the youth's suitability for removal to the adult system. See Bishop, supra note 6, at 94.
-
-
-
-
94
-
-
70350007864
-
-
art. 305(D) (Supp.)
-
La, Child, Code Ann, art. 305(D) (Supp. 2010).
-
(2010)
La, Child, Code Ann
-
-
-
95
-
-
79957813991
-
-
Id. art. 863(A) (2004)
-
Id. art. 863(A) (2004). The article provides: An order of transfer terminates the jurisdiction of the court exercising juvenile jurisdiction over the child with respect to the delinquent acts alleged in the petition. The appropriate court exercising criminal jurisdiction shall retain jurisdiction over the case, even though the child pleads guilty to, or is convicted of, a lesser included offense. The plea to, or conviction of, a lesser included offense shall not revest juvenile jurisdiction over such child.
-
-
-
-
96
-
-
79957815378
-
-
Id
-
Id.
-
-
-
-
97
-
-
79957814453
-
-
1975 La. Acts 764, 764-65
-
1975 La. Acts 764, 764-65.
-
-
-
-
98
-
-
79957803316
-
-
State ex rel. Moore v. Warden of La. State Penitentiary, 752 (La.), superseded by statute, 1975 La. Acts at 765, 749, 752 (La. 1975)
-
State ex rel. Moore v. Warden of La. State Penitentiary, 308 So. 2d 749, 752 (La. 1975), superseded by statute, 1975 La. Acts at 765 ("Although it can be argued that the constitutional deposit of jurisdiction in the district courts of the trial of juveniles in capital [c]ases is the grant of jurisdiction embracing every part of the case, from arraignment to sentence, we decline to make such a departure from established jurisprudence . . . .").
-
(1975)
So. 2d
, vol.308
, pp. 749
-
-
-
99
-
-
79957860677
-
-
Id. at 751-52
-
Id. at 751-52 (reasoning that "the question of double jeopardy is avoided because a person is not in jeopardy in a trial in which the court lacks jurisdiction").
-
-
-
-
100
-
-
33750130266
-
-
U.S. 578-79
-
Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551, 578-79 (2005).
-
(2005)
Roper v. Simmons
, vol.543
, pp. 551
-
-
-
101
-
-
79957866841
-
-
Id. at 571
-
Id. at 571.
-
-
-
-
102
-
-
79957860199
-
-
Id. at 578-79
-
Id. at 578-79.
-
-
-
-
103
-
-
79957861598
-
-
Brief of American Medical Ass'n et al. as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondent at 9, Roper, 543 U.S. 551 (No. 03-633), 2004 WL 1633549 [hereinafter AMA Brief]
-
Brief of American Medical Ass'n et al. as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondent at 9, Roper, 543 U.S. 551 (No. 03-633), 2004 WL 1633549 [hereinafter AMA Brief];
-
-
-
-
104
-
-
79957791872
-
-
Brief for American Psychological Ass'n & Missouri Psychological Ass'n as Amici Curiae Supporting Respondent at 7-10, Roper, 543 U.S. 551 (No. 03-633), 2004 WL 1636447
-
Brief for American Psychological Ass'n & Missouri Psychological Ass'n as Amici Curiae Supporting Respondent at 7-10, Roper, 543 U.S. 551 (No. 03-633), 2004 WL 1636447.
-
-
-
-
105
-
-
79957819672
-
-
AMA Brief, supra note 78, at 2, 7
-
AMA Brief, supra note 78, at 2, 7.
-
-
-
-
106
-
-
79957835009
-
-
Roper, 543 U.S. at 569-70
-
Roper, 543 U.S. at 569-70.
-
-
-
-
107
-
-
79957862093
-
-
Id. at 569
-
Id. at 569
-
-
-
-
108
-
-
79957827284
-
-
U.S. 367
-
(quoting Johnson v. Texas, 509 U.S. 350, 367 (1993)) (internal quotation marks omitted).
-
(1993)
Johnson v. Texas
, vol.509
, pp. 350
-
-
-
109
-
-
79957843850
-
-
Id
-
Id.
-
-
-
-
110
-
-
79957835647
-
-
Id. at 570
-
Id. at 570.
-
-
-
-
111
-
-
79957797355
-
-
Id
-
Id.
-
-
-
-
112
-
-
79957830468
-
-
Id. at 570-71
-
Id. at 570-71 (citations omitted).
-
-
-
-
113
-
-
84859593249
-
-
S. Ct. 2026
-
Graham v. Florida, 130 S. Ct. 2011, 2026 (2010) ("No recent data provide reason to reconsider the Court's observations in Roper about the nature of juveniles. As petitioner's amici point out, developments in psychology and brain science continue to show fundamental differences between juvenile and adult minds.").
-
(2010)
Graham v. Florida
, vol.130
, pp. 2011
-
-
-
114
-
-
80051486705
-
-
Justice Policy Inst.
-
For a summary of the progress and challenges of Louisiana's juvenile justice system, see Jason Ziedenberg, Justice Policy Inst., Models for Change: Building Momentum for Juvenile Justice Reform (2006), available at http://www.justicepolicy.org/images/upload/06-12-REP-ModelsForChange-JJ.pdf.
-
(2006)
Models for Change: Building Momentum for Juvenile Justice Reform
-
-
Ziedenberg, J.1
-
115
-
-
0345784624
-
-
14:30 (Supp.)
-
La, Rev, Stat, Ann, § 14:30 (Supp. 2010) (first degree murder); id. § 14:30.1 (second degree murder); id. § 14:42 (2007) (aggravated rape); id. § 14:44 (aggravated kidnapping). However, the recent ruling in Graham now precludes the sentencing of juveniles to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for non-homicide offenses as a violation of the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. As a result, juveniles transferred for aggravated rape and aggravated kidnapping in Louisiana will have to be afforded a "realistic opportunity to obtain release" such that they are not guaranteed to die in prison. Graham, 130 S. Ct. at 2034.
-
(2010)
La, Rev, Stat, Ann
-
-
-
116
-
-
68949168659
-
-
14:27(D)(1)(a)
-
Attempted first and second degree murder are punishable by imprisonment at hard labor for not less than ten nor more than 50 years without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence. La, Rev, Stat, Ann, § 14:27(D)(1)(a) (2007). Manslaughter has a 40-year maximum but does not have a minimum sentence unless the victim is under the age of ten, in which case a mandatory minimum of ten years at hard labor without benefit of probation or suspension of sentence does apply. Id. § 14:31(B) (Supp. 2010). Armed robbery carries a sentence of 10 to 99 years of incarceration without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence, except that the minimum sentence increases to 15 years if the dangerous weapon used is a firearm. Id. § § 14:64, :64.3 (2007). Aggravated burglary is punishable by imprisonment at hard labor for not less than one nor more than 30 years. Id. § 14:60. Forcible rape carries a sentence of between 5 and 40 years of incarceration with a requirement that at least two of the years be without benefit of probation, parole, or suspension of sentence. Id. § 14:42.1. Simple rape carries a maximum sentence of 25 years with or without hard labor and no minimum, but any time given must be served without benefit of probation, parole, or suspension of sentence. Id. § 14:43. Second degree kidnapping requires that the offender be imprisoned at hard labor for not less than five nor more than 40 years, with the requirement that at least two years of the sentence be without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence. Id. § 14:44.1(C). The sentence for aggravated battery is a fine of not more than $5,000, imprisonment with or without hard labor for not more than ten years, or both. Id. § 14:34. The sentence for simple burglary of an inhabited dwelling is imprisonment at hard labor for not less than one year, without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence, but not more than 12 years. Id. § 14:62.2. The sentences for transferable second or subsequent felony-grade drug offenses involving the manufacture, distribution, or possession with intent to distribute controlled dangerous substances range from a sentence of imprisonment at hard labor for not less than five nor more than 30 years for marijuana, id. § 40:966(B) (Supp. 2010), to imprisonment at hard labor for not less than ten nor more than 30 years, at least ten years of which shall be served without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence for offenses involving the production or manufacturing of cocaine-based substances, id. § 40:967(B)(4).
-
(2007)
La, Rev, Stat, Ann
, pp. 4
-
-
-
117
-
-
70350007864
-
-
art. 857(B) (Supp.)
-
La. Child. Code Ann. art. 857(B) (Supp. 2010). Since a youth who is arrested at 14 can spend up to the next 17 years in prison until his 31st birthday, all of the mandatory minimum sentences are applicable to judicially waived 14 year olds except for the life without parole sentence called for by first and second degree murder, aggravated rape, and aggravated kidnapping.
-
(2010)
La. Child. Code Ann.
-
-
-
118
-
-
77953406912
-
Mandatory sentencing laws: Undermining the effectiveness of determinate sentencing reform
-
65
-
See Gary Lowenthal, Mandatory Sentencing Laws: Undermining the Effectiveness of Determinate Sentencing Reform, 81 Calif. L. Rev. 61, 65 (1993).
-
(1993)
Calif. L. Rev.
, vol.81
, pp. 61
-
-
Lowenthal, G.1
-
119
-
-
36949039270
-
Juvenile sentencing: Effects of recent punitive sentencing legislation on juvenile offenders and a proposal for sentencing in the juvenile court
-
655-56
-
See Cathi J. Hunt, Juvenile Sentencing: Effects of Recent Punitive Sentencing Legislation on Juvenile Offenders and a Proposal for Sentencing in the Juvenile Court, 19 B.C. Third World L.J. 621, 655-56 (1999).
-
(1999)
B.C. Third World L.J.
, vol.19
, pp. 621
-
-
Hunt, C.J.1
-
120
-
-
79957874337
-
-
See id. at 656
-
See id. at 656.
-
-
-
-
121
-
-
79957868422
-
-
Hunt, supra note 92, at 658
-
Whether there is a net gain in incapacitation from our system of waiver and sentencing is less clear since many waiver offenses are also subject to mandatory minimums in juvenile court under Louisiana Children's Code article 897.1. Also, the tendency of some judges to treat transferred juveniles more leniently than their adult counterparts and the added pressure on juveniles to plea down to a probation-eligible offense makes it difficult to predict the effects of these policies on incapacitation in general. See Hunt, supra note 92, at 658.
-
-
-
-
122
-
-
79957813136
-
-
Bishop, supra note 6, at 154-55
-
See Bishop, supra note 6, at 154-55.
-
-
-
-
124
-
-
0036509443
-
What were they thinking? the mental states of aider and abettor and causer under federal law
-
1357
-
Traditionally, common law states divided parties to a felony into the following four categories in order to allow for different degrees of punishment: (1) principals in the first degree; (2) principals in the second degree (aiders and abettors present at the scene of the crime); (3) accessories before the fact; and (4) accessories after the fact. However, the federal government and most states statutorily eliminated these distinctions over the years, resulting in systems of full accessorial liability similar to Louisiana's in most jurisdictions. See Baruch Weiss, What Were They Thinking? The Mental States of Aider and Abettor and Causer Under Federal Law, 70 Fordham L. Rev. 1341, 1357 (2002);
-
(2002)
Fordham L. Rev.
, vol.70
, pp. 1341
-
-
Weiss, B.1
-
125
-
-
27244441803
-
Reassessing the theoretical underpinnings of accomplice liability: New solutions to an old problem
-
96-98
-
see also Joshua Dressler, Reassessing the Theoretical Underpinnings of Accomplice Liability: New Solutions to an Old Problem, 37 Hastings L.J. 91, 96-98 (1985).
-
(1985)
Hastings L.J.
, vol.37
, pp. 91
-
-
Dressler, J.1
-
127
-
-
79957851764
-
-
State v. Tate, 930 (La.)
-
State v. Tate, 851 So. 2d 921, 930 (La. 2003) ("[S]o long as the State sufficiently proves that the defendant is a principal and that he possessed the requisite specific intent, a conviction for first degree murder will be upheld.").
-
(2003)
So. 2d
, vol.851
, pp. 921
-
-
-
128
-
-
79957873860
-
-
State v. Smith, 1143 (La.)
-
State v. Smith, 748 So. 2d 1139, 1143 (La. 1999) (alteration in original) (citation omitted)
-
(1999)
So. 2d
, vol.748
, pp. 1139
-
-
-
130
-
-
79957858734
-
-
id
-
See id.
-
-
-
-
132
-
-
79957867799
-
-
Id
-
Id.
-
-
-
-
133
-
-
0042774574
-
Violent juvenile offenders: Rethinking federal intervention in juvenile justice
-
351
-
Joseph F. Yeckel, Violent Juvenile Offenders: Rethinking Federal Intervention in Juvenile Justice, 51 Wash. U. J. Urb. & Contemp. L. 331, 351 (1997).
-
(1997)
Wash. U. J. Urb. & Contemp. L.
, vol.51
, pp. 331
-
-
Yeckel, J.F.1
-
134
-
-
0005841012
-
The serious offender and juvenile court reform: The case for prosecutorial waiver of juvenile court jurisdiction
-
668
-
See Francis B. McCarthy, The Serious Offender and Juvenile Court Reform: The Case for Prosecutorial Waiver of Juvenile Court Jurisdiction, 38 St. Louis U. L.J. 629, 668 (1994).
-
(1994)
St. Louis U. L.J.
, vol.38
, pp. 629
-
-
McCarthy, F.B.1
-
135
-
-
79957809268
-
Losing sight of the utilitarian forest for the retributivist trees: An analysis of the role of public opinion in a utilitarian model of punishment
-
1559
-
See Andrew R. Strauss, Losing Sight of the Utilitarian Forest for the Retributivist Trees: An Analysis of the Role of Public Opinion in a Utilitarian Model of Punishment, 23 Cardozo L. Rev. 1549, 1559 (2002)
-
(2002)
Cardozo L. Rev.
, vol.23
, pp. 1549
-
-
Strauss, A.R.1
-
136
-
-
34147140632
-
The classic debate
-
Joel Feinberg & Jules Coleman eds., 6th ed.
-
(quoting Joel Feinburg, The Classic Debate, in Philosophy of Law 728 (Joel Feinberg & Jules Coleman eds., 6th ed. 2000)).
-
(2000)
Philosophy of Law
, pp. 728
-
-
Feinburg, J.1
-
137
-
-
70350424200
-
The jurisprudence of death by another: Accessories and capital punishment
-
53
-
See Joshua Dressler, The Jurisprudence of Death by Another: Accessories and Capital Punishment, 51 U. Colo. L. Rev. 17, 53 (1979).
-
(1979)
U. Colo. L. Rev.
, vol.51
, pp. 17
-
-
Dressler, J.1
-
138
-
-
79957846923
-
-
Dressler, supra note 97, at 115-21
-
See Dressler, supra note 97, at 115-21 (systematically refuting each of the traditional nonutilitarian moral justifications for coequal accomplice liability).
-
-
-
-
139
-
-
79957876701
-
-
Bishop, supra note 6, at 129
-
See Bishop, supra note 6, at 129.
-
-
-
-
140
-
-
0141886813
-
Patterns of juvenile delinquency and co-offending
-
Elin Waring & David Weisburd eds.
-
See Joan McCord & Kevin P. Conway, Patterns of Juvenile Delinquency and Co-Offending, in crime and social organization (Elin Waring & David Weisburd eds., 2002).
-
(2002)
Crime and Social Organization
-
-
McCord, J.1
Conway, K.P.2
-
141
-
-
29244490676
-
-
U.S.
-
See Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960). The United States Supreme Court has never explicitly extended competency protections to juveniles. However, Louisiana statutorily grants juveniles "[a]ll rights guaranteed to criminal defendants" under the state or federal constitution except for the right to trial by jury.
-
(1960)
Dusky v. United States
, vol.362
, pp. 402
-
-
-
142
-
-
70350007864
-
-
art. 808
-
La. Child. Code Ann. art. 808 (2004). Furthermore, the existence of a competency requirement for juveniles can be confidently derived from the court's general extension of other due process protections to juveniles in delinquency proceedings.
-
(2004)
La. Child. Code Ann.
-
-
-
143
-
-
33947127592
-
-
U.S.
-
See In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967) (extending the right to notice, counsel, confrontation, and cross- examination as well as the privilege against self-incrimination to defendants in delinquency proceedings);
-
(1967)
In re Gault
, vol.387
, pp. 1
-
-
-
144
-
-
34248663020
-
-
U.S.
-
see also In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358 (1970) (requiring a guilt beyond a reasonable doubt standard in delinquency proceedings); McGough & Triche, supra note 6, at 416 (arguing the rights extended in Gault are "meaningless if the accused lacks the competence to understand the nature of the charge, the range of penalties, and the possibilities of a defense").
-
(1970)
In re Winship
, vol.397
, pp. 358
-
-
-
145
-
-
79957801034
-
Juveniles and adults' competence as trial defendants
-
See Thomas Grisso et al., Juveniles and Adults' Competence as Trial Defendants, 27 LAW & HUM. BEHAV. 33 (2002);
-
(2002)
Law & Hum. Behav.
, vol.27
, pp. 33
-
-
Grisso, T.1
-
146
-
-
79957817933
-
-
MCGOUGH & TRICHE, supra note 6, at 413-15
-
see also MCGOUGH & TRICHE, supra note 6, at 413-15.
-
-
-
-
147
-
-
70350007864
-
-
arts. 832-38 & Supp.
-
See LA. Child. Code Ann. arts. 832-38 (2004 & Supp. 2010).
-
(2004)
LA. Child. Code Ann.
-
-
-
148
-
-
79957839487
-
-
Id. art. 305(E)(1) (Supp. 2010)
-
Id. art. 305(E)(1) (Supp. 2010) ("If a competency or sanity examination is ordered, except for the filing of a delinquency petition, no further steps to prosecute the child in a court exercising criminal jurisdiction shall occur until (a) Counsel is appointed for the child and notified in accordance with Article 809; and (b) The court determines mental capacity to proceed in accordance with Chapter 7 of Title VIII.").
-
-
-
-
149
-
-
79957804185
-
-
La. Senate
-
La. Senate, 2008 Legislative Session Highlights 100 (2008), available at http://senate.legis.state.la.us/sessioninfo/2008/highlights/2008Highlights.pdf;
-
(2008)
Legislative Session Highlights
, vol.2008
, pp. 100
-
-
-
150
-
-
79957828244
-
-
McGough & Triche, supra note 6, at 28
-
see McGough & Triche, supra note 6, at 28.
-
-
-
-
152
-
-
79957833084
-
-
state ex rel. T.C. (La. Ct. App. 1st)
-
Furthermore, the district attorney in at least one jurisdiction has interpreted article 305(E) as allowing the return of an indictment while competency proceedings in juvenile court are pending. Although the appellate court upheld the plain reading of the statute as barring the state from seeking the indictment and dismissed the state's arguments related to prescription, the opinion has only persuasive value outside of the Louisiana First Circuit Court of Appeal and does not prevent prosecutors in other appellate jurisdictions from engaging in the same practice. See state ex rel. T.C., 35 So. 3d 1088 (La. Ct. App. 1st 2010).
-
(2010)
So. 3d
, vol.35
, pp. 1088
-
-
-
153
-
-
79957872102
-
-
art. 641
-
Defendants in criminal court are deemed incompetent "when, as a result of mental disease or defect, a defendant presently lacks the capacity to understand the proceedings against him or to assist in his defense." La. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 641 (2003). The same legal standard applies to juveniles in delinquency proceedings since the Children's Code does not contain a different standard and requires adherence to the Code of Criminal Procedure when special procedures are not established in the Children's Code.
-
(2003)
La. Code Crim. Proc. Ann.
-
-
-
154
-
-
70350007864
-
-
art. 803
-
La. Child. Code Ann. art. 803 (2004). However, the detailed requirements contained in the Children's Code for the content of competency commission reports provides further guidance for judges of special factors to consider in determining if a juvenile meets the Code of Criminal Procedure's standard for mental incapacity to proceed.
-
(2004)
La. Child. Code Ann.
-
-
-
155
-
-
79957838543
-
-
id. art. 837 (Supp. 2010)
-
See id. art. 837 (Supp. 2010).
-
-
-
-
157
-
-
70350007864
-
-
arts. 819-30 & Supp.
-
La. Child. Code Ann. arts. 819-30 (2004 & Supp. 2010);
-
(2004)
La. Child. Code Ann.
-
-
-
158
-
-
79957872102
-
-
arts. 311-47 & Supp.
-
cf. La. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. arts. 311-47 (2003 & Supp. 2010).
-
(2003)
La. Code Crim. Proc. Ann.
-
-
-
159
-
-
79957832167
-
-
in fact, only the four largest parishes in Louisiana (Caddo, orleans, Jefferson, and East Baton Rouge) have specialized juvenile courts and therefore separate juvenile court judges. in all other judicial districts, the same judges from district, parish, or city courts exercise juvenile court jurisdiction. Kate Mitchell, The Louisiana Juvenile Defender Trial Practice Manual 30 (2007).
-
(2007)
The Louisiana Juvenile Defender Trial Practice Manual
, pp. 30
-
-
Mitchell, K.1
-
160
-
-
79957872102
-
-
art. 407
-
La. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 407 (2003) ("[T]he court shall allow the proceedings to be open to the public when the alleged delinquent act committed by the child would be considered a crime of violence as defined in R.S. 14:2(B), or when the alleged delinquent act would be a second or subsequent felony-grade adjudication.").
-
(2003)
La. Code Crim. Proc. Ann.
-
-
-
161
-
-
70350007864
-
-
art. 833(A) (Supp.)
-
La. Child. Code Ann. art. 833(A) (Supp. 2010).
-
(2010)
La. Child. Code Ann.
-
-
-
162
-
-
79957807887
-
-
Id. art. 836(A)
-
Id. art. 836(A). The timeline for non-detained youth is 60 days with one 15-day extension allowed.
-
-
-
-
163
-
-
79957834541
-
-
Id. art. 305(E)
-
Id. art. 305(E).
-
-
-
-
164
-
-
79957794270
-
-
Id. arts. 305(E)(2), 857(C)
-
Id. arts. 305(E)(2), 857(C).
-
-
-
-
165
-
-
79957834055
-
-
Feld, supra note 7, at 125-26
-
See Feld, supra note 7, at 125-26 (discussing the general lack of expertise of criminal court judges vis-à-vis juvenile court judges in handling juvenile cases). Although only four parishes have specialized juvenile courts, see supra note 120, they are the largest four parishes with the state's most populous urban centers, making it likely that the issue of differing levels of expertise and familiarity with juvenile issues and procedures will apply to a significant percentage of juvenile waiver cases where competency is an issue.
-
-
-
-
166
-
-
70350007864
-
-
arts. 306, 864(B)
-
La. Child. Code Ann. arts. 306, 864(B) (2004).
-
(2004)
La. Child. Code Ann.
-
-
-
167
-
-
79957858733
-
-
Campaign for Youth Justice, supra note 2
-
See Campaign for Youth Justice, supra note 2.
-
-
-
-
169
-
-
79957829014
-
-
Id. art. 648(A)(2)(a)
-
Id. art. 648(A)(2)(a) ("If the person is charged with a felony or a misdemeanor classified as an offense against the person and considered by the court to be likely to commit crimes of violence, and if the court determines that his mental capacity is likely to be restored within ninety days as a result of treatment, the court may order immediate jail-based treatment by the Department of Health and Hospitals not to exceed ninety days; otherwise, if his capacity cannot be restored within ninety days and inpatient treatment is recommended, the court shall commit the defendant to the Feliciana Forensic Facility.").
-
-
-
-
170
-
-
79957789322
-
Defendants wait too long for pretrial care
-
(New Orleans, La.), Apr. 13
-
A lawsuit filed by a disability rights organization alleges the average wait time for an incompetent inmate to be transferred to the facility is over six months, with one inmate waiting more than two years for a slot to open. See Laura Maggi, Defendants Wait Too Long for Pretrial Care, Lawsuit Says, Times-Picayune (New Orleans, La.), Apr. 13, 2010, available at http://www.nola.com'crime/index.ssf/2010/04/defendants-wait-too-long-for-p.html.
-
(2010)
Lawsuit Says, Times-picayune
-
-
Maggi, L.1
-
171
-
-
70350007864
-
-
art. 837(B) (Supp.)
-
La. Child. Code Ann. art. 837(B) (Supp. 2010). The juvenile court may: (1) Dismiss the petition in accordance with Article 876. (2) Adjudicate the family of the child to be in need of services and proceed to a disposition in accordance with Chapters 10 and 12 of Title VII. (3) Commit the child to the Department of Health and Hospitals, a private mental institution, or an institution for the mentally ill in accordance with Department of Health and Hospitals policy. The court may also order restoration services for the child and appoint a restoration service provider. However, a child shall not be committed unless the court finds, after a contradictory hearing with ten days notice to the district attorney and counsel for the child, that the child, as a result of mental illness, is dangerous to himself or others or is gravely disabled. If the court further finds that the child will not have the mental capacity to proceed in the foreseeable future, the court shall order civil commitment as provided in Title XIV. However, no child shall be discharged or conditionally discharged except upon court order after a motion and contradictory hearing. (4) Place the child in the custody of his parents or other suitable person or private or public institution or agency under such terms and conditions as deemed in the best interests of the child and the public, which conditions may include the provision of outpatient services by any suitable public or private agency. The court may also order restoration services for the child and appoint a restoration service provider.
-
(2010)
La. Child. Code Ann.
-
-
-
172
-
-
79957859383
-
-
Id
-
Id.
-
-
-
-
173
-
-
79957812651
-
-
U.S. 909-13
-
Bland v. United States, 412 U.S. 909, 909-13 (1973) (Douglas, J., dissenting from denial of certiorari). The dissenting Justices observed: First. A juvenile or "child" is placed in a more protected position than an adult, not by the Constitution but by an Act of Congress. In that category he is theoretically subject to rehabilitative treatment. Can he on the whim or caprice of a prosecutor be put in the class of the run-of-the-mill criminal defendants, without any hearing, without any chance to be heard, without an opportunity to rebut the evidence against him, without a chance of showing that he is being given an invidiously different treatment from others in his group? Kent and Gault suggest that those are very substantial constitutional questions. Second. The barricade behind which the prosecutor operates is that this, like other prosecutions, is committed to his informed discretion, which is beyond the reach of judicial intrusion. . . . "The reasons for a judicial check of prosecutors' discretion are stronger than for such a check of other administrative discretion that is now traditionally reviewable. important interests are at stake. Abuses are common. The questions involved are appropriate for judicial determination. And much injustice could be corrected." These two questions are large questions and substantial ones. i would grant the petition for certiorari in order to resolve them.
-
(1973)
Bland v. United States
, vol.412
, pp. 909
-
-
-
174
-
-
79957799903
-
-
Id. at 911-13
-
Id. at 911-13 (citation omitted)
-
-
-
-
176
-
-
79957862807
-
-
Id. at 911
-
Id. at 911.
-
-
-
-
177
-
-
0041524195
-
"Owing to the extreme youth of the accused": The changing legal response to juvenile homicide
-
693
-
David S. Tanenhaus & Steven A. Drizin, "Owing to the Extreme Youth of the Accused": The Changing Legal Response to Juvenile Homicide, 92 J. Crim, L. & Criminology 641, 693 (2002).
-
(2002)
J. Crim, L. & Criminology
, vol.92
, pp. 641
-
-
Tanenhaus, D.S.1
Drizin, S.A.2
-
178
-
-
79957843162
-
-
McCarthy, supra note 105, at 668
-
McCarthy, supra note 105, at 668.
-
-
-
-
179
-
-
79957864720
-
-
Bishop, supra note 6, at 112
-
Bishop, supra note 6, at 112.
-
-
-
-
180
-
-
79957811652
-
-
Tanenhaus & Drizin, supra note 135, at 694
-
Tanenhaus & Drizin, supra note 135, at 694;
-
-
-
-
181
-
-
79957823086
-
-
Bishop, supra note 6, at 112
-
see also Bishop, supra note 6, at 112.
-
-
-
-
182
-
-
79957858288
-
-
Tanenhaus & Drizin, supra note 135, at 698
-
Tanenhaus & Drizin, supra note 135, at 698.
-
-
-
-
183
-
-
79957828708
-
-
La. Legislature (last visited Oct. 12, 2010)
-
During the 2010 legislative session, an attempt to eliminate this protection altogether almost succeeded but was thwarted when House Bill 1106 died in a Senate committee after having been unanimously approved in the House of Representatives. 2010 Regular Session-Instrument Information, La. Legislature, http://www.legis.state.la.us/billdata/byinst.asp?sessionid= 10RS&billid=HB1106&doctype=ALL (last visited Oct. 12, 2010).
-
2010 Regular Session-Instrument Information
-
-
-
184
-
-
84900161706
-
Adolescent transfer, developmental maturity, and adjudicative competence: An ethical and justice policy inquiry
-
439-40
-
See Brian G. sellers & Bruce A. Arrigo, Adolescent Transfer, Developmental Maturity, and Adjudicative Competence: An Ethical and Justice Policy Inquiry, 99 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 435, 439-40 (2009).
-
(2009)
J. Crim. L. & Criminology
, vol.99
, pp. 435
-
-
Sellers, B.G.1
Arrigo, B.A.2
-
185
-
-
79957808335
-
-
Bishop, supra note 6, at 154-55
-
Bishop, supra note 6, at 154-55.
-
-
-
|