The purpose of the juvenile court system, as it relates to juveniles charged with law violations (what would otherwise be charged as criminal offenses if charged in adult court) is to be rehabilitative and not punitive. This structure is intended to benefit the juveniles accused by responding to the juvenile and their needs rather than focusing on the act of offense committed. Additionally, disposition is designed with the juvenile offender in mind rather than following determinate sentencing guidelines like criminal court. Given this structural difference, the rights of juveniles going through the juvenile court will differ slightly than the rights of an adult in criminal court.
The State is still required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the juvenile committed an offense to warrant adjudication. During this process the juvenile is entitled to the following rights:
(1) notice provided to juvenile of the charges against them;
(2) notice provided to the parents of the juveniles of the charges against the juvenile;
(3) assistance of counsel;
(4) right to confront witnesses and cross-examine witnesses; and
(5) right to remain silent.
The biggest difference between a juvenile court adjudication and a criminal trial is that juveniles are not entitled to a jury trial. The main argument behind that is that the Constitution only requires jury trials in specific criminal cases. Since juvenile court is outside that scope, there is no Constitutional guarantee. In ruling on this issue, the court in McKeiver v. Pennsylvania expressed concern that if the right to a jury trial was injected into the juvenile court system as a matter of right, it would bring the unnecessary delay and give way to an adversarial proceeding which is not the goal of juvenile court.
By: Abby Kuntz