Document: 467 U.S. 253 104 S.Ct. 2403 81 L.Ed.2d 207 Ellen SCHALL, Commissioner of New York City Department Juvenile Justicev.Gregory MARTIN et al. Robert ABRAMS, Attorney General v. Gregory Nos. 82-1248, 82-1278. Supreme Court the United States Argued Jan. 17, 1984. Decided June 4, Syllabus Section 320.5(3)(b) Family Act authorizes pretrial detention an accused juvenile delinquent based on a finding that there is "serious risk" "may before return date commit act which if committed by adult would constitute crime." Appellees, juveniles who had been detained under § 320.5(3)(b), brought habeas corpus class action in Federal District Court, seeking declaratory judgment violates, inter alia, Due Process Clause Fourteenth Amendment. The struck down statute as permitting without due process and ordered release all members. Appeals affirmed, holding since vast majority either have their cases dismissed adjudication delinquency or are released after adjudication, administered, not for preventive purposes, but to impose punishment unadjudicated criminal acts, therefore unconstitutional juveniles. Held: invalid Pp. 263-281. (a) Preventive serves legitimate state objective, held common with every State, protecting both society from hazards crime. That objective compatible "fundamental fairness" demanded proceedings, terms condition confinement objective. Pretrial need be considered merely because subsequently discharged subject conditions put probation. And even when case terminated prior factfinding, it does follow decision detain pursuant amounts violation. 264-274. (b) procedural safeguards afforded factfinding provide sufficient protection against erroneous unnecessary deprivations liberty. Notice, hearing, statement facts reasons given any detention, formal probable-cause hearing then within short time thereafter, itself scheduled three days. There no merit argument risk too high despite these procedures standard fatally vague. From legal point view, nothing inherently unattainable about prediction future conduct. Such experienced one host variables cannot readily codified. Moreover, postdetention procedures—habeas review, appeals, motions reconsideration—provide mechanism correcting case-by-case basis detention. 274-281. 689 F.2d 365 (2nd Cir.1982), reversed. Judith A. Gordon, Asst. Atty. Gen., City, appellants. Martin Guggenheim, appellees. Justice REHNQUIST delivered opinion Court. 1 child crime."1 Appellees suit behalf provision.2 law immediate ex rel. Strasburg, 513 F.Supp. 691 (SDNY1981). Second Circuit provision "unconstitutional juveniles" administered such way "the period imposed proof guilt established according requisite constitutional standard." 365, 373-374 (1982). We noted probable jurisdiction, 460 1079, 103 1765, 76 340 (1983),3 now reverse. conclude FCA protections detainees satisfy requirements Amendment Constitution. 2 * Appellee was arrested December 13, 1977, charged first-degree robbery, second-degree assault, possession weapon incident he, two others, allegedly hit youth head loaded gun stole his jacket sneakers. See petitioners' Exhibit 1b. he arrested. He 14 years old at and, therefore, came jurisdiction York's Court.4 occurred 11:30 night, lied police where whom lived. consequently overnight.5 3 A petition filed,6 made "initial appearance" 14th, accompanied grandmother.7 Judge, citing weapon, false address police, lateness hour, evidencing lack supervision, (at 739(a)(ii); see n. 2, supra). cause five days later, 19th, found exist crimes charged. At 27-29, guilty robbery charges. adjudicated placed years' probation.8 between initial appearance completion total 15 4 Luis Rosario Kenneth Morgan, age 14, were also pending hearings. attempted assault four tried rob men, putting them beating sticks. 2b. appearance, March 15, 1978, another knifing student, petitions adjusted.9 Probable 21. On April 11, father, adjustment September 25, 1978. 5 Morgan grand larceny boy steal money 14-year-old girl her brother threatening blow heads off grabbing search pockets. 3b. like Rosario, status (for stolen property) 27, previous times, mother refused come court trouble so often she did want him home. set 30, continued until combined hearing. harassment petit Social Services 18 months. eight 6 21, while still instituted "those persons are, during pendency this will be, preventively to" FCA. added additional named plaintiffs. These representatives sought violates Equal Protection Clauses 7 In unpublished opinion, certified class. App. 20-32.10 appellees required exhaust remedies resorting federal highest already rejected identical challenge statute. People Wayburn Schupf, 39 N.Y.2d 682, 385 N.Y.S.2d 518, 350 N.E.2d 906 (1976). Exhaustion remedies, "an exercise futility." 26. 8 trial, offered evidence histories 34 members class, including petitioners. Both parties presented some general statistics relation ultimate disposition. addition, testimony concerning proceedings number witnesses, aid attorney specializing cases, probation supervisor, psychologist, Judge. evidence, equal "insubstantial,"11 agreed process.12 "all custody [320.5(3)(b) ] shall forthwith." Id., 93. 9 affirmed. After reviewing trial record, opined [§ adjudication." F.2d, 369. concluded fact "is utilized principally, acts." 372. early many those contradicts asserted protect community. must declared Individual litigation practical impossibility periods mooted merits determined.13 II 10 doubt applicable proceedings. "The problem," we stressed, ascertain precise impact requirement upon proceedings." re Gault, 387 1, 13-14, 87 1428, 1436-1437, 527 (1967). certain basic enjoyed adults apply 31-57, S.Ct., 1445-1459 (notice charges, right counsel, privilege self-incrimination, confrontation cross-examination); Winship, 397 358, 90 1068, 25 368 (1970) (proof beyond reasonable doubt); Breed Jones, 421 519, 95 1779, 44 346 (1975) (double jeopardy). But Constitution mandate elimination differences treatment See, e.g., McKeiver Pennsylvania, 403 528, 91 1976, 29 647 (1971) (no jury trial). State has "a parens patriae interest preserving promoting welfare child," Santosky Kramer, 455 745, 766, 102 1388, 1401, 71 599 (1982), makes proceeding fundamentally different trial. tried, strike balance—to respect "informality" "flexibility" characterize supra, U.S., 366, 1073, yet ensure comport Clause. 531, 1786; McKeiver, 543, 1985 (plurality opinion). 11 statutory issue permits brief may crime date. question us whether process. Two separate inquiries necessary answer question. First, serve objective? Bell Wolfish, 441 520, 534, 99 1861, 1871 60 447 (1979); Kennedy Mendoza-Martinez, 372 144, 168-169, 83 554, 567-568, 644 (1963). And, second, contained adequate authorize least crimes? Mathews Eldridge, 424 319, 335, 96 893, 903, 47 (1976); Gerstein Pugh, 420 103, 114, 854, 863, 43 54 (1975). 12 purportedly designed potential consequences acts. 689-690, N.Y.S.2d, 521-522, N.E.2d, 910. When making decision, judge specifically directed consider needs best interests well 301.1; Craig S., 57 App.Div.2d 761, 394 200 (1977). left open governmental other than ensuring detainee's presence constitutionally justify As matter, decide whether, context system, community himself conduct 13 "legitimate compelling interest" doubted. De Veau Braisted, 363 155, 80 1146, 1152, 1109 (1960). Terry Ohio, 392 22, 88 1868, 1880, 20 889 (1968). stressed prevention weighty social objective," Brown Texas, 443 47, 52, 2637, 2641, 61 357 (1979), persists undiluted context. 20, 26, 1440, 527. harm suffered victim dependent perpetrator.14 generally greater rate recidivism among 1440. juvenile's countervailing freedom institutional restraints, involved here, undoubtedly substantial well. 1443. qualified recognition juveniles, unlike adults, always form custody. Lehman Lycoming County Children's Services, 458 502, 510-511, 3231, 3237-3238, 73 928 (1982); 1438. Children, definition, assumed capacity take care themselves. They control parents, parental falters, play its part patriae. Gleason, 404 A.2d 573, 580 (Me.1979); 690, 522, 910; Baker Smith, 477 S.W.2d 149, 150-151 (Ky.1971). respect, liberty may, appropriate circumstances, subordinated State's "parens child." 599. Appeals, upholding length desirability own folly." 688-689, 520-521, 909.15 Society activity—both physical injury fights back policeman attempts make arrest downward spiral activity into peer pressure lead child. L.O.W. Arapahoe, 623 P.2d 1253, 1258-1259 (Colo.1981); Morris D'Amario, 416 137, 140 (R.I.1980). Eddings Oklahoma, 104, 115, 869, 876, (1982) (minority life person most susceptible influence psychological damage"); Bellotti Baird, 622, 635, 3035, 3044, 797 (1979) (juveniles "often experience, perspective, recognize avoid choices could detrimental them"). 16 substantiality legitimacy underlying confirmed widespread use judicial acceptance Every Columbia, crime.16 model justice Acts contain provisions detention.17 courts States, upheld statutes specific reference harmful conduct, 1258-1259; 139-140; A.2d, 583; Pauley Gross, Kan.App.2d 736, 738-740, 574 234, 237-238 (1977); N.Y.2d, 909-910; Aubrey Gadbois, 50 Cal.App.3d 470, 472, 123 Cal.Rptr. 366 (1975); S.W.2d, 150-151; Commonwealth Sprowal Hendrick, 438 Pa. 435, 438-439, 265 348, 349-350 (1970). 17 practice followed large states conclusive accords process, plainly worth considering determining 'offends principle rooted traditions conscience our people ranked fundamental.' Snyder Massachusetts, 291 97, 105 [54 330, 332, 78 L.Ed. 674] (1934)." Leland Oregon, 343 790, 798, 72 1002, 1007, 1302 (1952). light uniform legislative properly promotes juvenile, regulatory purpose Cf. 548, 1987 opinion).18 argue limit categories having being likely commit. discretion delimit justifying define offenses prescribe punishments, resides wholly legislatures. Whalen 445 684, 689, 100 1432, 1436, 63 715 (1980); Rochin California, 342 165, 168, 205, 207, 183 Rummel Estelle, 263, 275, 1133, 1139, 382 (1980) ("the absence violence affect strength society's deterring particular crime"). More fundamentally, sort attack basis. Raines, 362 524 sift through entire determine applied each case. outside limited First context, attacked overbroad. Ferber, 747, 3348, 1113 Of course, mere invocation restrictions amounting punishment. It axiomatic "[d]ue requires detainee punished." 535, 16, 1872, 16. Even given, purposes. 567-568. "A disability purpose." 538, 1873. Absent showing express intent punish determination turn "whether alternative [the restriction] rationally connected assignable it, appears excessive assigned [to it]." 168-189, 567-578. 1874; Flemming Nestor, 603, 613-614, 1367, 1373-1375, 1435 19 indication used intended all, strictly time. If denied charges him, entitled more conclusion filing petition, whichever sooner. 325.1(2).19 finds cause, 320.5(3)(b). 325.3(3). Detained expedited designated felonies, commence appearance. 340.1. lesser offense, appearance.20 latter case, times coincide, hearings merged. 21 Thus, maximum possible serious crime, assuming 3-day extension good shown, less crimes, again six frames seem suited providing controlled environment separating improper influences speedy disposition 22 appear reflect purposes relied State. remanded cannot, absent exceptional sent prison lockup exposed criminals. 304.1(2). Instead, screened "assessment unit" Justice. Testimony Mr. Kelly (Deputy Operations, Justice), 286-287. assessment unit places nonsecure secure Nonsecure involves facility community, "halfway house," locks, bars, security officers receives schooling counseling access recreational facilities. 285; Benjamin, id., 149-150. 23 Secure restrictive, consistent objectives Children dorms age, size, behavior. wear street clothes provided institution partake educational programs sessions run trained workers. Misbehavior punished one's room. Kelly, 292-297. record briefly punishment" rather 24 punitive regulatory. dispute might Rather, invalidated significant aspect system solely statistical study appeared show dismissal failure confine dispositional belied fact-finding that, constituted 373. Since per se illegitimate, obvious flaws lower court.21 "by far incarcerated never confined consequence delinquency," 371-372, find insufficient ground upsetting widely shared important function system. unpersuaded Appeals' cavalier equation detentions do "wrongful" "punitive" detentions. 26 fact, actions reinforce original close supervision required. Lenient supervised keeping Act's promote development child.22 noted: 27 "It should surprise caution concern indicate conservative very outset, whereas later much relevant information prove warranted, placement indicated." 28 finding, amounted collateral merits, witness testify. expected anticipate developments available time, propriety judged light. Consequently, final "largely irrelevant" legality McCollan, 145, 2689, 2695, 433 (1979). circumstances pass muster. validity determined "on face" reason ambiguous below.23 justification contrary language court, measure. country, B 30 Given nonpunitive nature remaining 18.24 54, prerequisite extended restraint not, however, time-table. Nor require "full panoply adversary safeguards—counsel, confrontation, cross-examination, compulsory witnesses." 119, 866. recognized flexibility experimentation States." 123, 868. arose Fourth Amendment, same "informality," predetention procedures, present 1074, 368; Kent 383 541, 86 1045, 1054, 84 (1966). 31 respects, provides Gerstein. informal, full notice complete stenographic kept F.Supp., 702. parent guardian.25 first informed rights, remain silent represented counsel chosen guardian court. 320.3. adjourned longer hours next day, sooner, enable appointed 320.2(3). present, furnished copy petition. 320.4(1). representative presentment agency support 32 nonhearsay allegations supporting depositions establish believe offense. Although sufficiency ground. 315.1. oppose recommended arguing offense dismissed, opportunity admit deny 321.1.26 33 recommendation regarding officer reports current contacts, home life, school attendance, special medical developmental problems. concludes offering agency's Opposing speak recommendation. detention.27 noted, formal, adversarial shown.28 burden call witnesses offer 325.2. oath cross-examination. Ibid. behalf. Again, stated record. 35 sum, notice, flexible Clause, 557, 1055, 84. failed note significantly improve accuracy unduly impinging achievement purposes.29 36 argue, Detention released, seen claim, agreed, virtually impossible predict degree accuracy. they say, fails channel specifying factors rely prediction. above thus, unavailing intrinsically arbitrary uncontrolled. 37 Our indicate, view forms element decisions,30 contention, sociological data "that behavior vague meaningless." Jurek 428 262, 274, 2950, 2957, 49 929 (1976) (opinion Stewart, POWELL STEVENS, JJ.); 279, 2959 (WHITE, J., concurring judgment). 38 variables" Greenholtz Nebraska Penal Inmates, 442 2100, 2108, 668 Judge Quinones testified colleagues numerous seriousness charges; proved trial; record; adequacy effectiveness supervision; situation, known; day alleged control; attention officer, child's attorney, relatives, responsible accompanying Quinones, 254-267. can reasonably obtained reasons, specified concluded, 910, "to real extent substitute particularized criteria." reason, add, assume strive conscientiously possible. Sumner Mata, 449 539, 549, 101 764, 770, 66 722 (1981). 40 adding mistaken "[i]ndividual . determined." writ issued adopted liberal doctrine "capable repetition, evading review" precisely order orders unreviewable. 686, 908, declined dismiss appeal grant technical mootness 41 "Because situation recur otherwise reached (in predictably recurring happenstance however expeditiously prosecuted, normally reach us), decline appeal] mootness." 42 review individual cases. reviewed appealable taken directly presented. N.Y.Civ.Prac.Law 5601(b)(2) (McKinney 1978). Permissive Appellate Division. 365.2. Or motion reconsideration judge. 355.1(1)(b). 320.5(3). flesh out standards III dissent apparently grounds: first, constitutes poor public policy, balance harms outweighing positive benefits themselves, post, 290-291,3083, better drafted quality decisionmaking 304-306. recalling neither legislature formulating policy nor American Bar Association committee drafting today comports standards. precede imposition, Reversed. 45 MARSHALL, BRENNAN STEVENS join, dissenting. 46 governs acts crimes.1 contains covered Act2 up guilt.3 320.5(3)(a) empowers "there probability juvenile] date." crime."4 few limitations predicated applies regardless records severity accused. dangerous crimes; minor misdemeanor Aside risk," likelihood misbehave 48 holds violate rulings essential Court's decision: government enough abridgment juveniles' interests, ante, 2415; incorporates prevent impairment protected 2417, 2418. Because I disagree rulings, dissent. detailed findings, undisturbed, manner practice. Unless clearly erroneous, findings binding us, Fed.Rule Civ.Proc. 52(a), guide analysis questions step leads known "probation intake." arrive intake routes: arresting officer; intake; 691, 701 (S.D.N.Y.1981). heart procedure 10-to-40-minute interview sometimes guardian. conducting obtain background him. 51 derived examination decides disposed informally ("adjusted") referred latter, detained. "There governing criteria choosing proposing parole. ." 52 actual what called appearance"—a resembling arraignment.5 limited. "petition delinquency" prepared agency, charging affidavits attesting involvement. Ordinarily addition written report officer. However, rarely attends complainant appear. "[o]ften personal knowledge happened." 53 typical appoints called. lawyer independent inquiry character, only minutes prepare arguments 702, 708. ordinarily 708, truth offense.6 lasts minutes, renders immediately afterward. Neither body rules guides efforts decisions, "each subjective judgment, whatever developed exercising discretionary authority statute." judges over whose presided, refining employs decisions. 712. 55 examining sample 320.5(3)(b)7 along various studies York,8 habitually invoked. Three especially germane appellees' "first offenders" For example, contact adjudications delinquency. 695-700.9 Second, released—for ranging several weeks—after arrests misconduct appearances." Sixteen thirty-four fit pattern. 705, 713-714. Third, overwhelming majority" trials, unconditionally 705. fell category. 369, (CA2 1982); 695-700. 56 Finally, associated "secure detention" 320.5(3)(b).10 facility," "[t]he subjected strip-searches, clothing regimen. Spofford [Juvenile Center], facility, determinations awaiting (long term care) commingle (short care)." 695, 5. backdrop contentions examined. 58 concedes, insulate "[N]either Bill Rights alone." Examination course capacities 550, 1988, (1971), "must measure essentials fair treatment," 562, 1057, 59 To fairness," requirements. advance goals commensurate burdens imposes interests. applies. grudgingly incompletely acknowledges applicability tests, grip undeniable. manifest impinges fundamental rights. "liberty" means anything, restraint. Ingraham Wright, 430 651, 673-674, 97 1413-1414, 711 Board Regents Roth, 408 564, 572, 92 2701, 2706, 548 (1972). Only deprivation sense.11 seeks evade force discounting incarceration curtailment consequent contends, mitigated "juveniles, custody." Ante, 265. event, argues, burdensome. 271. suggest objective" strictures 256-257, 263-264, 274.12 62 majority's survive scrutiny. Its characterization transfer difficult seriously. Surely qualitative difference imprisonment heart. depiction insupportable above, entails closely jail mixed delinquent. Supra, 287-288. Evidence adduced reinforces findings. described follows: "Then again, Center, try, pleasant place world. you liable exposing youngsters sorts things. sexual assaults. You taking together youngster worse they, possibly bad effect respect." 270. 64 Many observers similar conclusions.13 65 short, fairly viewed, gives rise injuries comparable adult. situations, suffers stigmatization severe limitation movement. 367, (1970); Indeed, impressionability experience injurious adults; quickly hostile oppressive regard themselves irremediably "delinquent."14 presumptively innocent persons—encompassing rights liberty—can justified substantially advanced statute.15 second tests admitted majority. must, 264, 269. punishment, down. 67 related discussed 68 Appellants contend advances pair intertwined objectives: "protecting crime," activity," 266. specifically, argues detaining desirable effects: protects released; "both 264-266. 69 amici exists offense.17 categorial because, identified conceded compelling, sufficiently promoted concomitant interests.18 precisely, combination render toto: invoked, minimally promoted; courts, ends practicably distinguished not. 70 below occasionally accidentally commission subsidiary undergird conclusion. incapable trials part, incapacity derives dynamics human supplemented thorough secondary literature, 708-712, nn. 31-32, "no diagnostic tools devised highly criminologists reliably engage violent supportive overwhelming.19 An impediment identification defendants paucity cursory who, once. scarcity information, credited expert witness, "stated surprised recommendations interviews chance assessed judge's prognosis 4% chance—virtually unpredictable." 708.20 classes past suggests average future. trivial offenses21 contacts 285, 6.22 surrounding invoked strongly released. proportion reported large, 287; apparent why telling trials. 698 369; inference powerful detainees, examined carefully appearances, deemed insufficiently warrant further incarceration.23 rarity results undercuts 'parens child,' " (citation omitted), particularly hollow. Most benefited thereby, devices (and thus perils cycle recidivism, 266). contrary, suffer harms: "delinquent" "dangerous," ability defenses.24 unalloyed; gains partially offset aforementioned injuries. configuration harms, surprising repudiated suggestion detainees. 269-270. 74 fares little better. Certainly reaps benefit Prevention small confers slight community.25 occasional thereby interest. infrequent haphazard gain obeyed chance.26 75 deflect constitutionality contending framed broadly. possible, acknowledges, "in [pursuant basis." 273; 268-269, 18. implies violated nevertheless Separation improperly achieved "case-by-case" adjudication. impediments adoption proposal. days, impracticable challenging detention; considered, rendered moot long-term adjudication.27 problem damages injunctive relief. This declaration face almost certainly preclude rights; officials immune liability damages, Harlow Fitzgerald, 457 800, 2727, 396 pertaining standing injunction repetition behavior, clear able equitable remedy. Compare INS Delgado, 466 210, 217, 1758, 1763, 247 (1984), Los Angeles Lyons, 461 95, 105-106, 1660, 1666-1667, 675 (1983). 77 difficulties surmounted, proposal inadequate. Precisely unreliability 293-294, demonstrate abided words, category unconstitutionally detained.28 interest, face." C preceding section lend credence below: 372; 715717. 79 contends trying sanction "punishment," MendozaMartinez, 168169, 567568, (1963), useful sanction] assigned," ibid. (footnotes omitted). 24122413. Assuming, arguendo, test appropriate, cf. 564565, 18871888 (MARSHALL, dissenting), affirmance But, sporadically provision. frequently extremely unlikely striking involve mishap 287, adjudged surely "appears putatively it. supported materials appellants' acknowledged usually 370371, 2728. Another using "preventive sample. 708.29 summary, application litmus recently identify sanctions supports stand. 82 impossibility, predicting effected provision, Newman, observed, "New denied, guilt, unfettered considerable uncertainty behavior." 375. lacks crucial constraints. guidance kinds weight accord material deciding juvenile.30 account living situation. obliged attach significance arrested.31 specify how indicates govern issue.32 Not surprisingly, directions statute, ways estimating chances near "Each follows approach detention] determination." 702; (testimony Quinones). exercised decisions creates "erroneously"—i.e., served incarceration. fosters arbitrariness inequality 85 One imposing constraints affecting liberty, property reduce incidence error. Fuentes Shevin, 407 67, 8081, 1983, 19941995, 556 (1976), complex considerations helpful contexts achieve end: "[I]dentification dictates consideration distinct factors: private affected official action; used, value, any, safeguards; finally, Government's fiscal administrative entail." 903. Newman recognized, 375376, preventive-detention scheme compels form. Unnecessary right, 288, avoided erroneously—i.e., sections interest; operate 297-298. demonstrated error induce utmost Opportunities improvement extant regime casual observer. obviously, contribute determinations.33 89 purports value safeguards, subtle variables, advance. 24172418. resulted included reveals hopelessly idealized. operative portion Tyrone Parson, three-card monte player,34 consisted following: "COURT OFFICER: Will yourself. "TYRONE PARSON: Age 15. 93 "THE COURT: Miss Brown, Court? 94 "MISS BROWN: Seven times. Remand respondent." Petitioners' 18a.35 kind parody reasoned occur mandatory instructions assess Third imposition deliberations adverse give insubstantial burdens. simple directive materially increasing duration appearances. 98 enumerated incline overwhelmingly favor stringent Especially impracticability 24282429, meaningful invalid. 757, 9, 1396, doctrinal settings accorded impinge concerns underlie principle: distribution entitlements troublesome great; mask illegitimate allocating goods So, vagueness grounds vagrancy ordinance, emphasized "unfettered hands police." Papachristou Jacksonville, 405 156, 839, 846, 110 offensive "permits encourages discriminatory enforcement law." 170, 847. Partly consistently violative ordinances speech "contingent uncontrolled official—as requiring permit license granted withheld official." Staub Baxley, 355 313, 322, 277, 282, 302 (1958); accord, Shuttlesworth Birmingham, 147, 151, 153, 935, 938, 940, 162 (1969). Analogous inform understanding Concurring Zablocki Redhail, 434 374, 673, 618 (1978), conditioned marry satisfaction child-support obligations, aptly observed: "Quite apart truly indigent, 'confer judge] procedure,' applicant's children 'likely thereafter become charges.' raised feature standardless discretion, area." 402, (quoting 553, 1053, powered implicated scheme. constraining petty "caprice" 707. guidelines opportunities trials—for punishing them.36 choice dangerousness deem appropriate.37 resultant variation level great countenanced IV acknowledges—indeed, founds upon—the power responsibility jurisdiction. 1401. Yet upholds net purview detrimental. reap thereby. minority arguably enhanced. inequity regime, bound disillusion victims virtues justice. see—and pointed to—no works. respectfully Jud.Law 320.5 1983) (Family (hereinafter FCA)) provides, part: "1. respondent direct 3. unless detained; "(a) date; "(b) challenged date, 320.5(3)(a), 739(a)(ii) FCA, which, commencement suit, governed delinquents supervision. Effective July new Article governs, commenced effective thereof appeals post-judgment relating attaching thereto." 301.3(1). Obviously, "review stands, once did." Hall Beals, 45, 48, 200, 201, 214 former 739(a)(ii), 320.5(3), moot. Brockington Rhodes, 41, 43, 206, 209 long ended, infra, 257-261, 110, 861 (1975), termination claims "Pretrial temporary, claim decided convicted. nonetheless repeated deprivations, similarly situated procedures. distinctly 'capable review.' 686-687, 519-520, 906, 907-908 York, criminally 301.2(1). commits adult, comes exclusive 302.1(1). affixing Bogart, Misc.2d 1075, 259 351 pursuing insofar 301.1. civil criminal, although delinquent, criminals CF. 303.1. arrested, notify legally care. 305.2(3). Ordinarily, "appearance ticket" meet service day. 307.1(1). infra. If, 301.2(8), reached, 305.2. preliminary appoint child, advise silent. if, Martin's session exist, inability facility. 305.2(4)(c). detained, session, 307.3(4). judicially "presentment agency," originates 310.1. contain, factual "clearly apprise" accusation. 311.1. accompany 311.2(2). Also, deposition establish, true, thereof. 311.2(3). tested following arrest. 320.2. "factfinding" analogue earlier 341.2. suppressed 330.2, doubt, 342.2. established, enters schedules 345.1. felony, investigation assessment. 351.1. Any juvenile. sides cross-examine recommend alternatives. 350.4. find, preponderance 350.3(2), treatment, confinement. 352.1. Otherwise, dismissed. Possible alternatives include conditional discharge; years; with, perhaps, relative Division Youth; Mental Health; placement. §§ 353.1-353.5. restrictive 352.2(2). interviewed member staff Probation Department. Benjamin (Supervisor, Dept. Probation), 142. interview, gather attitudes involved, history family circumstances. 153. His sources guardian, attempt "adjust," resolve, 308.1(2). Adjustment purely voluntary complaining agrees press further, warning or, referral agency. 308.1 (Practice Commentary). involving felonies permitted approval 308.1(4). adjusted, agency." 6, supra. Rule Civil Procedure 23, actions, 527, Middendorf Henry, 425 1281, 1285, appellants contested certification raise appeal; urge here. occasion Circuit, us. gave cause. Relying is, itself, violation 717 pertinent scholarly fortiori, reliable felt "replete" examples capricious 713. euphemism guilt. detention—to conduct—is indistinguishable post-trial crimes," rational connection purpose, legitimate. 716. concurred separately. convinced conclusions. thought procedurally infirm unbridled uncertain 377. 1982, accounted 7.5 percent 19.9 17.3 combined. Justice, Bureau Investigation, Crime 176-177 ("violent crimes" murder, nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, aggravated assault; burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, arson). "Our recognizes stages emotional growth, intellectual incomplete, systems firmly adopted. "For hold delinquency, so. self-restraint constrain possibility second-offender sentencing, deterrent confronts Perhaps comprehension perspective gamesmanship excitement 'getting away' something inducement pressures. All commonly adults." 687-688, 908-909. Ala.Code 12-15-59 Alaska Stat.Ann. 47.10.140 3, Ariz.Juv.Ct.Rules Proc., Ariz.Rev.Stat.Ann. (Supp.1983-1984 Vol. 17A); Ark.Stat.Ann. 45-421 (Supp.1983); Cal.Welf. & Inst.Code Ann. 628 (West Supp.1984); Colo.Rev.Stat. 19-2-102 Conn.Gen.Stat. 46b-131 (Supp.1984); Del.Fam.Ct.Rule (1981); D.C.Code 16-2310 Fla.Stat. 39.032 Ga.Code 15-11-19 Haw.Rev.Stat. 571-31.1 Idaho Code 16-1811 Ill.Rev.Stat., ch. 37, 703-4 (1983); Ind.Code 31-6-4-5 Iowa 232.22 Kan.Stat.Ann. 38-1632 Ky.Rev.Stat. 208.192 La.Code Juv.Proc.Ann.Art. 1983 Pamphlet); Me.Rev.Stat.Ann., tit. 3203 (1964 Supp.1983-1984); Md.Cts. Jud.Proc.Code 3-815 (1984); Mass.Gen.Laws Ann., Mich.Comp.Laws 712A.15 Minn.Stat. 260.171 Miss.Code 43-23-11 (1972); Mo.Juv.Ct.Rule 111.02 Mont.Code 41-5-305 Neb.Rev.Stat. 43-255 (Supp.1982); Nev.Rev.Stat. 62.140 N.H.Rev.Stat.Ann. 169B:14 N.J.Stat.Ann. 2A:4-56 (Supp.1983-1984); N.M.Stat.Ann. 32-1-24 N.Y. 320.5(3) 1983); N.C.Gen.Stat. 7A-574 N.D.Cent.Code 27-20-14 (1974); Ohio Rev.Code 2151.311 Okla.Stat., Tit. 10, 1107 Ore.Rev.Stat. 419.573 Pa.Cons.Stat. 6325 R.I.Gen.Laws 14-1-20, 14-1-21 S.C.Code 20-7-600 S.D.Codified Laws 26-8-19.2 Tenn.Code 37-1-114 Tex.Fam.Code 53.02 (1975 Utah 78-3a-30 Vt.Stat.Ann., 33, 643 Va.Code 16.1-248 Wash.Rev.Code 13.40.040 W.Va.Code 49-5-8 Wis.Stat. 48.208 (1981-1982); Wyo.Stat. 14-6-206 Office Delinquency Prevention, Standards Administration Report National Advisory Committee 294-296 (July 1980); Uniform 9A U.L.A. Standard Act, Art. IV, proposed Council (1959); W. Sheridan, Legislative Guide Drafting 20(a)(1) (Dept. HEW, Bureau, Pub. No. 472-1969); Courts 62-63 437-1966). Institute Judicial Administration/American Project Relating Interim Status: Release, Control, Accused Offenders Between Arrest Disposition 3.2(B) (Tent. Draft 1977) (detention "reducing inflict bodily others interim"). adjourn 325.1(3). shown. 340.1(3). adjournment. 340.1(4). admits, 18, mingles indiscriminately 320.5(3)(a). concede lawfully Brief Furthermore, handpicked 3-year period. 19a Geraldo Delgado 5, 1976) 35a James Ancrum August 19, 1979). contest representativeness histories. 19. sample, evaluated statistician Appellant 82-1278, pp. 24-25, **. resolve controversy. "harsh solution." picture youngster" tries tailor picture. 279-281. Several throughout country. Amicus Curiae 23; Jersey 8, 11; Youth Law Center 13-14. duplicated national scale, urge, illicitly nationwide, strengthened existence Appeals. 62-75. intimated result ground, 373-374, concurrence, expressly perceived Accordingly, person, chooses silent, 321.1. With consent charge. wishes charge, accepting admission, admission. actually admits. refer adjustment. 320.6. Gerstein, 119-123, 865-868, informal nonadversarial, amount fail single example indicated supplied 124, 868, 25. delay work advantage 320.2(2), prepare. concurrence below, list improvements. suggested changes included: crime; background; proof. suggestions considered. add discussion delimiting respect. third fourth text, 274-275, 2957-2958, (death sentence jury); 9-10, 2104-2105, (grant parole); Morrissey Brewer, 471, 480, 2593, 2599, 484 (1972) (parole revocation). increased "dangerous offender" U.S.C. 3575. Under 3575(f), "dangerous" offender defined [underlying] felony defendant." claim. Davis, 710 108-109 (CA3), cert. 464 1001, 505, 695 Schell, 692 672, 675-676 (CA10 Williamson, 567 610, 613 (CA4 1977); Bowdach, 561 1160, 1175 (CA5 Neary, 552 1184, 1194 (CA7), 864, 197, 139 531 326, 336-337 (CA6), 426 922, 2629, 376 N.Y.Jud.Law 301.2(1), 302.1(1) FCA). aged murder kidnaping, arson, exempted coverage instead prosecuted "juvenile courts. N.Y.Penal 10.00(18), 30.00(2) Supp.1983-1984). sake simplicity, hereinafter generically crimes. Ironically, offenses, Strictly speaking, "guilt" Act; ever ascertained "factfinding hearing." functional equivalent ordinary bears demonstrating 341.2(1), 342.2(2); (1967) (establishing juveniles). convenience, ensuing terminology describing York. portions embodied 739(a). agree reenactment numerical heading 256, 2. arrest, hours, first. admits appearance," option 276. None cited novel reading shaky contention. 315.1, move lacking 311.2, "[a] 332.2." 332.2, turn, instructed "hear pre-trial basis," 332.2(4), rule peremptorily. seems contemplate "supporting affidavits, exhibits memoranda law," 332.2(2), filed sometime expect ruling event 325.1(2). 284, confirms interpretation. lesson foray tangled ought adhere usual relying whenever interpretation acquainted applications. refuses dismissing unrepresentative, 272, focuses lurid weight. uncontested typical. 128 Steven Hiltz, 81/2 Court). selection instances importantly, heavily assessing applied, 695-700, (CA 1982). plaintiff 261, plaintiffs' character analyze try construct version selective acknowledged, defects studies. none distinguishes disable meaningful—albeit rough—generalizations conjoined submitted appellees, 7, text. majority, though chastises failing assemble data, erroneous. figures text summary Review transcripts respectively. Exhibits 6a, 11a, 12a, 14a, 15a, 16a, 19a, 24a, 35a. director services approximately facilities" "non-secure facilities." 703, 8. broken dispute, detention." underlies relate 113-114, 862-863, prolonged construing forbid suspect cause." Stack Boyle, 4-5, 3-4, (1951), importance person's Eighth proscribe setting bail "at figure higher calculated assure 149-150, 2697-2698, 2699, (STEVENS, dissenting). phrase points 538-539, 1873-1874, implicitly so, reliance misplaced. Wolfish exclusively concerned undisputed; instance. 533-534, 1870-1871, employed bearing City. Numerous attested unsavory characteristics. Citizens' Inc., Problems 3-4 J. Stone, R. Ruskin, D. Goff, Inquiry Centers Operated 25-27, 52-54, 79-80 (1971). Conditions successfully (by group inmates type), Martarella Kelley, 359 478 (S.D.N.Y.1973), grim, Mayor's Task Force Spofford: v, viii-ix, 20-21 (June Deputy Mayor Criminal averred "Spofford ways, prison." ¶ (affidavit Herbert Sturz, 29, Aubry, Nature, Scope Significance Pre-Trial Juveniles Black L.J. 160, 164 refined ways. argued "[l]iberty restraint," "recognized core Clause," 2109, (POWELL, dissenting part), muster "compelling" 687, 908 (requiring "compelling uphold 320.5(3)(b)); Shapiro Thompson, 618, 634, 1322, 1331, 600 Alternatively, comparatively permissible warrants lowering bar. Applying needed depends encroaches Williams Illinois, 399 235, 259-260, 262-263, 2018, 2031-2032, 2033, 586 (Harlan, result), important—but quite "compelling"—objective sustain choose options, test. 671-672, 40, 1412-1413, 1414, Chicago, 111, 112, 946, 947, 134 (1969); Thompson Louisville, 199, 624, 629, 654 Sellers 36, 38, 64, (1968) (Black, J.in chambers) (questioning defendant's denial bail). reaching categorical objection objectives. chary Psychiatric Association, Clinical Aspects Violent 27-28 Cocozza Steadman, Failure Predictions Dangerousness: Clear Convincing Evidence, Rutgers L.Rev. 1084, 1094-1101 Diamond, Prediction Dangerousness, U.Pa.L.Rev. 439 Ennis Litwack, Psychiatry Presumption Expertise: Flipping Coins Courtroom, Calif.L.Rev. 693 Schlesinger, Dangerousness Juveniles: Replication, (1978); Steadman Cocozza, Psychiatry, Repetitively Offender, J.Crim.L. C. 226, 229-231 Wenk, Robison, Can Violence Be Predicted?, 393, 401 Detention: Empirical Analysis, Harv.Civ.Rights—Civ.Lib.L.Rev. 289 brushes aside remark contention 'that meaningless.' 278-279 (footnote citation Whatever relies, cf., Barefoot 463 880, 909, 3383, 3401, 1090 (1983) convicted sentence); looser processes abridge persons. Tucker, 443, 446, 589, 591, 592 ("[A] wide impose. [B]efore determination, appropriately broad scope, largely unlimited consider, source come"). enticing monte. 18b. penal 698-699. contrast breadth Columbia Edwards, 1321 (D.C.1981), 1022, 1721, 141 prescribed crime[s]" "crime[s] violence." 23-1322(a)(1), (2) past. Baldasar 446 222, 231, 1585, 1589, 169 dissenting) ("No confidence defendant recidivist"). By contrast, ordering "substantial probability" 23-1322(b)(2)(C) inference. explanation application. Release (before trial) factor: conceivable crime-prone imprisoned public. 130-134 (describing effects preparation presentation defense); Barker Wingo, 514, 533, 2182, 2193, Bitter 389 16-17, (per curiam); 5; Miller, Detention—A Eradication Rights, How.L.J. Tribe, Ounce World John Mitchell, Va.L.Rev. 371, 381 ("[Under General,] imprisonment. No tenable concept condone accused's liberty"). Some E.g., 9-14. unavoidably (because persons, 293-294), feasibility constitutionality. exceeds ours, span impossible." 29. dismisses 373, "mistaken." 280. confident point. suspended whole, 907-908, willing cites securing corpus. detention—a patent remedy glaring effectively exacerbated judges, 297-298, ascertaining transcript Ramon Ramos, # 1356/80, Heller presiding, 42, p. 11: "This business get guns, completely proportion. jungle. jungle, youths know going pay penalty. "As just state[d] am remand[ing] "reasons" 276, meaningfully 713: "Whether advised obedient son home, parole, disclose unusual discount remand minute evaluation." Addington 418, 431433, 1804, 18121813, 323 ("clear convincing" commitment mental hospital). 320.5(3)(b): limits ., evaluation accused[,] [and] type believes released." my reach, Part IIB, flaws. Certainly, narrowing lines sketched Parson's unique. Juan Santiago Daniel Nelson, somewhat duration, nearly undiscriminating. 13a, 22a. 708: variety reasons—as remand, device, charge[,] others" (citations

Category: 1