Grades

Kent v. United States (1966)

Facts: According to the facts of this case, Morris Kent was accused of committing the crimes of break-ins, robbery and rape in the District of Columbus. Although, on probation at the time of these crimes and after seven hours of interrogations Kent confessed to the crimes and without a hearing or formal notice, Kent’s case was transferred to the criminal court. He was convicted by a jury for robbery and housebreaking and was sentenced to serve thirty to ninety years in prison.

Issue: The issued of matter was; why did the juridical court issue a waiver from juvenile court to adult court without giving Kent due process.

Decision: This case was giving to the United States Supreme Court and it was reviewed by the operation of the juveniles.

Reasoning: The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Kent’s because he was entitled to representation by an attorney; to a meaningful hearing, even if informal, to access to any social reports, records, reports of probation, and so on, that would be consider by the Court in deciding the waiver; and to be apprised of the reasons for the waiver decision. The U.S. Supreme Court also took a look at juvenile courts process and procedures, subsequent cases like Gault, McKeiver, and Winship.

Dissenting: The Court noted that, even though a hearing to consider transfer to adult court is less formal than a trial; juveniles are still entitled to some due process protections.

Analysis: In its decision, the Court made numerous references to the need for due process protections, stating that in a juvenile court a child may receive “the worst of both world: that he/she gets neither the protections afforded to adults nor the solicitous care and regenerative treatment postulated for children.” A majority of the Supreme Court justices held that proof beyond a reasonable doubt was an essential element of due process in delinquency cases. The Court indicated that to allow a lesser standard would not only harm the...