NCJ Number
14578
Journal
Wisconsin Law Review Volume: 1973 Issue: 3 Dated: (1973) Pages: 954-962
Date Published
1973
Length
9 pages
Annotation
DISCUSSION OF A 1972 WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT CASE WHICH HELD THAT DUE PROCESS EXTENDS TO JUVENILES THE RIGHT TO A HEARING, TO COUNSEL, AND TO OTHER PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS WHEN THREATENED WITH A REVOCATION OF PAROLE.
Abstract
IN 'STATE EX REL. BERNAL V. HERSHMAN, THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT CONSIDERED THE DUE PROCESS REQUIREMENTS THAT MUST BE AFFORDED JUVENILES WHEN 'LIBERTY UNDER SUPERVISION', THE FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENT OF PAROLE OR RELEASE FROM INSTITUTIONAL CARE, IS REVOKED. THE MAJORITY REASONED THAT SINCE IN WISCONSIN ADULTS HAVE THE RIGHT TO A PAROLE REVOCATION HEARING AND TO COUNSEL, JUVENILES SHOULD ENJOY THESE SAME RIGHTS. THE DISSENT, HOWEVER, BELIEVED THESE CONSTITUTIONAL SAFEGUARDS TO BE IN CONFLICT WITH THE PRINCIPLES OF WISCONSIN JUVENILE LAW AND OBJECTED TO THE LACK OF JUDICIAL AUTHORITY FOR THE BROAD DECISION BY THE MAJORITY. THE AUTHOR OF THE NOTE, WHILE AGREEING WITH THE MAJORITY RESULT, FINDS THE LACK OF AUTHORITY A DEFECT IN THE MAJORITY OPINION. HE PRESENTS U.S. SUPREME COURT AND STATE CASE LAW WHICH SUPPORTS THE MAJORITY DECISION, AND ARGUES THAT THE QUESTION IS NOT WHETHER THE MAJORITY HOLDING CONFLICTS WITH WISCONSIN JUVENILE LAW AS THE DISSENT SUGGESTS, BUT RATHER WHETHER THAT LAW CONFLICTS WITH CONSTITUTIONAL DUE PROCESS REQUIREMENTS. THE AUTHOR RECOGNIZES THAT THE U.S. SUPREME COURT HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE ISSUE OF A JUVENILE'S RIGHTS AT POST-ADJUDICATORY PROCEEDINGS. HE NOTES, HOWEVER, THAT COURT HAS CONSISTENTLY EXPRESSED ITS CONCERN FOR ACCURATE FACT FINDING, ESPECIALLY WHEN A CHILD'S LIBERTY IS AT STAKE, AND THAT STATE COURTS IN NEW YORK AND FLORIDA HAVE EXTENDED DUE PROCESS TO THIS POSTADJUDICATION PROCEDURE.