DOCSLIB.ORG

Training & Resource Manual for Juvenile Defense Attorneys

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Training & Resource Manual for Juvenile Defense Attorneys Training & Resource Manual for Juvenile Defense Attorneys A Guide for Representing Children in South Carolina’s Family Courts 2014 EDITION CHILDREN’S LAW CENTER UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA SCHOOL OF LAW TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………....... 1 Basics of Juvenile Court ………………………………………………………….……….. 3 . Definition of “Child” ……………………………………………………….……….. 5 . Case Flow Chart ………………………………………………………….……..… 6 . Family Court Process for Children Charged with Offenses …..…….………… 7 . Intake ………………………………………………………………………….……. 15 . Notice & Service of Summons ……………………………………….….…..…… 16 . Prosecution ………………………………………………………….…………….. 17 . Indigent Defense ………………………………………………………………..... 19 . Rules for Conduct of Hearings ………………………………………………..… 20 . Checklist of Important Issues to Consider ……………………………….……. 21 Role & Duties of Juvenile Defense Counsel………………………………….….…. 23 . Role and Duties Overview……………………………………………………….. 24 . SCCID Performance Standards for Indigent Defense in Juvenile Cases…… 25 . Basic Steps of Representation Prior to the Adjudicatory Hearing………….... 31 . Attorney-Client Communications…..…………………………………………..… 33 . Preparing Your Client for the Courtroom……………….………………………. 36 Discovery …………………………………………………………..…………………………. 37 . Discovery and Disclosure of Evidence ………………………..……………….. 38 . Disclosure in Criminal Cases (Rule 5, SCRCrimP) …………….…………….. 40 Jurisdiction & Venue ………………………………………………………………………. 43 Custody & Pre-trial Detention ………………………………………………….……….. 47 . Detention Overview ……………………………………………………………….. 48 . Detention Hearing …………………………………………………………………. 51 . Detention Statutes (§§ 63-19-820, 830) ...…………….………………………... 53 Waiver Transfer of Jurisdiction ……………………………………………………….. 57 / . Waiver Overview …………………………………………………………………... 58 . Waiver Chart ……………………………………………………………………….. 61 . The Eight Determinative Factors of Kent v. U.S. ………………………………. 62 . Waiver Statute (§ 63-19-1210) ……………….………………………………….. 63 Adjudication ………………………………………………………………………………….. 65 . Adjudicatory Hearing ……………………………………………………………… 67 . Guilty Plea ………………………………………………………………………….. 69 Disposition. ……………………..……………………………………………………………. 73 . Disposition Planning and Advocacy …………………………………………….. 75 . Effective Use of Predisposition Evaluation Reports ………………………….. 81 . Dispositional Hearing …………………………………………………………….. 90 . Dispositional Powers of the Court Statutes (§§ 63-19-1410 to 1450) .……... 92 Appeals …………………………………………………………………………………...…... 99 . Juvenile Appeals Overview…………………………………………….…..…..... 100 i . Appellate Practice from the Court’s Perspective ……………………………… 102 . Juvenile Appeal Checklist …………………………………………………..…… 104 . Notice of Appeal (Rule 203, SCACR) ………………………………………….. 105 Parole …………….……………………………..…………………………………………… 107 . Parole Overview………………………………………………………………….. 108 . Parole Guidelines ………………………………………………………………… 109 . Parole Statutes (§§ 63-19-610, 1810 to 1870) ………………….…..……… 113 DJJ Policies & Procedures ……………………………………………………………... 117 . Agency Overview ………………………………………………………………… 118 . Detention and Evaluation Centers ……………………………………………... 120 . Long-term Campuses ………………………………………………………….… 122 . Transfer to Department of Corrections ………………………………………… 122 . DMH Seriously Mentally Ill Status ……………………………………………… 123 . DDSN Seriously Intellectually Disabled Status ……………………………….. 134 Juvenile Records ………………………………………………………………………..… 143 . Records Overview ……………………………………………………….………. 144 . Juvenile Records Statutes (§ 63-19-2010 to 2040) ………………………….. 147 . Expungement of Juvenile Records ………………………………………..…… 152 . Expungement Statute (§ 63-19-2050) ……………………………………..….. 154 Competency ……………………………………………………………………………….... 155 . Adjudicative Competence .…………………………………………………........ 156 . Competency Case Law …………………………..……………………………… 162 . Fitness to Stand Trial Statutes (§§ 44-23-410 to 460) ………………….……. 163 . Judicial Commitment Statutes (§§ 44-24-90 to 150) …………………………. 166 Mental Health Issues ……………………………………………………………………… 169 . MacArthur Foundation’s Juvenile Court Training Curriculum ………………… 170 . DMH Interagency Initiatives …………………………………………..…………. 171 . Quick Reference Guide to Common Disorders …………………….………..… 173 . Differences Between Intellectual Disability and Mental Illness ………………. 183 Juvenile Confessions …………………………………………………………………..…. 185 . Juvenile Confessions Overview……. ………………………………………..….. 186 . In re Williams…………………………………………………………………..…… 190 Interstate Compact for Juveniles ………………………………………………….…… 193 Media Issues ……………………………………………………………………………..…… 197 . Media Overview …………………………………………….……….……..……… 198 . Ex parte Columbia Newspapers …………………………………….………..…. 199 . Ex parte the Island Packet ……………………………………………….………. 200 Landmark Juvenile Cases ………………………………………………………………… 203 Agencies and Organizations Serving Children ………………………………….…. 205 Juvenile Justice Websites ……………………………………………………………..… . 209 Recommended Resources for Juvenile Defenders ………………………………… 212 ii INTRODUCTION The purpose of the Training and Resource Manual for Juvenile Defenders is to provide juvenile defense attorneys with a comprehensive overview of the juvenile justice system and the legal and collateral issues that arise in juvenile delinquency proceedings in South Carolina’s family courts. The information presented in the Manual is intended for educational and informational purposes only. It is not intended to provide legal advice or legal opinion on any specific issue. Readers should not rely on this guide as a primary source of legal authority, but should consult official versions of South Carolina statutes, rules, and cases prior to making decisions or taking action in legal proceedings. Citations to South Carolina statutes and cases used throughout this guide are formatted as concisely as possible, and therefore, are not necessarily appropriate for formal citations in pleadings and papers filed with the family court. South Carolina statutes are cited as § __-__-__ (e.g., § 63-3-651 instead of S.C. Code Ann. § 63-3-651 (2010)). All S.E.2d cases referred to are South Carolina cases unless otherwise noted. When full statutes are included, emphasis has been added (with bold or underlined font) to some of the statutory language to draw attention to important details or recent changes in the laws. The materials contained in this manual are as complete and current as possible as of the date of publication, but laws and policies are subject to change at any time without notice. While I have made every attempt to ensure accuracy, errors are inevitable. I would like to be notified of any errors detected so that I can make corrections as needed in future updates. If you have any questions concerning information contained in the Manual, or to report errors or suggestions for future updates, please contact me at the Children’s Law Center at 803-777-1646. Blanche Quinn Richey Resource Attorney Children’s Law Center University of South Carolina School of Law - Updated January 2014 - 1 THE CHILDREN’S LAW CENTER The Children’s Law Center, University of South Carolina School of Law was founded in 1995 and serves as a resource center for judges, attorneys, and other professionals involved in juvenile justice or child maltreatment cases in South Carolina. The overall purpose of the Children’s Law Center is to improve the administration of justice in these cases, by enhancing the knowledge and skills of practitioners of all disciplines. The Children’s Law Center provides a full array of training, technical assistance, resource materials, and research activities addressing a broad spectrum of law and court-related topics affecting children involved in court proceedings in South Carolina. Children’s Law Center 1600 Hampton Street, Suite 502 Columbia, SC 29208 Phone: (803) 777-1646 Fax: (803) 777-8686 http://childlaw.sc.edu 2 Basics of Juvenile Court 3 4 DEFINITION OF “CHILD” While the legal age of majority in South Carolina is 18 years of age under § 63-7-20(3), for purposes of the juvenile justice system, “child” or “juvenile” is defined by § 63-19-20(1) of the Juvenile Justice Code as follows: "Child" or “juvenile” means a person less than 17 years of age. "Child" or “juvenile” does not mean a person 16 or older who is charged with a Class A, B, C or D felony or a felony which provides for a maximum term of imprisonment of 15 years or more. However, a 16-year-old charged with a Class A, B, C or D felony or a felony which provides for a maximum term of imprisonment of 15 years or more may be remanded to the family court for disposition of the charge at the solicitor’s discretion. Note: § 63-19-20(1) also states that “[a]n additional or accompanying charge associated with the charges contained in this item must be heard by the court with jurisdiction over the offenses contained in this item.” (E.g., If a 16-year-old is charged with burglary in the first degree and petit larceny arising out of the same circumstance, both charges should be heard in general sessions court.) 5 CASE FLOW CHART COMPLAINT Citizen, Law Enforcement INIVESTIGATION BY LAW TAKING INTO CUSTODY (by law enforcement) After being taken into custody, child is either released to ENFORCEMENT parent/responsible adult or detained by law enforcement. INTAKE DIVERSION DETENTION HEARING Only if detained. Must be held within 48 PETITION FILED hours, excluding weekends and holidays. Motion may be made to waive eligible child FIRST COURT APPEARANCE to adult court. PRE-WAIVER EVALUATION ADJUDICATION Court finds whether the WAIVER HEARING allegations in the petition Court considers waiver of DISMISSAL are true beyond a child to adult court.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Achieving Fundamental Fairness for Oklahoma's Juveniles: the Role for Competency in Juvenile Proceedings
    Oklahoma Law Review Volume 65 Number 1 2012 Achieving Fundamental Fairness for Oklahoma's Juveniles: The Role for Competency in Juvenile Proceedings Mary Sue Backus University of Oklahoma College of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/olr Part of the Courts Commons, Fourteenth Amendment Commons, and the Juvenile Law Commons Recommended Citation Mary Sue Backus, Achieving Fundamental Fairness for Oklahoma's Juveniles: The Role for Competency in Juvenile Proceedings, 65 OKLA. L. REV. 41 (2012), https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/olr/vol65/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Oklahoma Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ACHIEVING FUNDAMENTAL FAIRNESS FOR OKLAHOMA’S JUVENILES: THE ROLE FOR COMPETENCY IN JUVENILE PROCEEDINGS MARY SUE BACKUS* Introduction As a matter of due process under the Fourteenth Amendment, a criminal defendant has a constitutional right to be competent to stand trial.1 In fact, at all stages of the criminal justice process a defendant must be able to understand the proceedings and be capable of consulting with and assisting his lawyer with his defense.2 Although the United States Supreme Court has held that the Due Process Clause requires that criminal defendants must be competent, the Court has never addressed whether that competency
    [Show full text]
  • Juvenile Competency Statutes: a Model for State Legislation
    Juvenile Competency Statutes: A Model for State Legislation KELLiE M. JOHNSON* "Many things can wait; the child cannot. Now is the time his bones are being formed, his mind is being developed. To him, we cannot say tomorrow; his name is today."' INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................1068 I. JUVENILE JUSTICE IN AMERICA: ORIGINS AND TRANSFORMATIONS ............1069 A. A Targeted History of the Juvenile Justice System ...........................1069 B. Transformationof the Juvenile Justice System: In re Gault and Subsequent Legislation............................................ 1070 II. THE ADULT COMPETENCY RIGHT ...............................................................1072 III. JUVENILE COMPETENCY AND THE NEED FOR STATUTORY DEFINITION .......1074 A. Supreme Court Ambiguity and State Power..................................... 1074 B. The Need for State Juvenile Competency Statutes............................ 1075 C. An Example of the Problem: Indiana'sResponse to Juvenile Competency ........................................................................1076 IV. THE ROLE OF DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY AND BIOLOGICAL RESEARCH ......................................................................1077 A. Developmental Psychology and Juvenile Competency ....................1077 B. NIMH Study on Juvenile Biological Brain Development .................1080 V. CURRENT STATE STATUTES AS A GUIDE FOR FUTURE JUVENILE COMPETENCY LEGISLATION ........................................................1081
    [Show full text]
  • Incompetent but Deportable: the Case for a Right to Mental Competence in Removal Proceedings, 65 Hastings L.J
    Hastings Law Journal Volume 65 | Issue 4 Article 1 5-2014 Incompetent but Deportable: The aC se for a Right to Mental Competence in Removal Proceedings Fatma E. Marouf Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_law_journal Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Fatma E. Marouf, Incompetent but Deportable: The Case for a Right to Mental Competence in Removal Proceedings, 65 Hastings L.J. 929 (2014). Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_law_journal/vol65/iss4/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hastings Law Journal by an authorized editor of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. MAROUF_19 (M. Stevens) (Do Not Delete) 5/26/2014 10:54 AM Articles Incompetent but Deportable: The Case for a Right to Mental Competence in Removal Proceedings Fatma E. Marouf* Important strides are currently being made toward increasing procedural due process protections for noncitizens with serious mental disabilities in removal proceedings, such as providing them with competency hearings and appointed counsel. This Article goes even further, arguing that courts should recognize a substantive due process right to competence in removal proceedings, which would prevent those found mentally incompetent from being deported. Recognizing a right to competence in a quasi-criminal proceeding such as removal would not be unprecedented, as most states already recognize this right in juvenile adjudication proceedings. The Article demonstrates that the same reasons underlying the prohibition against trial of incompetent defendants apply to removal proceedings. Competence is necessary to protect the fairness and accuracy of the proceedings, safeguard statutory and constitutional rights, uphold the prohibition against in absentia hearings, and preserve the moral dignity of the process.
    [Show full text]
  • Developmental Incompetence, Due Process, and Juvenile Justice Policy Elizabeth S
    NORTH CAROLINA LAW REVIEW Volume 83 | Number 4 Article 2 5-1-2005 Developmental Incompetence, Due Process, and Juvenile Justice Policy Elizabeth S. Scott Thomas Grisso Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.unc.edu/nclr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Elizabeth S. Scott & Thomas Grisso, Developmental Incompetence, Due Process, and Juvenile Justice Policy, 83 N.C. L. Rev. 793 (2005). Available at: http://scholarship.law.unc.edu/nclr/vol83/iss4/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Carolina Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in North Carolina Law Review by an authorized administrator of Carolina Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DEVELOPMENTAL INCOMPETENCE, DUE PROCESS, AND JUVENILE JUSTICE POLICY ELIZABETH S. ScoTT" & THOMAS GRISSO* INTRO D U CTION ....................................................................................... 794 1. APPLYING THE TRIAL COMPETENCE REQUIREMENT TO JUVENILES: A DOCTRINAL HISTORY ...................................... 799 A. The Legal and ConstitutionalRequirements of Competence To Stand Trial ................................................. 799 B. Trial Competence of Juveniles............................................. 800 1. The Incorporation of the Competence Requirement in Delinquency Proceedings .................. 800 2. The Criminal Adjudication of Youths ......................... 804 C. The PunitiveJuvenile Justice Reforms ...............................
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix to Petition for Writ of Certiorari
    CAPITAL CASE No. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES WALTER BARTON Petitioner v. WILLIAM STANGE Respondent On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit APPENDIX TO PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI FREDERICK A. DUCHARDT, JR. COUNSEL OF RECORD Mo.Bar Enrollment Number 28868 P.O. Box 216 Trimble MO 64492 Phone: 816-213-0782 Fax: 816-635-5155 e-mail: [email protected] ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER TABLE OF CONTENTS Appendix A-5/15/20 District Court Order ......................................................... 3-10 Appendix B-5/17/20 Eighth Circuit Judgment ................................................ 11-18 Appendix C-4/27/20 Missouri Supreme Court Judgment ................................ 18-30 Appendix D-District Court judgment in case #14-8001 .................................. 31-74 Appendix E-Eighth Circuit Judgment re case #14-8001 .................................. 75-76 Appendix F-Report by Dr. Patricia Zapf, Ph.D. .............................................. 77-92 Appendix G-2/18/20 Order Setting Execution Date .......................................93-100 Appendix H-Lawrence Renner Affidavit .....................................................101-107 Appendix I-Affidavit of Juror Ashleigh Bauernfeind ................................... 108-110 Appendix J-Affidavit of Jury Foreperson Paul Bartlett ................................ 111-113 Appendix K-Affidavit of Juror Edwin Anderson..........................................114-116 Appendix L-Affidavit of Cindy Malone about
    [Show full text]
  • Involuntary Competence in United States Criminal Law
    University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law 2-23-2017 Involuntary Competence in United States Criminal Law Stephen J. Morse University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Behavioral Neurobiology Commons, Chemical Actions and Uses Commons, Courts Commons, Criminal Law Commons, Law and Psychology Commons, Litigation Commons, Medical Jurisprudence Commons, Mental Disorders Commons, Psychiatric and Mental Health Commons, and the Public Law and Legal Theory Commons Repository Citation Morse, Stephen J., "Involuntary Competence in United States Criminal Law" (2017). Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law. 1747. https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship/1747 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law by an authorized administrator of Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Involuntary Competence in United States Criminal Law Stephen J. Morse* 1. Introduction This chapter addresses whether in the United States the state has the right to forcibly medicate an incompetent defendant or prisoner to restore competence, including competence to stand trial, competence to plead guilty and to waive trial rights, competence to represent himself, and competence to be sentenced.1 Other legal systems may treat this as primarily a mental health law question addressed best by mental health laws, but in the United States, it is a criminal law question although some courts are very deferential to the judgment of mental health professionals.
    [Show full text]
  • Developmental Incompetence, Due Process, and Juvenile Justice Policy
    Columbia Law School Scholarship Archive Faculty Scholarship Faculty Publications 2005 Developmental Incompetence, Due Process, and Juvenile Justice Policy Elizabeth S. Scott Columbia Law School, [email protected] Thomas Grisso Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminal Procedure Commons, Juvenile Law Commons, Law and Psychology Commons, and the Science and Technology Law Commons Recommended Citation Elizabeth S. Scott & Thomas Grisso, Developmental Incompetence, Due Process, and Juvenile Justice Policy, 83 N. C. L. REV. 793 (2005). Available at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/331 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Publications at Scholarship Archive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Scholarship Archive. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DEVELOPMENTAL INCOMPETENCE, DUE PROCESS, AND JUVENILE JUSTICE POLICY ELIZABETH S. ScoTT" & THOMAS GRISSO* INTRO D U CTION ....................................................................................... 794 1. APPLYING THE TRIAL COMPETENCE REQUIREMENT TO JUVENILES: A DOCTRINAL HISTORY ...................................... 799 A. The Legal and ConstitutionalRequirements of Competence To Stand Trial ................................................. 799 B. Trial Competence of Juveniles............................................. 800 1. The Incorporation
    [Show full text]
  • Quick Reference Guide to Juvenile Court in South Carolina
    Children’s Law Center University of South Carolina School of Law Quick Reference Guide to Juvenile Court in South Carolina An Overview of Juvenile Delinquency Proceedings & Related Issues for Family Court Judges and Attorneys 2019 Edition THE CHILDREN’S LAW CENTER The Children’s Law Center, University of South Carolina School of Law was founded in 1995 and serves as a resource center for judges, attorneys, and other professionals involved in juvenile justice or child maltreatment cases in South Carolina. The overall purpose of the Children’s Law Center is to improve the administration of justice in these cases, by enhancing the knowledge and skills of practitioners of all disciplines. The Children’s Law Center provides a full array of training, technical assistance, resource materials, and research activities addressing a broad spectrum of law and court-related topics affecting children involved in court proceedings in South Carolina. 1600 Hampton Street, Suite 502 Columbia, SC 29208 (803) 777-1646 http://childlaw.sc.edu TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1 Case Flow Chart ............................................................................................................... 2 Basics of Juvenile Court.................................................................................................... 3 ▪ Definition of “Child” .........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Quick Reference Guide to the Juvenile Justice System in South Carolina
    Children’s Law Center University of South Carolina School of Law Training & Resource Manual for Juvenile Defense Attorneys A Guide for Representing Children in South Carolina’s Family Courts 2019 Edition THE CHILDREN’S LAW CENTER The Children’s Law Center, University of South Carolina School of Law was founded in 1995 and serves as a resource center for judges, attorneys, and other professionals involved in juvenile justice or child maltreatment cases in South Carolina. The overall purpose of the Children’s Law Center is to improve the administration of justice in these cases, by enhancing the knowledge and skills of practitioners of all disciplines. The Children’s Law Center provides a full array of training, technical assistance, resource materials, and research activities addressing a broad spectrum of law and court-related topics affecting children involved in court proceedings in South Carolina. 803.777.1646 http://childlaw.sc.edu TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1 Case Flow Chart ............................................................................................................... 2 Basics of Juvenile Court.................................................................................................... 3 ▪ Definition of “Child” .......................................................................................... 3 ▪ Family Court Process for Children Charged with Offenses ............................
    [Show full text]