« Ind. Courts - "$13.65M courthouse renovation project nearing completion" | Main | Environment - Jim Rogers, A Green Coal Baron? »

Sunday, June 22, 2008

Courts - The Supreme Court of Kansas has ruled that juvenile defendants have a right to trial by jury

From the June 21 Kansas City Star, reported by David Klepper and Diane Carroll:

TOPEKA | In a decision affecting every juvenile criminal case in Kansas, the state Supreme Court has guaranteed juvenile defendants the right to a trial before a jury.

The court ruled Friday that young defendants should be afforded the protections of a jury because the distinctions between juvenile and adult justice have eroded over the past 20 years as lawmakers cracked down on juvenile crime.

The decision sent a shock wave through the juvenile justice community. Prosecutors and judges said the likely result is more juries, longer trials and higher expenses.

“This is huge,” said state Sen. Phil Journey, a Haysville Republican.

But Journey, a criminal defense attorney, said the ruling is justified.

“You cannot impose adult penalties on little children without giving them adult due process,” he said.

Previously in Kansas, it was up to judges to decide whether to grant a juvenile defendant’s request for a jury trial. Most states, including Missouri, do not offer the option in juvenile cases.

The rare use of jury trials is a hallmark of the juvenile justice system, which was set up a century ago to treat younger offenders more gently and encourage confidentiality and rehabilitation.

Teens charged with the most serious crimes often are tried as adults. Friday’s decision affects those who remain in the juvenile system. It applies to current cases, even those under appeal, and future ones. * * *

Kansas now joins a small list of states that make jury trials a right for any defendant. It’s a list other states should join, according to Jessica Feierman, an attorney at the Juvenile Law Center, a Philadelphia-based group that supported the Finney County boy’s appeal.

Ten states: Alaska, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, West Virginia, and Wyoming -- provide jury trials for allegedly delinquent juveniles as a matter of state law, according to page 7 of a brief filed in the Kansas case by the Juvenile Law Center.

Here is the Kansas Supreme Court's opinion in the case, In the Matter of L.M. The decision appears to turn on the wording of Sec. 10 of the Kansas Bill of Rights:

§ 10. "In all prosecutions, the accused shall be allowed to appear and defend in person, or by counsel; to demand the nature and cause of the accusation against him; to meet the witness face to face, and to have compulsory process to compel the attendance of the witnesses in his behalf, and a speedy public trial by an impartial jury of the county or district in which the offense is alleged to have been committed. No person shall be a witness against himself, or be twice put in jeopardy for the same offense." (Emphasis by Court.)

The plain language of §10 extends the right to a jury trial to "all prosecutions." This court has previously interpreted the phrase "all prosecutions" to "mean all criminal prosecutions for violations of the laws of the state." State, ex rel. Mayer v. Pinkerton, 185 Kan. 68, 69, 340 P.2d 393 (1959) (denying a jury trial in a bastardy proceeding). In 1883, this court addressed the question of whether §10 applied to a charge of maintaining a nuisance, i.e., a hog pen. In re Rolfs, Petitioner, 30 Kan. 758, 1 Pac. 523 (1883). In concluding that the defendant was entitled to a trial by jury, this court stated:

"So long, therefore, as the fundamental law contains the guaranty which it does, I think no party can be subjected to a prosecution for an act of a criminal nature, whether that prosecution be brought by the state directly or any corporation created by the state, without in some way and before some tribunal being secured an opportunity of having the truth of that charge inquired into by an impartial jury of the district.

"A distinction should be noticed here. A prosecution which involves nothing of a criminal nature, as for instance, where one is charged with acting as an auctioneer, without a license, in violation of a city ordinance, (such an ordinance being a mere municipal regulation,) is not a criminal offense in the true legal sense of the term. As to such proceedings, the constitutional guaranty may not be applicable; but where the charge is of an act like the one at bar, criminal at common law, criminal in its nature, and an offense against the public, the constitutional guaranty is applicable and cannot be ignored or disregarded." 30 Kan. at 763.

What about Indiana? Indiana's Bill of Rights, at Section 13(a), provides:
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall have the right to a public trial, by an impartial jury, in the county in which the offense shall have been committed; to be heard by himself and counsel; to demand the nature and cause of the accusation against him, and to have a copy thereof; to meet the witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on June 22, 2008 10:44 AM
Posted to Courts in general