In re Gault

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In re Gault

Argued December 16, 1966
Decided May 15, 1967

Full case name:	In re Gault et al.

Citations:	387 U.S. 1
Prior history:	Appeal from the Supreme Court of Arizona

Holding

Juveniles tried for crimes in delinquency proceedings should have the right of due process protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.

Court membership

Chief Justice: Earl Warren
Associate Justices: Hugo Black, William O. Douglas, Tom C. Clark, John Marshall Harlan II, William J. Brennan, Jr., Potter Stewart, Byron White, Abe Fortas

Case opinions

Majority by: Fortas
Joined by: Warren, Douglas, Clark, Brennan
Concurrence by: Black
Concurrence by: White
Concurrence/dissent by: Harlan
Dissent by: Stewart

Laws applied

U.S. Const. Amend. XIV

In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967) was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision which established that under the Fourteenth Amendment, juveniles accused of crimes in a delinquency proceeding must be accorded many of the same due process rights as adults such as the right to timely notification of charges, the right to confront witnesses, the right against self-incrimination, and the right to counsel. The court's opinion was written by Justice Abe Fortas, a noted proponent of children's rights.

[edit] Case Background

The mother of Bryant resident Gerald Francis Gault, aged 15, returned home one day to find him missing and sent his older brother to look for him. The brother discovered that Gerald had been taken into custody by the local police, following a complaint by a neighbor named Mrs. Cook that someone, whom they believed was Gerald and his friend, had made obscene and threatening phone calls.

Under the juvenile code at that time, Gault was not entitled to certain constitutional rights, such as the right to be informed of the charges, right to counsel, right to confront and cross-examine witnesses, and protection against self-incrimination.

Gault had a previous juvenile record of being in the company of another teen who stole a wallet from a woman's purse. Solely on the basis of that record, he was found a delinquent by the juvenile court and committed to the state industrial school until he reached the age of 21. However, had Gault been 18 or older and committed the same offense, he would have only faced a fine of between $5.00 and $50.00 or a maximum of two months jail time.

His parents petitioned for his release in the Arizona Supreme Court because Gault had no right to appeal under Arizona law. The constitutional questions presented in this case included whether the juvenile code violated the Fourteenth Amendment protection of due process, and whether minors enjoyed the same rights as adults in judicial procedure.

[edit] Decision

In an 8-1 decision the Supreme Court ruled that Gault’s commitment to the State Industrial School "was a clear violation of his 14th Amendment due process rights, since he had been denied the right to legal counsel, had not been formally notified of the charges against him, had not been informed of his right against self-incrimination (remain silent), had no opportunity to confront his accusers and had been given no right to appeal his sentence to a higher court." Justice Potter Stewart was the sole dissenter. He argued that the purpose of juvenile court was correction, not punishment, and the constitutional procedural safeguards for criminal trials should not apply to such juvenile trials.

[edit] See also

List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 387

As part of the "Children Under the Constitution" episode of the "We the People Stories" Podcast from the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia, dated January 1st, 2008, this case was discussed at length and Gerald Francis Gault was interviewed as part of a panel discussion. http://www.constitutioncenter.org/Misc/Pages/Podcast.shtml