|
Abstract
| Argument: |
Friday, December 16, 1966
|
| Decision: |
Monday, May 15, 1967 |
| Issues: |
Civil Rights, Juveniles |
| Categories: |
children, criminal, due process, juveniles, right to confront witnesses, right to counsel, self-incrimination |
|
Advocates
| Norman Dorsen |
(Argued the cause for the appellants) |
| Merritt W. Green |
(Argued the cause for the Ohio Association of Juvenile Court Judges, as amicus curiae, urging affirmance) |
| Frank A. Parks |
(Argued the cause for the appellee, pro hac vice, by special leave of the Court) |
|
Facts of the Case
Gerald Francis Gault, fifteen years old, was taken into custody for allegedly making an obscene phone call. Gault had previously been placed on probation. The police did not leave notice with Gault's parents, who were at work, when the youth was arrested. After proceedings before a juvenile court judge, Gault was committed to the State Industrial School until he reached the age of 21.
Question
Were the procedures used to commit Gault constitutionally legitimate under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
Conclusion
No. The proceedings of the Juvenile Court failed to comply with the Constitution. The Court held that the proceedings for juveniles had to comply with the requirements of the Fourteenth Amendment. These requirements included adequate notice of charges, notification of both the parents and the child of the juvenile's right to counsel, opportunity for confrontation and cross-examination at the hearings, and adequate safeguards against self-incrimination. The Court found that the procedures used in Gault's case met none of these requirements.
