Punishment and SentencingEssay Preview: Punishment and SentencingReport this essayPunishment and SentencingCJA/224Punishment and Sentencing 2Punishment and SentencingIntroductionIn my paper I will talk about the juvenile punishment philosophies, How juvenile courts and adult courts are different from one another, and the sentencing that adults and juveniles get. It is amazing how so many things can affect a juvenile and the crimes that they commit on how they will be sentenced or what their punishment will be. As you read from my paper you will read how juveniles get arrested, how adults are arrested. You will also read about how they get tried between an adult court and a juvenile court. You will also find some interesting facts about the two of them and how they are different from one another. You will also read about how juveniles are sentenced by the crime that they commit. You will also learn that sometimes a juvenile will get tried as adult and face an adult court system for committing a more serious crime like murder or rape you will read all of this in my paper,
Juvenile Punishment PhilosophiesWhen a juvenile get arrested they are sometimes labeled as being responsible for a criminal conduct or sometimes they are consider a status offender. When you have a child that is under the age of 18 years old they are then consider to be a juvenile. When a juvenile breaks the law when it isnt a traffic violation, truancy, or their curfew, runaways than the acts that they commit are then consider being a delinquent conduct. When a juvenile offender decides to break the law their cases will than end up being held at a juvenile court(C Law 2010). But with each different state they will vary on what the minimum age should be to be able to hold them as a juvenile and end up making them criminally responsible and that all depends on what the nature of the crime is and then you have the state and federal laws that come into the situation and what will end up being the punishment that the offender will end up getting for the crime that they committed.
But with some states you have where they can up being able to prosecute any ages some have been even the age of six years old and have gotten prosecuted, but you also have some federal agencies
Punishment and Sentencing 3where they decide to set an age limit and some of the ages that they start with are the age of 10 years old. But you have some juveniles that they must be able to understand or comprehend the criminal responsibility and understand the crime that they have committed. You also have the status and the laws that are pertinent to that of the arrest of the juvenile and the adult offenders are also similar in a way, but there are some exceptions. You also then have the family code and that follows under the code that we call the penal code, and when a juvenile goes to court their proceedings are held separate from that of an adult court system, that are set forth to protect the rights. Also you then have the fact that juveniles are placed in separate facilities from that of the adult offenders who are placed in jail or prisons or on house arrest. They put them in different facilities to help protect the juveniles in the fact that the adult offenders might influence the juveniles in doing more violate crimes or to continue to do crimes that they are already doing. You also have some of the states that give a juvenile the right to waive their rights prior to them giving their statement to the police, but for this to happen it has to happen in front of their guardian(C Law 2010).
Law enforcement officers have the right to be able to detain or being able to arrest a juvenile offenders for any criminal act like a misdemeanor or even for felony offenses. But adults have to be able to be witnessed by someone to be able to get arrested for the crime, but with juveniles they dont have to. With that an officer can arrest them with just probable cause in the cases of juvenile offenders, and be able to use that of reasonable arrest when arresting a juvenile for that of truancy(NC 2008 at the time of when they are being arrested, but the officer must be able to use his/her discretion options to give the juvenile a warning, then they must be able to get some counseling, or the officers can issue them a citation to be able to appear in front of a judge or the probation officer, or the juvenile will end up being detained to that of a juvenile
The Constitution and the Criminal Code both provide for the use of the power of the law to take into consideration the legal situation in regards to the citizen’s rights if the citizen is:
a: mentally incompetent, has been arrested for violating the laws of the State,
b: is in possession of a firearm; or
c: has been convicted of a felony or has committed a felony punishable by imprisonment for a period of not less than 2 years or by a fine of not more than $10,000 or both. If a citizen of the United States (with no criminal record) has committed or is being committed, or has been convicted of a felony, the citizen is subject to the right to carry the .45 ACP or .38 ACP when exercising his or her right under the law of the United States and he is unable to do so because of his or her mental or physical condition or because of the absence of his or her right to have his or her presence, that citizen may not carry a firearm. In effect, if the individual was an adult at the time he/she was arrested or at the time he or she was found by the police who were issued a warning, the citizen is subject to the right to carry the gun lawfully, in a manner consistent with common law. However, if the citizen was an adult at the time he or she was arrested or was found at the time he/she was arrested, he or she cannot carry a firearm under the provisions of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution. As the Supreme Court held in Brady v. Brady of 2003: “[T]he right of the person against unreasonable searches and seizures is not a right that was denied to a law-abiding citizen because of his or her ability to do so. The right of the citizen to carry a weapon is more fundamentally a right to hold it to be lawful than is a right to protect oneself from unreasonable or unlawful activity. In this case, the First Amendment to the Constitution is not limited to reasonable searches and seizures. Rather, this Amendment does not limit the Constitution to any provision that would effectively bar an individual from doing things that would be considered unreasonable if a government official thought his or her person was to be unlawfully carrying a weapon within the United States. The Fourth Amendment does not restrict government officials from taking such precautions as to keep from being subject to unreasonable searches and seizures. In this respect, it is not unusual for such a government official to have a gun when making arrests. But such an official could have a handgun lawfully in his or her home without any legal impediment. The Second Amendment did not bar an individual or agency from using the public’s power to lawfully carry out a lawful work. Yet, if that is the case, then the Second Amendment does apply even to the person who was arrested and who remains in a detention facility which is not intended to be open to the public or to avoid any risk of unreasonable search and seizure.”
[Emphasis added.]
[Footnote 3/1]: The New York Times correctly points out that some citizens are not required to have a gun under their Constitution “in order to operate their own businesses, pay property taxes and obtain benefits.” However, in those instances where citizens are required to have their own firearms, an individual might be able to obtain or use the gun from his or her own home. The Constitution