Kent V. The United States
1966
Jason Snitselaar
Background
Morris A. Kent a 16 year old boy was arrested for robbery
and rape.
The juvenile judge waived jurisdiction and was having Kent
be tried as an adult.
Kents lawyer wanted to know the reasoning and asked for
Kents social service file. He was turned down and the judge
just said “There was a full investigation” but he would not
release the details of it.
Basic question before the court
Does a juvenile judge have the right to waive
jurisdiction on a case without a public hearing?
Supreme court's Decision
5-4 in favor of Kent
Justice Abe Fortas wrote for the majority. The
supreme court determined there was not a
sufficient investigation prior to the waiver Kent
did not receive a hearing, access to counsel or
access to his records.
Justice Warren, Douglas, Clark, and Brennan voted with
Fortas
Supreme court's decision continued
Justice Potter Stewart wrote the dissent. he
stated he would vacate the judgment and
remand the case for reconsideration in light of
two recent decisions by the court of appeals.
Justice Black, Harlan, and White joined in the
dissent.
Societal impact
In juvenile cases such as Kents it would now be
required to have a full hearing before
jurisdiction can be waived. Making it so that the
judge can’t just pass a case to another court
because he thinks the other court can handle it
better.
Sources
http://www.oyez.org/cases/19601969/1965/1965_104
https://www.law.cornell.
edu/supremecourt/text/383/541