103A
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION
ADOPTED BY THE HOUSE OF DELEGATES
FEBRUARY 10, 2014
RESOLUTION
RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association urges federal, state, local, tribal and territorial
governments to ensure that juveniles are provided effective appellate representation and have
access to appeals consistent with state statutes and/or state constitutional provisions by:
1. Providing training for judges and attorneys in juvenile court to recognize that in the
representation of the juvenile, the control and direction of the case is the same as in the
representation of a criminal defendant;
2. Providing adequate resources so that juveniles, including those qualifying for public
defender services, have access to effective appellate representation;
3. Providing timely appellate review, expedited when necessary, within the timeframe that
the juvenile is completing the court-ordered disposition, particularly in cases where youth
are confined; and
4. Collecting data on the rate of juvenile delinquency appeals to identify institutional
barriers to appellate representation and possible internal geographical disparities in state
juvenile appellate practice.
103A
REPORT
I.
Juvenile Appellate Practice
A. Background on Juvenile Appeals
The appellate process serves three essential core functions: correction of legal error in the
initial proceedings, the opportunity for development and refinement of the law, and ensuring
uniformity in the law’s application.1 The Institute for Judicial Administration and American Bar
Association Standards (“IJA-ABA Standards”) and the National Juvenile Defense Standards
include trial counsel’s obligations surrounding appeals as a required task in defense of a client
accused of a crime.2 In addition, the IJA-ABA Standards address appeals and collateral review,
providing a framework for the disposition of juvenile cases after trial and urging the timely
resolution of juvenile appeals.3
“The appellate process furthers fidelity to the law…”4 Appeals are particularly important
in juvenile court where transparency is lacking in other traditional ways.5 Despite its importance,
appeals are rare in juvenile delinquency cases. As a result there is a lack of guidance for courts
and practitioners about the contours of the law as applied to juveniles. Additionally, the rights of
children suffer as a result.6 Lack of appellate process also hinders the ability of juvenile courts to
address underlying problems related to disparate treatment of minorities, including disparate
minority confinement.
1
Substantial portions of this report have been adopted from a recent article that examines the role of appeals in
the administration of juvenile justice and that provides the largest data set available on the rate of appeals in juvenile
delinquency cases.,. Megan Annitto, Juvenile Justice on Appeal, 66 U. MIAMI L. REV. 671 (2012). See VICTOR E.
FLANGO, NAT’L CTR. FOR STATE COURTS, FUTURE TRENDS IN STATE COURTS: ROLE OF STATE SUPREME COURT
OPINIONS IN LAW DEVELOPMENT 1, 142 (2010), available at http://contentdm.ncsconline.org/cgibin/showfile.exe?CISOROOT=/appellate&CISOPTR=195.
2
IJA-ABA Juv. Just. Standards, Standards Relating to the Def. Function § 8.2 (1980, NATIONAL JUVENILE
DEFENDER CENTER, NATIONAL JUVENILE DEFENSE STANDARDS, Standards 7.2-7.4 (2012).
3
IJA-ABA Juv. Just. Standards, Standards Relating to Appeals and Collateral Review, (1979). “Because of the
youth of those persons subject to juvenile court jurisdiction and the rehabilitative theories that partially underlie
juvenile court legislation, rapid final determination is essential,” Id. at Commentary to § 5.5.
4
Robert Schwartz, Exec. Dir., Juvenile Law Ctr., Testimony at Pennsylvania Interbranch Commission on
Juvenile Justice (Jan. 21, 2010) (transcript available at http://www.modelsforchange.net/reform-progress/49 ).
5
JUVENILE LAW CTR., LESSONS FROM LUZERNE COUNTY: PROMOTING FAIRNESS, TRANSPARENCY AND
ACCOUNTABILITY iv (2010), available at
http://www.jlc.org/sites/default/files/press_release_pdfs/luzerne_exec_summary.pdf (last visited Feb. 12, 2012)
[hereinafter LESSONS FROM LUZERNE COUNTY]; Katayoon Majd & Patricia Puritz, The Cost of Justice: How LowIncome Youth Continue to Pay the Price of Failing Indigent Defense Systems, 16 GEO. J. ON POVERTY L. &
POL’Y 543, 567 (2009); Annitto, supra note 1, at 690-670.
6
See Gary L. Crippen, Can the Courts Fairly Account for the Diminished Competence and Culpability of
Juveniles? A Judge’s Perspective, in YOUTH ON TRIAL: A DEVELOPMENTAL PERSPECTIVE ON
JUVENILE JUSTICE 403, 411, 414 (Thomas Grisso & Robert G. Schwartz eds., 2000) (stating that children’s legal
rights are “often illusory” without a healthy appellate practice).
1
103A
In 1995, the ABA Juvenile Justice Center Report called for greater attention to appeals
after finding that many attorneys were not filing them in juvenile cases.7 A recent study on
juvenile delinquency appeals in 2012 provided data about the scope of the problem across the
country,8 highlighting the need for reform that experts have previously identified.9 The extent of
the lack of appeals is profound and raises questions about the inability of juvenile courts to
ensure just outcomes.
The average rate of appeal for juvenile adjudications of guilt (“juvenile delinquency
convictions”) is .005% or just five appeals per 1,000 juvenile delinquency convictions; in one
state, the appellate rate average was 1.25 appeals for 4,440 juvenile delinquency convictions
each year for five years.10 In six out of the fourteen states with data tracking appeals, the rate of
appeal was less than three cases per 1,000 juvenile convictions.11 And even in states with high
numbers of confined juveniles, appeals were scarce. For example, in 2010, Texas had 5,352
juveniles living in confinement in juvenile facilities as a result of juvenile delinquency
convictions and in that same year, there were 56 appeals filed in juvenile delinquency cases. 12
The rate of appeal totaled 2.6 per 1,000 juvenile convictions (56 appeals out of 19,306 juvenile
convictions).13
The dramatic lack of appeals raises questions about a lack of due process in juvenile
courts. In addition, without appeals, there is a dearth of guidance for courts and law enforcement
on juvenile delinquency matters. The state assessments performed by the National Juvenile
Defender Center in nearly half of the states have consistently noted that juvenile appellate
practice is in need of improvement, identifying weak infrastructure across states. 14 The historical
lack of rigor in juvenile appellate practice, combined with the recent data documenting the low
rate of appeal, demonstrate entrenched practices against the filing of juvenile appeals and present
compelling reasons to revisit and advocate for states to strengthen appellate practice on behalf of
juveniles.
7
PATRICIA PURITZ, ET AL., NAT’L JUVENILE DEFENDER CTR. ET AL., A CALL FOR JUSTICE: AS ASSESSMENT OF
ACCESS TO COUNSEL AND QUALITY OF REPRESENTATION IN DELINQUENCY PROCEEDINGS 10 (1995), available at
http:www.njdc.info/pdf/cfjfull.pdf, at 10 (discussing results of a survey of public defenders that revealed that 32% of
their offices are not authorized to handle appeals and of those that do handle them, 46% took no appeals in the prior
year).
8
Annitto, supra note 1 (describing the empirical data reported from a national study on state juvenile
delinquency appellate rates).
9
PURITZ, supra note 7 (calling for more attention to juvenile appeals in a 1995 assessment of access to counsel).
10
Annitto, supra note 1, Part III.
11
Id. at 715.
12
Id.
13
Id. at 16.
14
To date, the National Juvenile Defender Center has conducted twenty-one state assessments. See e.g.,
LAVAL S. MILLER-WILSON, NAT’L JUVENILE DEFENDER CTR., PENNSYLVANIA: AN ASSESSMENT OF ACCESS TO
COUNSEL AND QUALITY OF REPRESENTATION IN JUVENILE DELINQUENCY PROCEEDINGS (2003), at 53 (addressing
“non-existent” appellate advocacy), available at
http://www.jlc.org/sites/default/files/publication_pdfs/PA%20Assesment%20of%20Access%20to%20Counsel.pdf
[hereinafter “Pennsylvania Assessment”]; KIM BROOKS & DARLENE KAMINE, NAT’L JUVENILE DEFENDER CTR.,
JUSTICE CUT SHORT: AN ASSESSMENT OF ACCESS TO COUNSEL AND QUALITY OF REPRESENTATION IN JUVENILE
DELINQUENCY PROCEEDINGS IN OHIO (2003) available at http://www.njdc.info/pdf/Ohio_Assessment.pdf
(discussing a confusion among attorneys about whether representation continued after disposition).
2
103A
The nature of juvenile justice has changed during the past two decades. The
consequences that now attach to juvenile adjudications have increased substantially since 1990,
elevating the stakes of the case outcomes.15 Today, adjudications will remain a part of a
juvenile’s life in an increasing number of ways. These include, for example, adult sentencing
enhancements, DNA collection and registration, and sex offender registration, as well as, noncriminal consequences. The lack of appeals diminishes reliability and fairness and is a critical
part of the dialogue. It also prevents the development of law in areas that affect juveniles when
they are charged with crimes.16
B. Obstacles to Appeal
The lack of vigor in the appellate process for juveniles is attributed to a variety of causes.
Many obstacles preventing effective juvenile delinquency appellate practice appear to be similar
across jurisdictions, although they vary according to geography and resources. For the most part,
they are similar to the reasons for lack of effective representation for juveniles in general. Some
reasons posited for the lack of appeals include frequent waiver of counsel by juveniles, lack of
resources, the belief that appeals interfere with the rehabilitation process, mootness due to length
of time for resolution when appealing dispositions, and a lack of understanding about the
collateral consequences that increase the stakes for juveniles. Another overarching area has been
confusion among attorneys about the obligation to advocate for the stated interests of the juvenile
client when acting as a juvenile defender.17 It is also true that many juveniles’ cases are resolved
with pleas and some jurisdictions limit the ability of a defendant to appeal when entering a plea;
but given that plea bargaining drives both the adult and juvenile criminal systems, this does not
fully explain the dearth of appellate practice in juvenile courts. For example, suppressions issues
are among the most common bases of appeal in criminal cases. A juvenile who loses a critical
suppression hearing, for example, would make a conditional plea in some jurisdictions.18 Or in
some instances, the entry of pleas is not conditional and appeals would be taken for pretrial
rulings prior to a plea, where permitted.19
One of the most frequently noted obstacles to a robust appellate practice is that juveniles
frequently waive their right to counsel.20 Yet, even when counsel appears, many defenders do not
pursue appeals regularly due to lack of resources or role confusion.21 For example, even states
with laws that provide protections against juvenile waiver of counsel still struggle to realize a
15
Annitto, supra note 1, at 701-709 (discussing the criminal justice related consequences).
See generally, Annitto, supra note 1 (providing examples of areas of law related to criminal procedural
questions and juvenile status where there has been little doctrinal attention or development).
17
People v. Austin M, 975 N.E.2d 22 (2012); ABA HOUSE OF DELEGATES, STANDARDS FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE:
PROSECUTION AND DEFENSE FUNCTION § 4-5.2 (3d ed. 1993).
18
RANDY HERTZ, MARTIN GUGGENHEIM, & ANTHONY AMSTERDAM, TRIAL MANUAL FOR DEFENSE ATTORNEYS
IN JUVENILE COURT 1, 281 (2008) (explaining that some jurisdictions authorize appellate review of pretrial
suppression rulings after the entry of a guilty plea).
19
See e.g., People v. Neuhaus, 240 P.3d 391, 397-98 (Colo. App. 2009).
20
See Mary Berkheiser, The Fiction of Juvenile Right to Counsel: Waiver in Juvenile Courts, 54 FLA. L.
REV. 577, 633 (2002); Wallace J. Mlyniec, In re Gault at Forty: The Right to Counsel in Juvenile Court—A
Promise Unfulfilled, 44 CRIM. L. BULL. 371, 379–80 (2008); Patricia Puritz & Robin Walker Sterling, The Role of
Defense Counsel in Delinquency Court, CRIM. JUST., Spring 2010.
21
See generally, Puritz & Sterling, supra note 20 (describing the culture of juvenile courts that impedes
effective representation).
16
3
103A
strong appellate practice.22 Notably, the rates of appeal in New Jersey and Alabama were almost
identical at .0017 or 1.7 appeals per 1,000 juvenile convictions.23 This is true despite the fact that
New Jersey law strictly limits the circumstances under which a child may waive her right to
counsel. Waiver by a child can occur only upon consulting with counsel and then appearing on
the record with counsel in order to waive;24 in contrast, Alabama, like many states, provides no
additional protections to juveniles than it does for adults waiving counsel.25 This reveals that,
while stronger protections for waiver should be a first step toward realizing appeals for juveniles,
the reasons for the lack of appeals are more complex and require investigation by individual
jurisdictions.
Next, a perception that the stakes are lower for juveniles can lead to a decision to allocate
resources elsewhere where defenders are overwhelmed by high caseloads.26 Historical
underpinnings of the juvenile courts as rehabilitative, as opposed to punitive, create a perception
that appeals interfere with the rehabilitation process.27 This is linked to questions about lack of
authorization to appeal cases, whether it is real or perceived, for public defenders of juveniles.28
The belief that the bar is exceedingly high on appeal may also compound this problem. Similar
to adult sentencing standards, the court generally reviews a dispositional order for an abuse of
discretion.29 As a result, the burden on appeal for a juvenile disposition is steep. For other issues
on appeal, most courts use a de novo standard of review for questions of law whether the issue is
raised in a juvenile or adult case.30 In addition, a statutory challenge to the disposition may be
reviewed de novo.31
The length of time it takes to resolve appeals also contributes to the problem, given that
many juveniles will have completed their sentences of confinement or probation before the
22
Annitto, supra note 1.
Id. at 715-716.
24
N.J. STAT. ANN. §2A:4A-39(b)(1)-(2) (West 1983). After the juvenile has consulted with counsel, along with
the parent, “the court shall question the juvenile and his counsel to determine if the juvenile is knowingly, willingly
and voluntarily waiving his right.”).
25
Alabama does not have a specific statute nor has the court imposed a more protective standard through case
law for juvenile waiver.
26
See e.g., Barbara Fedders, Losing Hold of the Guiding Hand: Ineffective Assistance of Counsel in Juvenile
Delinquency Representation, 14 LEWIS & CLARK L. REV. 771, 812 (2010).
27
Donald J. Harris, Due Process v. Helping Kids in Trouble: Implementing the Right to Appeal from
Adjudications of Delinquency in Pennsylvania, 98 DICK. L. REV. 209, 214, 225(1994); see also Welch v. United
States, 604 F.3d 408, 432 (7th Cir. 2010) (Posner, J., dissenting).
28
See PURITZ, supra note 7, at 53; BROOKS & KAMINE, supra note 14 at 21, 33 (discussing a confusion among
attorney about whether representation continued after disposition)
29
See United States v. Brandon P., 387 F.3d 969, 976 (9th Cir. 2004) (stating that the decision to transfer a
juvenile to be prosecuted as an adult is reviewed for abuse of discretion); Phillips v. United States, 238 Fed. Appx.
89, 95 (2007) (reviewing a district court decision that denied a juvenile’s request for an evidentiary hearing under an
abuse of discretion standard).
30
See, e.g., United States v. Juvenile Male, 74 F.3d 526, 528 (4th Cir. 1996) (“We review the question of
whether the district court erred in denying the juveniles’ motion to dismiss, pursuant to the speedy trial
provision . . . under a de novo standard of review.”); United States v. Sealed Juvenile 1, 192 F.3d 488, 490 (5th Cir.
1999) (“[W]e review factual findings . . . for clear error and the legal conclusions de novo.”).
31
See United States v. P.S., 125 F.3d 859, 1 (9th Cir. 1997) (reviewing a juvenile’s appeal on the basis of a
statutory violation under a de novo standard).
23
4
103A
appeal is resolved.32 As a result, in those instances, a portion of the appeal challenging the
disposition risks mootness prior to any opportunity for review. While collateral consequences
prevent mootness of some issues on appeal, the same is not true when a juvenile is challenging
the appropriateness of the dispositional orders. As a result, a small number of states use
expedited time frames for juvenile delinquency appeals—most recently, Illinois implemented
such a rule. Shortened filing deadlines for juvenile appeals can expedite the outcome of the case.
But if they are not accompanied by a requirement that the appeal will be decided on an expedited
basis, as is the case in Illinois, the effect can be limited.
Finally, defenders in urban areas tend to have high caseloads, potentially, one of the most
significant causes of the lack appellate attention.33 On the other hand, rural areas tend to have
fewer qualified criminal defense appellate lawyers to manage indigent appeals.34 This reality is
true for adult defendants as well, yet it appears that the juvenile cases tend to be given a lower
priority.
While data on rates of appeal in the criminal justice system is limited in general, appeals
are more frequent in adult criminal cases.35 Yet, even with these appeals and additional
opportunities for transparency and accountability in the adult criminal context, such as juries and
open courtrooms, there are still concerns about fairness in the criminal justice system. In many
juvenile courts, appeals are the only opportunity for transparency of decisions; in many courts,
for example, the courtroom is shielded from the public to protect the privacy of juveniles. In that
way, juvenile appeals play a critical role in affording some form of transparency, in addition to
correction of error and development of the law.36
C. Examples of Reform
In some instances, the identification of structural problems in state wide juvenile
defender assessments has led to promising reform. Three specific examples of improvement can
provide guidance to other states. First, after an assessment of its juvenile defender system
identified that many juveniles were not represented in court because courts frequently allowed or
encouraged waiver of counsel, Florida strengthened its safeguards against juvenile waiver of
counsel.37 Although the rate of appeal suggests that there is still room for improvement, this,
along with other measures directed at appellate attention, has led to a more active appellate
practice in at least one area of the state.38 Next, in Ohio after an assessment, the state reallocated
32
Patricia Puritz & Wendy Shang, Juvenile Indigent Defense: Crisis and Solutions, 15 CRIM. JUST. 22, 23
(2000) (noting that “[o]ffices that struggle to provide the most basic day-to-day representation find it difficult to
make appeals practice a priority, especially when the time for an appeal would exceed the length of a juvenile's
sentence.”; Annitto, supra note 1.
33
Puritz & Shang, supra note 32, at 23.
34
Diane E. Courselle, When Clinics are “Necessities, Not Luxuries”: Special Challenges of Running a Criminal
Appeals Clinic in a Rural State, 75 MISS. L.J. 721, 725 n.5 (2006).
35
Harris, supra note 27, at 220 (comparing rates of appeal between juvenile and adult cases in Pennsylvania in
1990 and finding appeals were filed in eleven times more adult cases for that year).
36
Annitto, supra note 1.
37
Id. at 718. Although a rule that requires presence of counsel would be stronger, in order for a juvenile's
waiver of counsel to be valid, the juvenile's counsel, parent, custodian, or relative must attest that the juvenile's
waiver was knowing and voluntary. Fla. R. Juv. P. R. 8.165(b)(3).
38
Id. at 730.
5
103A
funding for a juvenile division, leading to improved defense representation for juveniles and, as a
result creating a stronger infrastructure for juvenile appeals. The Juvenile Division created an
agreement with the state’s Division of Youth Services and took specific steps to meet with
juveniles who were sentenced to confinement with the Division of Youth Services to review their
cases for error. Because a problem in juvenile representation has been the lack of representation
after trial, these steps have led to a more effective system of representation on appeal for
juveniles who are confined. Third, most recently, in 2013, in response to concerns about the time
frame for resolution of appeals of juvenile delinquency cases, the Illinois Supreme Court created
a new rule permitting expedited appeals for juvenile delinquency cases. The rule provides a
model for other states in that it requires that the appellate court will issue a decision within 150
days. The new rule is also consistent with the IJA-ABA Standards which call for expediting
appeals from juvenile courts.39 As a result, there is a greater likelihood that the appellate court
will have the opportunity to review the disposition assigned by the trial court before the
expiration of the youth’s confinement or probation term.
II. The Appellate Role Going Forward
As a result of the deficiencies of appellate practice and the acknowledgment of its
importance, the following recommendations seek to enhance the appellate function going
forward. Jurisdictions should ensure that the statutory and, in some states constitutional, right to
appeal is upheld for juveniles.
A. Assessment of the Right to Appeal and Collection of Data
State judicial branches should collect more robust data in juvenile delinquency cases
including, but not limited to, the quantity and basis of appeals, in order to fully assess the
fulfillment of the juvenile right to appeal in their own jurisdictions. Where the scope of the
appellate deficit is unknown, it is more difficult to identify the factors that correlate with the lack
of appeals, to confirm the possible causes, and, finally, to understand the depth of the
consequences of the lack of appeals.
States should reassess their ability to provide access to appellate review to juveniles. Not
only are states required to provide such representation but it protects the institutional role of
appellate courts to provide protection against error, allow for law development, and ensure
uniformity in the application of the law. Each of these appellate functions benefits the larger
community in addition to ensuring that the rights of its youngest members are protected. When
only five out of 1000 cases juvenile convictions are appealed, it is difficult to maintain that
minors are protected from error.
States should examine the ability of juveniles to exercise their right to appeal within their
jurisdictions where prudent minds would agree that an appeal is warranted. This includes
investigating the suggested reasons for lack of appeals, including, but not limited to, insufficient
resources, lack of safeguards ensuring valid waivers of counsel, the belief that “less is at stake”
IJA-ABA Juv. Just. Standards, Standards Relating to Appeals and Collateral Review, §§ 4.1, 5.5. “Due to the
unique nature of the status of juveniles, appeals from the juvenile court should be afforded preferential treatment.”
Id. at Commentary to §4.1.
39
6
103A
for juveniles, length of time to resolution of the appeal--particularly dispositional issues, and
confusion among lawyers and courts about the proper role of an attorney defending a child
accused of a crime. States should employ a system for expediting and granting preferences to
appeals from the juvenile court, particularly where there is not a stay granted pending appeal. 40
In addition, states should assess to what extent juveniles are aware of their right to appeal.
While it is counsel’s responsibility to explain appeals to the client, it may also be appropriate to
have the court inform the juvenile of the right to appeal in a language that is developmentally
appropriate. States should also seek to identify whether appellate practice varies according to
jurisdictions within the state.41 This would allow them to identify potential clusters of best
practices within their own states.
B. Training
Attorneys representing juveniles should be provided with adequate training about appellate
practice. This includes the obligation to make the client aware of the right to appeal,42 filing the
notice of appeal on behalf of the client regardless of whether or not trial counsel will handle the
appeal,43 and taking proper steps to preserve the record in the lower court. Development of
juvenile appellate specialization practice opportunities should also be considered by jurisdictions
where possible. Independent, specialized appellate counsel is especially important where the
basis of the appeal would be the ineffectiveness of trial counsel.
The training should emphasize that the duties of an attorney for a juvenile include preserving
the juvenile’s right to appeal throughout the course of the delinquency case; advising the juvenile
on the right to appeal and filing a notice of appeal on the juvenile’s behalf; either representing
the juvenile on appeal or assisting the juvenile in obtaining appellate representation; preserving
the record in the trial court and recognizing that collateral consequences may prevent mootness
on appeal
Conclusion
Moving toward a vibrant appellate practice is essential to ensure a just system for
juveniles. As states take steps to address some of these structural problems, it will improve the
development of legal doctrine and ensure better protection against error. It will also contribute to
a uniform treatment of all youth to provide for a better check on the system as a whole so that the
most vulnerable populations are not treated more harshly. Targeted interventions by states,
including increased data collection, will uphold the constitutional and procedural rights of
juveniles. States should make a concerted effort to remove current barriers to appeal.
40
IJA-ABA Juv. Just. Standards, Standards Relating to Appeals and Collateral Review, §§ 4.1, 5.5.
Annitto, supra note 1, at 730-731.
42
Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. 470, 480 (2000); ABA Standards for Criminal Justice §4-8.29(a); National
Juvenile Defense Standards, Standard 7.2, Disclose the Right to Appeal.
43
National Juvenile Defense Standards, Standard 7.3, Trial Counsel’s Obligations Regarding Appeals.
41
7
103A
Respectfully submitted,
Mathias H. Heck, Jr.
Criminal Justice Section
February 2014
8
103A
GENERAL INFORMATION FORM
Submitting Entity: Criminal Justice Section
Submitted By: Mathias H. Heck, Jr., Chair
1. Summary of Resolution(s). This resolution will develop policies to ensure that juveniles are
provided adequate and effective appellate representation and have appropriate access to
appeals consistent with state statutes and/or state constitutional provisions.
2. Approval by Submitting Entity. This resolution was approved by the Criminal Justice Section
Council at its Fall meeting on November 2, 2013.
3. Has this or a similar resolution been submitted to the House or Board previously? No similar
resolutions have been previously submitted.
4.
What existing Association policies are relevant to this Resolution and how would they be
affected by its adoption? This resolution would not impact any existing resolutions.
5. If this is a late report, what urgency exists which requires action at this meeting of the
House? Not applicable
6. Status of Legislation. (If applicable) Not applicable
7. Brief explanation regarding plans for implementation of the policy, if adopted by the House
of Delegates. The policy will be distributed to various criminal justice stakeholders in order
to encourage the necessary legislative action to develop policies to ensure that juveniles are
provided adequate and effective appellate representation and have appropriate access to
appeals consistent with state statutes and/or state constitutional provisions. The policy will
also be featured on the Criminal Justice Section website and in Section publications.
8. Cost to the Association. (Both direct and indirect costs) No cost to the Association is
anticipated
9. Disclosure of Interest. (If applicable) None
10. Referrals.
At the same time this policy resolution is submitted to the ABA Policy Office for inclusion in
the 2014 Midyear Agenda Book for the House of Delegates, it is being circulated to the
chairs and staff directors of the following ABA entities:
Standing Committees
Continuing Legal Education
Delivery of Legal Services
Ethics and Professional Responsibility
Legal Aid and Indigent Defense
9
103A
Pro Bono and Public Service
Special Committees and Commissions
Commission on Homelessness and Poverty
Center for Human Rights
Coalition on Racial and Ethnic Justice
Commission on Youth at Risk
Sections, Divisions
Family Law
Government and Public Sector Lawyers Division
Individual Rights and Responsibilities
Judicial Division
Law Practice Division
Law Student Division
Legal Education and Admission to the Bar
Solo, Small Firm and General Practice Division
State and Local Government Law
Young Lawyers Division
11. Contact Name and Address Information. (Prior to the meeting. Please include name,
address, telephone number and e-mail address)
Kevin Scruggs
Director, Criminal Justice Standards Project
American Bar Association
1050 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite 400
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: 202-662-1503
Email: kevin.scruggs@americanbar.org
12. Contact Name and Address Information. (Who will present the report to the House? Please
include name, address, telephone number, cell phone number and e-mail address.)
Stephen A. Saltzburg, Section Delegate
George Washington University Law School
2000 H Street, NW
Washington, DC 20052-0026
Phone: (202) 994-7089; (202) 489-7464
Email: ssaltz@law.gwu.edu
Neal R. Sonnett, Section Delegate
2 S. Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2600
Miami, FL 33131-1819
Phone: (305) 358-2000
Email: nrslaw@sonnett.com
10
103A
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.
Summary of the Resolution
This resolution will develop policies to ensure that juveniles are provided adequate and
effective appellate representation and have appropriate access to appeals consistent with
state statutes and/or state constitutional provisions.
2.
Summary of the Issue that the Resolution Addresses
Despite its importance, appeals are rare in juvenile delinquency cases. As a result there is
a lack of guidance for courts and practitioners about the contours of the law as applied to
juveniles. Additionally, the rights of children suffer as a result.
3.
Please Explain How the Proposed Policy Position will address the issue
This resolution will urge providing training for judges and attorneys in juvenile court to
recognize that in the representation of the juvenile, the control and direction of the case is
the same as in the representation of a criminal defendant. It will further urge providing
adequate resources to defense counsel so that juveniles have access to effective
representation by an attorney on appeal, including the appointment of appellate counsel
for juveniles qualifying for public defender services. It will further urge providing timely
appellate review, expedited when necessary, so that review can be completed, whenever
practicable, within the timeframe that the juvenile is completing the court-ordered
disposition, particularly in cases where youth are confined. Finally the resolution will
urge collecting data on the rate of juvenile delinquency appeals to allow for identification
of institutional barriers toward appellate representation and possible internal geographical
disparities in state juvenile appellate practice
4.
Summary of Minority Views
None are known.
11