In Re Whittington

1968-05-20

Headline: Juvenile delinquency ruling vacated and remanded; Court orders Ohio court to reconsider a 14-year-old’s delinquency finding in light of a recent decision expanding constitutional protections for juveniles, affecting how hearings are treated.

Holding: The Court vacated the Ohio Court of Appeals’ judgment and remanded for the state court to reconsider the juvenile delinquency finding in light of In re Gault and the subsequent transfer to adult court.

Real World Impact:

Sends Ohio juvenile delinquency case back for reconsideration under new juvenile-rights rules.
May require juvenile courts to give more constitutional protections in commitment hearings.
Could affect whether juveniles are bound over to adult criminal court.

Topics: juvenile rights, due process, juvenile court procedures, transfer to adult court

Summary

Background

Petitioner was a 14-year-old who the Fairfield County Juvenile Court in Ohio found to be delinquent on September 7, 1966, after the judge concluded there was “probable cause” he had committed what would be second-degree murder if an adult. He appealed, arguing the juvenile proceeding used too low a proof standard and denied him a jury trial, an impartial judge, bail, and protection against self-incrimination. The Ohio Court of Appeals and the State Supreme Court rejected his claims before this Court granted review.

Reasoning

The Supreme Court focused on whether the Ohio courts had considered the effect of this Court’s decision in In re Gault, decided after the state courts ruled, which extended several constitutional protections to juvenile proceedings when confinement was possible. Because the Ohio courts had not had a chance to apply Gault to his case, the Court vacated the Ohio Court of Appeals’ judgment and sent the matter back for the state court to reconsider the delinquency finding and to account for the later order sending the boy to adult court, including the State’s argument that the earlier hearing was merely like a probable-cause hearing for an adult.

Real world impact

Practically, the ruling means a state court must reexamine a juvenile’s earlier delinquency finding in light of the Gault decision. That reconsideration could change what procedures are required in juvenile hearings, affect whether a young person is placed in a state institution, or influence whether the juvenile is transferred and prosecuted as an adult. This Court’s action is not a final ruling on guilt or the underlying claims; it only requires the Ohio courts to revisit them.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice White, joined by Justice Black, would have dismissed the case for lack of a final judgment, arguing the juvenile adjudication was not a final disposition and that a later transfer to adult court might alter the issues to be decided.