Juvenile Justice Final Write
Marsh, now 21, was in court on Monday for a hearing to determine if he should be re-tried in juvenile court. Why? In 2016, California voters passed Proposition 57 which, among other things, changed how juveniles are prosecuted as adults. After Prop 57, DA’s could not send juveniles cases directly to an adult court. They had to go before a juvenile judge at a “transfer hearing” where they had to make a case for transferring a youth to adult court. Lindsey’s transfer hearing is supposed to conclude Friday. Marsh started his on Monday. But here is the question: Will Brown’s signing of SB 1391 hold up in court?California voters approved Prop 57. In California, changes to ballot measures require a public vote. Clearly, Brown weighed this possibility when signing SB 1391. But just as clearly, his signature is going to be legally challenged. If that happens, it will place Attorney General Xavier Becerra squarely in the middle of a battle between DAs and liberal criminal justice reformers in the state legislature.It is true, that too often young kids of color are prosecuted as adults. “Unfortunately, I have seen too many cases over the last 20 years of young immature kids who were followers and ended up in prison for much too long,” said Kevin Adamson, the lawyer representing Lindsey.“The vast majority of those kids were black or Latino, from poverty stricken homes,” he said. “We need to start educating and rehabilitating these kids, not throw them in prisons for massive amounts of time.”There is no question that Adamson is right. But there are exceptions. Marsh is white and does not come from abject poverty. And though Lindsey is African American, so was the victim of his alleged act.Clavo’s family, led by his mother Nicole, is African American. Nicole Clavo is an advocate for young black men. But what happened to her son happened. He really was killed in broad daylight. He really was in a car full of young African American men who also might have been killed.Brown argued that state law allows for extended detention in juvenile facilities in cases of juveniles who still pose a threat when their incarcerations are nearing an end. The state Director of Juvenile Justice can request that the prosecuting attorney petition for more jail time. Theoretically, that petition could result in another trial of the defendant. It sounds good, except neither Schubert nor Reisig can recall this ever happening in their jurisdictions before.Besides, a strong case can be made that Prop 57 is working. In fiscal year 2017-18, the Sacramento County DA filed 1,035 juvenile delinquent cases. But since October of last year, Schubert’s office has only petitioned for five transfer hearings to adult courts. These are rare cases when teens under 16 are prosecuted as adults. “This is not just about public safety, this is about the crimes themselves,” Schubert said. Said Reisig:”Why wouldn’t you want to let a juvenile court judge make the call whether a juvenile should be tried in adult court? Why not enact common sense modifications instead of an all-or-nothing rule?”The DAs need to challenge Brown. Signing SB 1391 was a mistake. One that has deeply affected those victimized by young people like Marsh, who challenge the notion that all youthful defendants are alike.“My thoughts have been completely on the victims’ family,” Reisig said. “I can’t imagine what they are going through. The pendulum is swinging toward criminal defendants and away from victims.”
