Bouge v. Reed, 459 P.2d 869 (Or. Sup. Ct. 1969)

The Oregon Supreme Court held the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment requires states to “accord a hearing before a [youth]can be remanded to the adult criminal process.” In this case, the remand statute at issue ORS 419.533 did not expressly provide for a hearing before transfer to adult court but the Oregon Supreme Court concluded that the intent of the U.S. Supreme Court as expressed when reviewing Kent and Gault together is that a hearing occur before a youth faces adult prosecution. The Court provided the following language in support: 

“The chief contention of the petitioner is that Kent v. United States, 383 U.S. 541, 86 S Ct 1045, 16 L Ed2d 84 (1966), read in light of In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1, 87 S Ct 1428, 18 L Ed2d 527 (1967), requires that we interpret our remand statute to require a hearing. Petitioner argues that these decisions hold that the due process clause of the Federal Constitution requires a hearing. 

Kent v. United States , supra (383 U.S. 541), specifically held that a remand could not be made without a hearing. The uncertainty about Kent is whether it is grounded upon a statute, the District of Columbia Juvenile Court Act, or upon the Due Process Clause. Gault is expressly grounded upon the Due Process Clause; however, it concerned the requirements for a juvenile commitment hearing and not a remand. We conclude that the intent of the United States Supreme Court, as expressed in those two decisions, is that the due process clause of the Constitution of the United States requires states to accord a hearing before a juvenile can be remanded to the adult criminal process.”