Center on Wrongful Convictions of Youth, Juvenile Law Center et al. Amicus Brief, Welch v. U.S. 

This amicus brief by Center on Wrongful Convictions of Youth, Juvenile Law Center, and others argues that a juvenile court adjudication should not be used to enhance a sentence in adult court under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), because a juvenile court adjudication lacks the same reliability as a criminal conviction, and because of the Court’s longstanding recognition of the differences between young people and adults.

The amici outline in the summary of their arguments that: “This systemic risk of unreliability is a result of several factors, including the absence of jury trials; a juvenile court culture that discourages and sometimes precludes zealous and adversarial advocacy; and a heightened possibility that some of the evidence introduced in juvenile court, such as juvenile confessions, may be unreliable. Against such a backdrop, it would be fundamentally unfair to allow the use of juvenile adjudications to enhance adult sentences.

. . . “Through more than six decades of jurisprudence, this Court has recognized that youth are different from adults; they are less mature, more vulnerable to external pressure, and more capable of redemption and growth. The juvenile justice system has historically functioned with these differences in mind. Quoting Judge Posner below, “[t]he constitutional protections to which juveniles have been held to be entitled have been designed with a different set of objectives in mind than just recidivist enhancement.” Id. at 431. The use of juvenile adjudications to enhance adult sentences years later runs fundamentally contrary to the notion of a separate, protective juvenile court system.”

The Supreme Court declined Certiorari to hear this case.