LEGAL ISSUES PRESENTATION INFORMATION SHEET

FARE V. MICHAEL. C.

PRESENTATION OVERVIEW

1. Identify and explain the case’s issue related to juvenile justice.

A minor is suspected of murder, he is in custody where his rights are violated.

 2. Conduct a legal history of the case and identify the case’s issue.

The minor’s right to see his probation officer was violated by police officers. The case was dismissed because the evidence was collected illegally.[1]

3.  Present opposing viewpoints 

The court had no authority to dismiss the case. Critics claimed the evidence were sufficient for prosecution.[2]

4. Providing an opinion piece about your feelings towards the issue.

The court ruling favored the offender. No substantial evidence was presented to the court.

PRESENTATION DETAILS

The case issue is related to juvenile justice, where under age offenders usually younger than 18 years of age are prosecuted. Crimes committed by minors are judged differently as compared to the judgment passed to adults committing the same crimes.[3] Crimes like murder and robbery are treated equally irrespective of age. Juvenile justice is very important in providing guidance to minor offenders, although punishment must be administered.  The main objective of juvenile justice is to prevent minors from future involvement in criminal activities. Studies reported a decline in illegal and criminal activities among minors and youths who have been in juvenile cells.[4]

Fare V. Michael C. is a case where the respondent, a 16 years old Michael, a murder suspect was taken to custody at Van Nuys police cell. He was denied by the police to see his probation officer. He eventually decided not to consult an attorney and said he will talk by himself. He made statements and sketches implicating his involvement in the murder. The juvenile court charged him with murder, basing its jurisdiction on the statements and sketches he made. He opposed the judgment claiming that his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent, before the ruling was violated.[5] His rights were violated when the statements and sketches were obtained and used to vindicate him. The court held that, a probation officer acts like a parent/guardian to the juvenile offender and he is supposed to represent his interests.

Critics to the court ruling may argue that, the court had no authority to dismiss the case. The evidence provided in the statements and sketches could serve to be sufficient evidence to prove the murder. The offender having been interrogated by the police officers could justify the murder; leading to prosecution by the court. The court ruling favored the offender. No substantial evidence was presented in order to verify his involvement in the murder.[6] The court ruled that the probation officer acts as a parent/guardian where the offender could place his trust. Although, the statements and the sketches could have been a true reflection of the murder, it was obtained illegally.

The court ruling illustrates that no rights of an offender should be violated. Criminal evidence obtained in an illegal manner will not provide sufficient jurisdiction over the ruling but instead will be dismissed.

REFERENCES

C. R. Soltero, “Miranda v. Arizona (1966) and the rights of the criminally accused”. Latinos and American Law: Landmark Supreme Court Cases (2006).  ISBN 0-292-71411-4.

C. V. Holden, Fare v. Michael C.: The Supreme Court Once again Narrowly Construes Miranda (1980). Loyola Law Review, (1), 190.

G. S. Chudacoff, Fare v. Michael C.: Juveniles and In Custodial Interrogations (1979). Pepperdine Law Review, (4), 953.

M. Stewart, Fare v. Michael C.: Blurring the Distinction between Minors and Adults in Custodial Interrogations. (1980) Southwestern University Law Review, (1), 129.