The Limitation Argument, Part 2: Minimizing the Transfer Method

View Sample PDF

Copyright: 2023
Pages: 22
Source title: Realizing the Purpose and Benefits of Juvenile Transfer to Criminal Court
Source Author(s)/Editor(s): Joseph B. Sanborn, Jr. (University of Central Florida (Retired), USA)
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-7923-7.ch011

Keywords: Business Science Reference / Criminal Science & Corrections / Government and Law / Security & Forensics

Purchase

View The Limitation Argument, Part 2: Minimizing the Transfer Method on the publisher's website for pricing and purchasing information.

Abstract

Chapter 11's focus is also on the anti-transfer crowd's (ATC's) transfer-limitation-mission, this time addressing the claim that judicial transfer (JT) is only the permissible method. To establish this position, the ATC falsely floats the idea that JT is a constitutional requirement. Chapter 11 establishes that since there is no constitutional right to prosecution in JC, there is no constitutional right to JT prior to prosecution in CC. Some ATC members strongly object to the amenability-to-treatment considerations inherent in JT, however, this is due to the nebulous and ambiguous criteria employed and the potential discriminatory outcomes invited. Although all ATC folks prefer JT to PT, then, only some are willing to embrace traditional JT. Stripping amenability from JT, nevertheless, leaves judges with the solitary chore of gauging offenses, which prosecutors can do well and better. The bottom line is that the ATC demands JT because they know certainly that judges are less inclined than prosecutors to transfer.

The IRMA Community

Research IRM

The Limitation Argument, Part 2: Minimizing the Transfer Method

Purchase

Abstract

Related Content

IRMA Sponsors