In re Gault
| In re Gault | |
|---|---|
|
|
| Argued December 16, 1966 Decided May 15, 1967 |
|
| Full case name | In re Gault et al. |
| Citations | 387 U.S. 1 (more) |
| Prior history | Appeal from the Supreme Court of Arizona |
| Holding | |
| Juveniles tried for crimes in delinquency proceedings should have the right of due process protected by the Fourteenth Amendment, including the right to confront witnesses and the right to counsel guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment. | |
| Court membership | |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Fortas, joined by Warren, Douglas, Clark, Brennan |
| Concurrence | Black |
| Concurrence | White |
| Concur/dissent | Harlan |
| Dissent | Stewart |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. Amend. VI | |
In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that held that juveniles accused of crimes in a delinquency proceeding must be afforded many of the same due process rights as adults, such as the right to timely notification of the charges, the right to confront witnesses, the right against self-incrimination, and the right to counsel. The court's opinion was written by Justice Abe Fortas, a noted proponent of children's rights.
On the morning of June 8, 1964, the sheriff of Gila County, took fifteen-year-old Gerald Gault into custody, without notifying Gault's parents, after a neighbor, Ora Cook, complained of receiving an inappropriate and offensive telephone call. After returning home from work that evening to find her son missing, Gault's mother eventually located him at the county Children's Detention Home but was not permitted to take him home.
According to Gault, his friend Ronald Lewis made the call from the Gault family's trailer. Gault claims that Lewis had asked to use the telephone while Gault was getting ready for work. Then, not yet knowing to whom Lewis was speaking, Gault said, "I heard him, ahem, using some pretty vulgar language… so I – all I did was walk out, took the phone off him, hung it up, and told him – I said, 'Hey, there's the door. Get out.'" Judge McGhee of the Gila County superior court, acting as a juvenile court judge, presided over Gault's preliminary hearing the next morning, which he ended by saying he would "think about it," and Gault remained in custody for several more days until being released without explanation. On Gault's release, his mother received a note from the superintendent of the detention home informing her that "Judge McGhee has set Monday June 15, 1964 at 11:00 A. M. as the date and time for further Hearings on Gerald's delinquency." That was the family's only notification of the hearing.
...
Wikipedia