Canadian youth court charges and dispositions for females before and after implementation of the Young Offenders Act

1993 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 437-458
Author(s):  
Marge Reitsma-Street
2005 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 465-481
Author(s):  
Marie Choquette

The jurisdiction of the youth court depends on the age of the person who appears before it. Since the federal Young Offenders Act came into effect, the minimum limit has been established at twelve years of age. Consequently, sections 12 and 13 of the Criminal Code have been repealed. In the Province of Quebec, before Bill 60 came into effect, the lower age limit was fourteen years. Since the bill came into force, however, the Youth ProtectionAct has become essentially a law of protection and all federal offences must be treated in accordance with the Young Offenders Act. Many reasons persuaded the legislator to lower the minimum age from fourteen to twelve years of age, but it seems that the most convincing was a decline of the age of juvenile criminality. Finally, the Young Offenders ACt establishes the maximum age limit at eighteen years of age and standardizes that age accross Canada from April 1, 1985. Reasons of uniformity, equity and constitutionality have influenced the legislator in setting the upper age limit at eighteen years of age.


1969 ◽  
pp. 1029
Author(s):  
Larry C. Wilson

The proper role of counsel in youth court has always been somewhat uncertain. Historically, there was resistance to the idea of active participation by counsel. This began to change with the introduction of the Young Offenders Act and the process continues with the Youth Criminal Justice Act Counsel are under a legislated and ethical duly to take instructions from their clients and advocate their behalf in the same fashion as with adult clients. However, the Youth Criminal Justice Act does not address two fundamental issues: I) who pays for the provision of legal services; and 2) from whom does counsel receive instructions. These unanswered questions, and the complex nature of the legislation, further complicate the role of counsel in youth court.


1992 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 232
Author(s):  
J. Thomas Dalby ◽  
Alan W. Leschied ◽  
Peter G. Jaffe ◽  
Wayne Willis

1989 ◽  
Vol 34 (7) ◽  
pp. 675-679
Author(s):  
Alan W. Leschied ◽  
Ken E. Thomas

The current study reviews the personal characteristics of 32 consecutive admissions to a secure custody centre in one southwest Ontario jurisdiction under the Young Offenders Act. Results indicated that there was considerable variability amongst the group regarding court history and the seriousness of the charge on which committal was made. Background history data suggested that the problems of youths committed to secure custody reflect considerable difficulties within families and school. The discussion questions whether the youths in this group are better served through the dispositions emphasizing custody-deterrence or rehabilitation-treatment. Implications for young offender policy are also presented.


Author(s):  
Christopher P. Manfredi

Abstract Recent proposals to reform the Young Offenders Act have sought to address the difficult question of the proper response to youth who commit especially serious offences. This article evaluates these proposals from the perspective or recent developments in US juvenile justice policy that have also been designed to meet serious and chronic youth criminality. The article suggests that a series of US state legislative reforms, in which individual responsibility and system accountability replace rehabilitation as the dominant objective of juvenile justice policy, offers a comprehensive, if imperfect, model for reform.


1998 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 399-411 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane B. Sprott

This study examined the frequently reported finding that the public believes that youth court sentences are too lenient and that young offenders should be processed in the adult justice system. These beliefs, along with the view that sentences for specific cases should be harsher, were all related to one another in an Ontario, Canada, survey. However, the nature of the relationship was complex, and more detailed analyses suggested that the wish to imprison young offenders was not solely a desire for more punitive responses but instead was due, in part, to perceptions that alternatives to prison were ineffective.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document