-
In
re Jan Carlos D (June 15, 2010)
Connecticut Supreme Court
June 15, 2010
Juvenile
Justice: ...The
Connecticut Supreme Court addressed the issue as to whether
General Statutes § 54-1f (a) applies to juveniles who are served
with a summons that alleges the commission of criminal offenses.
-
State
v. Juan L. (May 19, 2009)
Connecticut Supreme Court
Juvenile
Justice: ...The
sole issue decided by the Connecticut Supreme court in Juan
L. was the interpretation of whether Conn. Gen. Stat. § 54-56d,
which governs the commitment or release of criminal defendants
who are not competent to stand trial, applies in the Superior
Court for Juvenile Matters (juvenile court). The court answered
that question with a resounding yes - and agreed with the state's
argument on appeal and remanded the case back to the trial court
for a disposition hearing pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 54-56d(m).
-
In
re Earl B (September 2008)
Connecticut Supreme Court
Juvenile Justice: ...In
this juvenile justice case, the Connecticut Supreme Court addressed
the question of whether a juvenile adjudicated as delinquent
and committed to the custody of the Department of Children and
Families pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46b-140(j) is entitled
to a hearing pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 17a-15 to challenge
his continued placement at Connecticut Juvenile Training School
("CJTS"). The Supreme Court, in reversing the judgment of the
trial court, held that the department's decision to continue
placement at CJTS was reviewable in a treatment plan hearing
under § 17a-15.
-
In
re William D (November 13, 2007)
Connecticut Supreme Court
Juvenile Justice: ...In
this juvenile justice case, the Connecticut Supreme Court addressed
the question of whether a trial court may extend a delinquency
commitment when the "child" at issue has reached the age of
16, given that the definition of "child" in Conn. Gen. Stat.
46b-120 is defined as a 'person under sixteen' or a person over
16 who has a violated a court order issued subsequent to a delinquency
finding. In
this case neither definition applied to William D. The Supreme
Court held that for purposes of extending a person's commitment
pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46b-141, it only matters what
age the person was at the time of the original commitment.
-
N.G.
ex rel. S.G. v. Connecticut (September 7, 2004)
Second Circuit Court of Appeals
Civil Liberties and Civil Rights, Juvenile Justice :
The second circuit court of appeals recently held that the Connecticut
Judicial Branch's repetitive strip search policy at the state's
juvenile detention centers ("JDC") violates the fourth amendment's
guarantee against unreasonable searches. In N.G. ex
-
In
re Darien S. (March 23, 2004)
Connecticut Appellate Court
Juvenile Justice : New juvenile justice case tackling
whether a permanency plan may review an existing commitment
plan, as opposed to a "future" permanency plan, an issue of
first impression in Connecticut
-
In re Steven M. (Feb 26, 2002)
CT Appellate Division
Juvenile Justice, Mental Health, Civil Liberties : In
an important decision limiting the Department of Children and
Families’ inherent power to unilaterally transfer a mentally
disabled juvenile delinquent from a Department facility to a
correctional institution...
-
In
re Carlos Q. (April 10, 2001)
CT Appellate Division
Juvenile Justice : DCF ...involving the Department of
Children and Families' attempt to extend the commitment of a
juvenile offender beyond the initial eighteen month period ...
-
State
v. Jason B. (May 4 1999)
CT Supreme Court
Juvenile Justice : Defendant had been convicted of statutory
rape. On the date of t ...
-
In
re James B., Jr. (1998)
CT Superior Court
Juvenile Justice : Pursuant to Conn. General Statutes
Section 46b-124(e), the victim ...
-
State
v. Angel C. (1998)
CT Supreme Court
Juvenile Justice : Four defendants, ages fourteen and
fifteen were convicted of A an ...
-
In re James B., Jr. (1998)
US Court of Appeals
Juvenile Justice : Pursuant to Conn. General Statutes
Section 46b-124(e), the victim ...
-
United
States of America v Male Juvenile (1997)
US Court of Appeals
Juvenile Justice : Court held that juvenile's mental
disabilities did not preclude f ...
