Kent v. United States

Kent's counsel also asked that his client be moved to another facility for psychiatric evaluation, and this was done. Staff at two hospitals wrote reports describing Kent as severely emotionally ill. However, instead of the waiver hearing his attorney had requested, the juvenile court judge issued an order waiving jurisdiction on the basis of a "full investigation," and the case moved to district court.

At the regular criminal court Kent faced the charges of housebreaking, robbery and rape as an adult. His counsel motioned to dismiss the charges, claiming the waiver that landed him in district court was invalid, since it did not encompass a "full investigation" as dictated by the Juvenile Court Act. The motion was denied, and Kent was found guilty on the housebreaking and robbery charges and sentenced to 30 to 90 years. The case was appealed and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit found the waiver and the judge's waiver order valid, and upheld the convictions. It was appealed again and came before the U.S. Supreme Court in 1966 as Kent v. United States.

In a 5-4 decision delivered on 21 March 1966 by Justice Fortas, the Supreme Court reversed the lower courts' rulings. It found that proper procedure had not been followed when the juvenile court judge waived jurisdiction. Furthermore, whether or not an offender should be tried as an adult--a portentous possibility--could not be determined without some representation on behalf of the youth present.