Schall v. Martin
Significance, Juvenile System Of Justice, Is Teenage Preventive Detention Legal?, Impact, Curfews For Juveniles
Schall, Commissioner of New York City Department of Juvenile Justice
Gregory Martin, Luis Rosario, Kenneth Morgan
That pretrial preventive detention of juveniles under New York's Family Court Act does not violate the "fundamental fairness" requirement of the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause.
Chief Lawyer for Appellant
Judith A. Gordon, Assistant Attorney General of New York
Chief Lawyer for Appellees
Justices for the Court
Harry A. Blackmun, Warren E. Burger, Sandra Day O'Connor, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist (writing for the Court), Byron R. White
William J. Brennan, Jr., Thurgood Marshall, John Paul Stevens
Date of Decision
4 June 1984
Upheld the state of New York's claim and overturned two lower courts' decisions banning pretrial detention of juveniles.
- In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967).
- McKeiver v. Pennsylvania, 403 U.S. 528 (1971).
- Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520 (1979).
- Reno v. Flores, 507 U.S. 292 (1993).
Court Decisions--Juvenile Curfews, http://www.mrsc.org/legal/curfew/courtcur.htm.
Keeping Our Kids on the Right Track, http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/rttrack.htm.
The Seattle Times, http://www.seattletimes.com/extra/browse/html97/altcurf_040797.html.
- Selective Service v. Minnesota Public Interest Research Group - Significance, Uncle Sam And Eligible Young Men, Questions Of Punitive Intent And Compulsion, Marshall's Dissent: "a De Facto Classification Based On Wealth"
- Santosky v. Kramer - Significance, Further Readings
- Schall v. Martin - Further Readings
- Schall v. Martin - Significance
- Schall v. Martin - Juvenile System Of Justice
- Schall v. Martin - Is Teenage Preventive Detention Legal?
- Schall v. Martin - Impact
- Schall v. Martin - Curfews For Juveniles
- Other Free Encyclopedias