Pennsylvania Juvenile Defenders

Website made possible with the generous support of the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency and the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation.

Publications and Resources

Pennsylvania Juvenile Collateral Consequences Checklist

Performance Guidelines for Quality and Effective Juvenile Delinquency Representation

Rules of Juvenile Court Procedure: Delinquency Matters

The Juvenile Act 2008

Northeast Regional Defender Center

In order to increase the capacity of the grassroots juvenile defense bar across the country, the National Center incorporated into its design the development of nine Regional Defender Centers. The Northeast Region includes the following four states: Delaware, New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania.

State and Local Defender Sites

Juveniles Denied right to Attorney in Luzerne County

Opinion: Juveniles denied attorneys are being unjustly served
Wilkes-Barre Times Leader
May 2, 2008

EVEN CASUAL VIEWERS of television cop shows know that, in addition to “the right to remain silent,” criminal suspects have “the right to speak to an attorney.”

And, good grief, that’s from the moment police begin serious questioning.

So why, then, do so many Luzerne County children who have been accused of wrongdoing apparently get all the way to the courtroom without legal representation?

Research indicated that more than half of the young people who went through Luzerne County’s juvenile court system over a two-year span, in 2005 and 2006, were not represented by an attorney, according to the Juvenile Law Center in Philadelphia.

That figure is nearly 10 times the state average, an attorney with the law center told Times Leader reporter Terrie Morgan-Besecker.

“Luzerne County’s juvenile court proceedings represent the most egregious violation of children’s constitutional rights in Pennsylvania,” said Marsha Levick, the center’s legal director. “When more than half of all youth appear in court without legal representation … something is seriously wrong and it must be stopped.”

The group earlier this week filed a petition urging the state Supreme Court to intervene in hundreds of past and current juvenile delinquency hearings. In fact, it identified more than 560 cases from the two-year period in question that it has asked to be reviewed. Additional cases from the years since are expected to be tacked onto the list.

The center’s petition alleges that the county’s juvenile judge, Mark Ciavarella, and its juvenile probation officials failed to follow regulations from Oct. 1, 2005, when Pennsylvania adopted the Rules of Juvenile Court Procedure.

“More than 500 families in the county were affected and approximately 200 children were removed from their homes, leaving both children and parents feeling bewildered, violated and traumatized,” according to the law center’s press release.

Ciavarella could not explain why the number of unrepresented juveniles was higher here than in other counties. He has asked the attorney for the county’s juvenile probation department to file a response to the petition.

Ultimately, the state Supreme Court will review the documents and decide whether to intervene.

Let’s hope that its review occurs quickly.

Meanwhile, the county’s juvenile justice system should review its procedures and ensure that every youth is adequately represented during his, or her, day in court.