The nature of the juvenile court process remained unchanged until the 1960s. When the Warren Court began to scrutinize procedures in adult criminal courts, its attention turned also to juvenile courts. In a groundbreaking decision, the Supreme Court held in In re Gault (1967) that the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applied to juvenile court proceedings. The court emphasized that “under our Constitution the condition of being a boy does not justify a kangaroo court.”
-In what case following In re Gault did the Court hold that a juvenile is charged with an act that would be a crime if committed by an adult, then every element of that criminal act must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt?

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

In re Winship was a Supreme Court case in which the Court held that if a juvenile is charged with an act that would be a crime if committed by an adult, then every element of that criminal act must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. This decision established the constitutional standard of proof for juvenile delinquency cases.

The Nature of the Juvenile Court Process Remained Unchanged Until