Filed a civil rights class action lawsuit challenging Pennsylvania law and practices that governed the detention of youth charged with committing delinquent acts.
Argued that law violated due process and involved incarceration in jail-like facilities that mixed those already adjudicated delinquent with youth not yet found guilty of a crime.
Challenged the adequacy of Philadelphia’s program of aftercare probation, which was responsible for a child’s course of treatment in, discharge from, and supervision following detention for juvenile offenses.
Represented Pennsylvania children in challenging the way the state implemented the funding formula that paid for services for delinquent and dependent children.
This appeal raised a question of first impression: Is a juvenile entitled to request a jury trial in juvenile court when 1) the protective features of the juvenile court have been largely eliminated by statutory amendments, and, 2) a delinquency adjudication would lead to automatic adult status upon a next arrest? The Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed the denial of the right to a jury trial.
Challenged the constitutionality of Pennsylvania’s Act 53, which assists parents in obtaining treatment for minors afflicted with a drug or alcohol dependency by allowing for involuntary commitment.
Argued that a sentence of 110 years to life (three consecutive life-terms) for a non-homicide offense committed as a juvenile violates the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in Graham v. Florida.
Follow: