1245 disillusionment with the results of juvenile

for the juvenile offender and was in no sense his adversary.
1245
Disillusionment with the results of juvenile reforms coupled with
judicial emphasis on constitutional protection of the accused led in
the 1960s to a substantial restriction of these elements of juvenile
jurisprudence. After tracing in much detail this history of juvenile
courts, the Court held in In re Gault
1246
that the application of due
process to juvenile proceedings would not endanger the good inten-
tions vested in the system nor diminish the features of the system
which were deemed desirable—emphasis upon rehabilitation rather
than punishment, a measure of informality, avoidance of the stigma
of criminal conviction, the low visibility of the process—but that the
consequences of the absence of due process standards made their
application necessary.
1247
their sentences commuted were promptly paroled. In Van Curen , the Court made
express what had been implicit in Dumschat ; the “mutually explicit understand-
ings” concept under which some property interests are found protected does not ap-
ply to liberty interests. Van Curen is also interesting because there the parole board
had granted the petition for parole but within days revoked it before the prisoner
was released, upon being told that he had lied at the hearing before the board.
1244
For analysis of the state laws as well as application of constitutional prin-
ciples to juveniles, see S
AMUEL
M. D
AVIS
, R
IGHTS OF
J
UVENILES
: T
HE
J
UVENILE
J
USTICE
S
YS
-
TEM
(2d ed. 2006).
1245
In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1, 12–29 (1967).
1246
387 U.S. 1 (1967).
1247
“Ultimately, however, we confront the reality of that portion of the juvenile
court process with which we deal in this case. A boy is charged with misconduct.
The boy is committed to an institution where he may be restrained of liberty for
years. It is of no constitutional consequence—and of limited practical meaning—
that the institution to which he is committed is called an Industrial School. The
fact of the matter is that, however euphemistic the title, a ‘receiving home’ or an
‘industrial school’ for juveniles is an institution of confinement in which the child is
incarcerated for a greater or lesser time. His world becomes ‘a building with white-
2039 AMENDMENT 14—RIGHTS GUARANTEED

Thus, the Court in Gault required that notice of charges be given
in time for the juvenile to prepare a defense, required a hearing in
which the juvenile could be represented by retained or appointed
counsel, required observance of the rights of confrontation and cross-
examination, and required that the juvenile be protected against
self-incrimination.
1248
It did not pass upon the right of appeal or
the failure to make transcripts of hearings. Earlier, the Court had
held that before a juvenile could be “waived” to an adult court for
trial, there had to be a hearing and findings of reasons, a result
based on statutory interpretation but apparently constitutionalized
in Gault .