Poulin, In re
| Decision Date | 28 February 1957 |
| Citation | 129 A.2d 672,100 N.H. 458 |
| Parties | In re Paul POULIN. |
| Court | New Hampshire Supreme Court |
Sleeper & Mullavey, Wayne J. Mullavey, Exeter, for petitionee.
Juvenile court proceedings in this state are protective and not penal and are designed to rehabilitate minors rather than punish them for the commission of crimes. State v. Lefebvre, 91 N.H. 382, 20 A.2d 185; Petition of Morin, 95 N.H. 518, 520, 68 A.2d 668. The statute requires that juvenie delinquency proceedings be heard 'in an informal manner.' RSA 169:9. The court is not bound 'by the technical rules of evidence,' RSA 169:26, and any adjudication 'shall not be deemed a conviction.' Id. The constitutionality of this law was clearly established in Petition of Morin, supra, 95 N.H. 522, 68 A.2d 671, and is not brought into question here. The single question presented in this case is whether a juvenile court may prohibit counsel from appearing in behalf of a juvenile delinquent or his parent.
There is no express provision in the juvenile court law which explicitly allows or prohibits the presence of counsel in juvenile proceedings. The pertinent part of RSA 169:20 reads as follows: 'No one shall attend such hearing, unless his presence is necessary either as parent, party or witness, or in the opinion of the court, in the interest of justice * * *.' In the present case it is conceded that counsel is not a parent, nor a party, nor a witness but it is urged that his presence is necessary 'in the interest of justice' within the meaning of that statute.
The right to notice and an opportunity to be heard in special proceedings of a civil nature is generally considered to be a basic essential of most judicial proceedings. DiPietro v. Lavigne, 98 N.H. 294, 295, 99 A.2d 413. It is not to be assumed that a statute denies notice and hearing in the ordinary case. A concomitant of an opportunity to be heard in support of or in defense of a claim is the right to the assistance of counsel. Shioutakon v. District of Columbia, 98 U.S.App.D.C. 371, 236 F.2d 666. Inasmuch as a finding of juvenile delinquency may result in the child's commitment for the period of his minority, it is quite evident that this may be of serious concern to the child as well as his parents. The custodial rights of parents may be affected. The matters considered may lead to imposition of penalties upon the parents. RSA 169:13, 23. The requirement of a hearing upon the petition, RSA 169:9, even though informally conducted implies a right to the assistance of counsel in order that the parent or party may be fairly and intelligently heard. Specific provision is made for the inspection of records by the 'authorized representative of the person concerned,' RSA 169:22, which must be deemed to include counsel. This right would be of little value if it were intended that counsel should be excluded from the proceedings.
The worthwhile objectives of the juvenile courts can be accomplished without prohibiting the child or the parent from obtaining the assistance of counsel. Rubin, Protecting the Child in the Juvenile Court 43 J.Crim.L. 425 (1952). It is significant that the right to counsel in juvenile courts has been emphasized by those most interested in the advancement and improvement of juvenile courts. See 'Standards for Specialized Courts Dealing with Children,' pp. 56, 58 (1954), a publication prepared by Children's Bureau, U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, in cooperation with National Probation and Parole Association and National Council of Juvenile Court Judges.
Some cases have indicated that the right to counsel in a juvenile court proceeding is a constitutional requirement under the federal Constitution. In re Poff, D.C., 135 F.Supp. 224; 54 Mich.L.Rev. 1000. We find it unnecessary to decide the present case on constitutional grounds since we believe the answer can be found in the statute itself.
We find nothing inconsistent with the right to counsel on the one hand and the laudable objectives of the juvenile court law on the other. Both the child and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Artibee v. Cheboygan Circuit Judge
...(D.N.J.1957); People v. Dotson, 46 Cal.2d 891, 299 P.2d 875 (1956); In re Walker, 282 N.C. 28, 191 S.E.2d 702 (1972); In re Poulin, 100 N.H. 458, 129 A.2d 672 (1957). See, also, Note, Rights and Rehabilitation in the Juvenile Courts, 67 Col.L.Rev. 281 (1967); Ketcham, Legal Renaissance in t......
-
Pee v. United States
...— State ex rel. Miller v. Bryant, 94 Neb. 754, 144 N.W. 804 (1913). Nevada — N.R.S. 62:200 (1957). New Hampshire — In re Poulin, 100 N.H. 458, 129 A.2d 672, 673 (1957). New Jersey — Ex parte Newkosky, 94 N. J.L. 314, 116 A. 716, 717 New Mexico — In re Santillanes, 47 N.M. 140, 138 P.2d 503,......
-
State v. Smagula, s. 7502
...conflict with constitutional rights wherever reasonably possible. Sibson v. State, 110 N.H. 8, 259 A.2d 397 (1969); In re Poulin, 100 N.H. 458, 129 A.2d 672 (1957); C. Sands, 2A Sutherland Statutory Construction § 45.11 (1972). Although guidelines do not appear in a statute, a reviewing cou......
-
State v. Deane
...been transferred although not strictly of a criminal nature. State v. Tetreault, 97 N.H. 260, 85 A.2d 386 (bastardy) and In re Poulin, 100 N.H. 458, 129 A.2d 672 (juvenile delinquency). These decisions indicate that municipal courts, and attorneys for the prosecution and the defense as well......
-
The Utopian World of Juvenile Courts
...be ap-pointed for him-the so-called Mirandawarnings.When one views together thesetwo developments of recent years-the29 In re Poulin, 100 N.H. 458, 129 A 2d 672(1957).30 In re Holmes, 379 Pa. 599, 109 A 2d 523(1955). Many of the leading cases on thelegal aspects of the juvenile court are co......