State in Interest of M.C

7 Citing cases

  1. State in Interest of C.V

    201 N.J. 281 (N.J. 2010)   Cited 29 times
    Holding that a juvenile was not entitled to credit for time spent in residential treatment programs as a condition of probation

    N.J.S.A. 2A:4A-43(a). Although not explicitly included in the statute, the Code has been found to permit suspended sentences as a necessary, viable disposition. State ex rel. M.C., 384 N.J.Super. 116, 118, 894 A.2d 60 (App.Div. 2006). The Code provides guidance to judges considering whether incarceration is appropriate.

  2. In re C.K.

    233 N.J. 44 (N.J. 2018)   Cited 44 times
    Holding a lifetime registration requirement for certain juvenile sex offenders unconstitutional in part because "keeping on the sex-offender registry those juveniles who have completed their rehabilitation, not reoffended, and who can prove after a-year look-back period that they are not likely to pose a societal threat"

    Although rehabilitation, historically, has been the primary focus of the juvenile justice system, a second purpose—increasingly so in recent times—is protection of the public. See State in Interest of K.O., 217 N.J. 83, 92–93, 85 A.3d 938 (2014) ; see also J.G., 169 N.J. at 320–21, 777 A.2d 891 (noting that soon after enactment of Megan's Law, Legislature amended Juvenile Code's statement of purpose to include "a range of sanctions designed to promote accountability and protect the public" (quoting N.J.S.A. 2A:4A–21 ) ); State in Interest of M.C., 384 N.J. Super. 116, 128, 894 A.2d 60 (App. Div. 2006) (noting that rehabilitation and protection of society are among considerations family court must weigh). Nevertheless, rehabilitation and reformation of the juvenile remain a hallmark of the juvenile system, as evidenced by the twenty enumerated dispositions available to the family court in sentencing a juvenile adjudicated delinquent.

  3. In re C.G.

    DOCKET NO. A-4585-16T2 (App. Div. May. 31, 2018)

    Although rehabilitation, historically, has been the primary focus of the juvenile justice system, a second purpose — increasingly so in recent times — is protection of the public. See State in Interest of K.O., 217 N.J. 83, 92-93 (2014); see also J.G., 169 N.J. at 320-21 (noting that soon after enactment of Megan's Law, Legislature amended Juvenile Code's statement of purpose to include "a range of sanctions designed to promote accountability and protect the public" (quoting N.J.S.A. 2A:4A-21)); State in Interest of M.C., 384 N.J. Super. 116, 128 (App. Div. 2006) (noting that rehabilitation and protection of society are among considerations family court must weigh).Nevertheless, rehabilitation and reformation of the juvenile remain a hallmark of the

  4. In re T.C.

    454 N.J. Super. 189 (App. Div. 2018)   Cited 1 times

    When making a disposition, "Family Part judges must determine the most appropriate course of action in respect of the individual to ‘accomplish both rehabilitation and preservation of the family unit and at the same time protect society.’ " Id. at 296, 990 A.2d 640 (quoting State In re. M.C., 384 N.J. Super. 116, 128, 894 A.2d 60 (App. Div. 2006) ). N.J.S.A. 2A:4A–43(c) states in relevant part:

  5. In re State

    453 N.J. Super. 480 (App. Div. 2018)   Cited 3 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Noting "shall" signals a mandatory result

    "One of the ‘major hallmarks of the Code’ was to provide the newly created, specialized family court with flexibility in juvenile dispositions." State ex rel. C.V., 201 N.J. 281, 295, 990 A.2d 640 (2010) (quoting State ex rel. M.C., 384 N.J. Super. 116, 127, 894 A.2d 60 (App. Div. 2006) ). We have said, "[e]ven with respect to a juvenile charged with conduct that would be a crime if committed by an adult, the overriding goal of the juvenile justice system is rehabilitation, not punishment."

  6. State ex rel. J.J.

    DOCKET NO. A-2357-11T2 (App. Div. Aug. 28, 2012)

    Nevertheless, our courts also recognize that the Code serves a penal purpose. State ex rel. J.D.H., 171 N.J. 475, 483 (2002); State ex rel. M.C., 384 N.J. Super. 116, 118 (App. Div. 2006). The Code provides juvenile offenders with most, but not all, of the rights of criminal defendants.

  7. In re State ex rel. J.J.

    427 N.J. Super. 541 (App. Div. 2012)   Cited 4 times
    Mentioning the general policy towards "sight and sound separation" between juvenile delinquents and adults at mixed correctional facilities

    Nevertheless, our courts also recognize that the Code serves a penal purpose. State ex rel. J.D.H., 171 N.J. 475, 483, 795 A.2d 851 (2002); State ex rel. M.C., 384 N.J.Super. 116, 118, 894 A.2d 60 (App.Div.2006). The Code provides juvenile offenders with most, but not all, of the rights of criminal defendants.