Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 125 Vt. 373 - In Re Rich

In Re Rich’s Empirical Analysis

1966

Citation profile

42
cited by 42 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
7
states following
September 2022
most recently cited

6 district · 31 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 42 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2022 · most notably Gault (1967), State Ex Rel. Londerholm v. Owens (1966)

6 district · 31 state decisions

2001966197019801990200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Holmes' Appeal · 46 Cal. 2d 891 - People v. Dotson · In re Hook · In Re Mears · 125 F. Supp. 647 - White v. Reid

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “It is a protective proceeding entirely concerned with the welfare of the child, and is not punitive. The procedures supersede the provisions of the criminal law and laws affecting minors in conflict with the authorizations of the juvenile court statutes. The inquiry relates to proper custody for the child, not his guilt or innocence as a criminal offender.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““It is therefore essential to the constitutional validity of our juvenile court procedures that the power to connect it to a punitive proceeding in the criminal sense be removed. Tlie rehabilitative caretaking offered in exchange for constitutional protections must be substantive and real, not mere verbiage. Otherwise the exchange is, in the words of Professor Paulsen, counterfeit. Paulsen ‘Fairness to the Juvenile Offender’ supra, 41 Minn. L. R. 547, 576 (1957). “To this end we hold that any transfer from Weeks School to a penal institution must be founded upon a criminal prosecution and conviction attended by the constitutional guarantees appropriate to such a proceeding. Transfers under the authority of 28 V. S. A. § 415 can constitutionally be made only under such circumstances. This did not occur in this case and must be corrected by a return of the petitioner to Weeks School.” (p. 378.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““The validity of the whole juvenile system is dependent upon its adherence to its protective, rather than its penal, aspects. Dispensing with formal constitutional safeguards can be justified only so long as the proceedings are not, in any sense, criminal. We hold confinement in a penal institution will convert the proceedings from juvenile to criminal and require the observance of constitutional safeguards. The non-criminal aspect is the legal backbone of the constitutionality of all American juvenile court legislation. If after a juvenile proceeding, the juvenile can be committed to a place of penal servitude, the entire claim of parens patriae becomes a hypocritical mockery.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.