Summary of Argument

Although arising out of different statutory provisions, there is no significant distinction between a youthful offender and a juvenile offender in Connecticut. Youthful offenders are processed within the adult system but benefit from juvenile-like provisions protecting their confidentiality, including private proceedings under seal and closed to the public, detention separate from adult defendants, and term limits on commitment. C.G.S. §54-76. In fact the legislative intent was to create a replicated process to the juvenile system. Yet, the difference in possible outcomes in juvenile or youthful offender versus adult prosecution and sentencing is profound, resulting in life-altering consequences for youth treated as adults. Connecticut statute, C.G.S. §54-76(c), unlawfully delegates to the prosecutor the power to choose the forum in which youthful offenders are prosecuted without providing standards to guide that choice, without requiring a statement of reasons for that choice, and without affording an opportunity for review of that choice. As a matter of forum selection, not charging, prosecutorial discretion does not provide any special justification for the denial of process. The need for process is even greater when a prosecutor, who is inherently adversarial, rather than a judge, who is inherently neutral, chooses to prosecute the defendant as an adult rather than a youthful offender. The transfer statute that divested the court of jurisdiction over Defendant B.B. is constitutionally defective because it deprives youth of their vested liberty interest guaranteed them by C.G.S. §54-76 (original jurisdiction over youth ages sixteen and seventeen until prosecutors move for and judge orders transfer) without due process. For that reason, this Court must reverse his conviction.

Summary of Argument

Despite originating from distinct statutory frameworks, the distinction between "youthful offender" and "juvenile offender" in Connecticut is effectively inconsequential. While youthful offenders are processed within the adult system, they receive protections mirroring the juvenile system, such as confidentiality measures, separate detention, and limited commitment terms. Legislative intent aimed for a near-identical process to the juvenile system. However, the potential outcomes for youthful offenders differ dramatically from those of adult defendants, resulting in potentially life-altering consequences for youth subjected to adult treatment.

Connecticut statute C.G.S. §54-76(c) is problematic in its delegation of the power to choose the forum for prosecuting youthful offenders to the prosecutor. This delegation lacks any guiding standards, lacks a requirement for stating reasons, and excludes opportunities for reviewing the prosecutor's decision. The lack of procedural safeguards regarding forum selection, particularly in the context of prosecutorial discretion, necessitates greater process when prosecutors make decisions regarding the treatment of defendants. This need is especially critical given the adversarial nature of prosecution, contrasting with the inherent neutrality of judges. The transfer statute divesting the court of jurisdiction over Defendant B.B. constitutes a violation of due process by unlawfully depriving youth of their protected liberty interest established in C.G.S. §54-76. The Court is obligated to overturn his conviction due to this constitutional defect.

Summary of Argument

Connecticut's legal system distinguishes between "youthful offenders" and "juvenile offenders," although both are processed through similar procedures. While youthful offenders are treated within the adult system, they enjoy certain juvenile-like protections, such as private proceedings and separate detention. This approach aims to replicate the juvenile system. However, the potential outcomes for juvenile, youthful, or adult prosecutions can vary significantly, potentially impacting the lives of young people treated as adults.

The issue at hand focuses on Connecticut statute, C.G.S. §54-76(c), which allows prosecutors to decide whether to pursue cases against youthful offenders within the juvenile or adult systems. The statute lacks clear standards to guide this choice, fails to require justification for the decision, and offers no avenue for judicial review. This raises concerns about procedural due process, particularly as the prosecutor's adversarial role creates a conflict of interest when choosing between adult and juvenile prosecution.

The statute's lack of procedural safeguards deprives young individuals of their guaranteed right to juvenile court jurisdiction, established in C.G.S. §54-76, which provides original jurisdiction over sixteen and seventeen-year-olds until prosecutors initiate a transfer to the adult system. This arbitrary transfer without proper process violates due process rights, and the court should overturn the conviction in this case.

Summary of Argument

In Connecticut, youthful offenders and juvenile offenders are treated similarly despite being governed by different laws. While youthful offenders face adult court proceedings, they receive special protections, like confidentiality and limited detention time. However, the difference between adult and youthful offender outcomes can be dramatic, impacting young people's lives in major ways.

Connecticut law gives prosecutors the power to decide whether to treat a youthful offender as an adult or a juvenile. This power is not limited by specific rules, requiring justification, or offering a review process. This unchecked power allows the prosecutor, an adversarial figure, to make life-altering decisions without a neutral judge’s oversight.

This lack of due process violates the rights of young people, who have a legal right to be considered for youthful offender status. The law unfairly takes away their right to be treated as juveniles by transferring their cases to adult court. As a result, this court must overturn the conviction.

Summary of Argument

In Connecticut, there are two ways to deal with young people who break the law: juvenile court and youthful offender court. Youthful offenders are treated in the adult court system, but they get some special protections like keeping their information private. The law says that prosecutors can decide which court a young person goes to. This means the prosecutor can choose whether a young person is treated as an adult or like a juvenile. This is not fair because the prosecutor is like a lawyer for the state, and they want to win the case. A judge is supposed to be fair to everyone. This is why the court should throw out B.B.'s conviction, because the law doesn't let judges review the prosecutor's decision.