| In re Winship
(No. 778)
2 N.Y.2d 196, 247 N.E.2d 253, reversed. |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Syllabus
| Opinion
[ Brennan ] | Concurrence
[ Harlan ] | Dissent
[ Burger ] | Dissent
[ Black ] |
| HTML version
PDF version | HTML version
PDF version | HTML version
PDF version | HTML version
PDF version | HTML version
PDF version |
In re Winship
Relying on a preponderance of the evidence, the standard of proof required by § 744(b) of the New York Family Court Act, a New York Family Court judge found that appellant, then a 12-year-old boy, had committed an act that "if done by an adult, would constitute the crime . . . of Larceny." The New York Court of Appeals affirmed, sustaining the constitutionality of § 744(b).
Held: Proof beyond a reasonable doubt, which is required by the Due Process Clause in criminal trials, is among the "essentials of due process and fair treatment" required during the adjudicatory stage when a juvenile is charged with an act that would constitute a crime if committed by an adult. Pp. 361-368.
