Juvenile Law Center filed an amicus curiae brief on behalf of Paul H. Gingerich, a 12-year-old child who was transferred to adult court and entered a guilty plea without the court inquiring into his competency at any phase in the proceedings. It is established law that when the judicial process puts the rights of a child or adult who is incompetent in jeopardy, due process is violated. However, the trial court completely ignored issues of 12-year-old Gingerich’s competence at both the transfer phase and when it accepted Gingerich’s guilty plea. Courts increasingly rely on principles of adolescent development to inform their decisions with regard to how immaturity and lack of experience hinder children's ability to fully understand, protect and exercise their rights. A decision which disregards strong evidence that a 12-year-old child is incompetent raises serious concerns about due process and fundamental fairness.
Juvenile Law Center’s brief argued that the trial court thus failed to adequately protect the due process rights of Paul Gingerich. In particular, the court failed in its obligation at three pivotal points in these proceedings to assure that Paul was competent: prior to the initiation of the transfer hearing, at the transfer hearing itself and prior to acceptance of the plea agreement. The failure of the court to address the issue of competency violates the due process clause of the United States Constitution as well as Indiana law. This failure resulted in fundamentally unfair proceedings in juvenile and criminal court that can only be remedied by vacating the plea agreement.
Follow: