U.R.Y.C.P. 17

History

Comments & Procedures: Rule 17. The rights set forth in section 43-21-311 of the Mississippi Code attach whenever the child is taken into custody for an offense which is within the jurisdiction of the youth court. See Smith v. State, 534 So. 2d 194, 196 (Miss. 1988) (“At the time [the child] gave his confession he had not been charged with any crime that would remove him from the Youth Court’s jurisdiction. . . Therefore, the circumstances surrounding [his] confession must satisfy the Youth Court Act.”). However, these rights do not necessarily apply to a minor who is a suspect in a crime carrying a potential life or death sentence. See Moody v. State, 838 So. 2d 324, 334 (Miss. Ct. App. 2002) (“Once a minor becomes a suspect in a crime carrying a potential life sentence or death, to the extent that it becomes necessary to detain that person and inform him of his Miranda rights prior to an attempt to interrogate him, we conclude that Section 43-21-151(1)(a) is sufficiently invoked so as to remove that youthful suspect from the protections otherwise afforded him under the Youth Court Act.”). If the rights are applicable then failure to abide by them may constitute a violation of due process. See Gallegos v. Colorado, 370 U.S. 49, 55 (1962) (“The youth of the petitioner, the long detention, the failure to send for his parents, the failure immediately to bring him before the judge of the Juvenile Court, the failure to see to it that he had the advice of a lawyer or a friend - all of these combine to make us conclude that the formal confession. . . was obtained in violation of due process.”); Edmonds v. State, 955 So. 2d 787, 804 (Miss. 2007) (“[The] absence of a parent or guardian during the interrogation of a [child who was under the jurisdiction of the youth court] goes directly to the issue of voluntariness; such a violation renders the statement inadmissible as a violation of basic constitutional guarantees.”).