Supreme Court Vacates Juvenile Convictions Back To 2003

Times Leader Photo
According to a Times Leader article out of Harrisburg Pennsylvania's Highest Court has vacated all of the juvenile cases heard before disgraced ex-Judge Mark Ciavarella since 2003. Its order also disallows retrial of all the cases but a handful.

In issuing the ruling, the high court said it agreed with Grim's assessment that Ciavarella had shown a "complete disregard for the constitutional rights of juveniles who appeared before him."

"We conclude that the record supports Judge Grim's determination that Ciavarella knew he was violating both the law and the procedural rules promulgated by this court applicable when adjudicating the merits of juvenile cases without the knowing, intelligent and voluntary waiver of counsel by the juveniles," the court wrote.

Grim had also recommended that Luzerne County District Attorney's office be barred from retrying all but a handful of cases based on the double jeopardy statute, a constitutional prohibition against trying a person twice for the same crime. Grim based that recommendation on his finding that Ciavarella engaged in intentional conduct meant to deprive juveniles of their rights. That triggered the double jeopardy statute, he said.

The Supreme Court agreed with Grim that the vast majority of cases cannot be retried, but declined to adopt Grim's reasoning regarding the double jeopardy statute. The court instead said it was granting that relief solely "in the interest of justice."

SOP believes this order is far reaching and Judges in Pennsylvania should take note. In reading the court's order it is an indictment of actions by a judge that would introduce an element of prejudice by a judge.

The transcripts reveal a disturbing lack of fundamental process, inimical to any system of justice, and made even more grievous since these matters involved juveniles.

During the hearing conducted by President Judge Platt in Joseph v. The Scranton Times, 19 MM 2009, Ciavarella admitted under oath that he had received payments from Robert Powell, a co-owner of the PA Child Care and Western PA Child Care facilities, and from Robert K. Mericle, the developer who constructed the juvenile facilities, during the period of time that Ciavarella was presiding over juvenile matters in Luzerne County. It is a matter of record that Ciavarella routinely committed juveniles to one or another of these facilities. It is also a matter of record that Ciavarella failed to disclose his ties to Powell, much less the financial benefits he received in connection with the facilities to which he routinely committed Luzerne County juveniles. Ciavarella’s admission that he received these payments, and that he failed to disclose his financial interests arising from the development of the juvenile facilities, thoroughly undermines the integrity of all juvenile proceedings before Ciavarella. Whether or not a juvenile was represented by counsel, and whether or not a juvenile was committed to one of the facilities which secretly funneled money to Ciavarella and Conahan, this Court cannot have any confidence that Ciavarella decided any Luzerne County juvenile case fairly and impartially while he labored under the
specter of his self-interested dealings with the facilities.

At a federal hearing yesterday Mark Ciavarella had "No comment." FINALLY!

DA Jackie Musto Carroll- Lets Ask You A Question

The Juvenile Law Center released a press release on April 28, 2008 that stated "Luzerne County is Worst Violator of Youth Civil Rights- Juvenile Law Center, a Philadelphia-based public interest law firm, filed a petition to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court today requesting immediate, emergency relief on behalf of Luzerne County youth who have been the subject of delinquency hearings without counsel since October 1, 2005 when Pennsylvania adopted the Rules of Juvenile Court Procedure."

The Center issued another press release on June 17,2008 titled "JLC Petitions PA Supreme Court for Extraordinary Relief for Hundreds of Youth Tried Without the Benefit of Lawyers". In the body of the release it states "The Luzerne County District Attorney and the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts (AOPC) filed briefs on behalf of the Juvenile Court urging the Supreme Court not to take jurisdiction. JLC filed a response."

A second request was placed before the Supreme Court by the Juvenile Law Center in December.

DA Musto-Carroll's argument to the court contained the following statement "The Petitioners have not shown that the issue is of such immediate public importance that extraordinary jurisdiction is required. Nor have the Petitioners clearly demonstrate that their rights have been violated. In addition the Petitioners allegations regarding other juveniles who may be similarly situated have not shown that such individuals even exist."

Oh really???

On page 14 of the indictment against Ciavarella and Conahan it reads "It was further a part of the scheme and artifice to defraud that, on numerous occassions, accused juvenile offenders were ordered detained by the defendant Mark A. Ciavarella, Jr. even when Juvenile Probation Officers did not recommend detention. The defendant Mark A. Ciavarella, Jr., at others operating at his behest, also exherted pressure on staff of the Court of Common Pleas to recommend detention of juvenile offenders. On some occassions, probation officers were pressured to change recommendations of release to recommendations of detention.

Tom Corbett, Attorney General for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania supported the Juvenile Law Center's efforts to secure Supreme Court review. The Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare filed a similar brief supporting a Supreme Court review. Yet, DA Musto-Carroll chose otherwise.

In today's press conference DA Musto-Carroll isquoted as saying "I think this is the beginning of the end of the darkest days of our county. We can look at this as a bright spot that things have been turned around and no longer will these sorts of things be tolerated."

Her brief filed in opposition to the Juvenile Law Center demonstrates an acute ignorance of the investigation going on around her. The Supreme Court's refusal to hear children's complaints of massive rights violations in Luzerne County demands public outrage at the arrogance of the court in light of this indictment.

DA Musto-Carroll- Were you not aware of an investigation into PA ChildCare to the extent that you foiled attempts to protect children from long range mental problems over injustice?

From the press release of U.S. Attorney Martin Carlson dated January 26, 2009 at the bottom of page 4- "Mr. Carlson further noted that Luzerne County District Attorney Jackie Carroll worked closely with federal investigators and the United States Attorney's Office in assisting in the investigation." It is hard to comprehend how DA Carroll could write a brief in opposition knowing the facts she must have known given that statement.