In the Interest of Davis
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Dissent
CIRILLO, President Judge,
dissenting:
I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion. Although I agree that an adult in a revocation of probation hearing has the right to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses absent a showing of good cause, I cannot embrace the majority’s assertion that juveniles are entitled to this same right. Rather, an examination of applicable statutory and case law, as well as a consideration of the purposes and procedures of the juvenile system, leads me to the conclusion that juveniles have a more limited right to confrontation in probation revocation…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- In Re GAULTSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Kent v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- McKeiver v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Breed v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.