Coming of age in the eyes of the law: the conflict between miranda, J.D.B., and puberty

• Author: David M. N. Garavito and Mary Kate Koch
• Pages: 1-29

ARTICLES

COMING OF AGE IN THE EYES OF THE LAW: THE CONFLICT

BETWEEN MIRANDA, J.D.B., AND PUBERTY

David M. N. Garavito* and Mary Kate Koch**

ABSTRACT

Everyone knows that going through puberty is associated with a multitude of

changes: physical, mental, hormonal, etc. Fewer people know that when and how

fast one goes through puberty can also be associated with changes to one’s legal

rights. The Supreme Court of the United States held, in the landmark case of

J.D.B. v. North Carolina, that there were many “commonsense conclusions” that

could be drawn from how a child’s age would affect their interactions with law

enforcement. In that case, the Court was deciding whether age should affect

whether a child was considered “in custody” of the police, granting them the

legal rights associated with custodial interrogation (also known as Miranda

rights). Surprisingly, however, despite the majority opinion discussing the objec-

tive nature of age, and “commonsense conclusions” derived therefrom, the Court

did not fully incorporate age into the custody analysis. The Court held that the

age only matters in a legal sense either if the officer(s) interacting with that per-

son knows that the person is a child or if the age of the child would be objectively

apparent to a reasonable officer. In other words, unless the officer(s) knows that

a suspect is a child, the influence of this objective fact about a person depends

solely on if that person looks like a child to a “reasonable officer.” Although

some people find this shortcoming harmless, the Court has inadvertently opened

the door for discrimination, both intentional and unintentional. The vast amount

of biological and psychological research on puberty has found that when one

starts puberty and how fast one goes through puberty depends on multiple fac-

tors, including socioeconomic status, race, and sex. Further, additional research

on how children are perceived by others shows that children of color are per-

ceived as more mature and more responsible for their actions. In this Article, we

provide a brief history of custody and custodial interrogation, including the case

of J.D.B., and we summarize existing puberty research to emphasize the serious-

ness of limiting the legal importance of age based on subjective perceptions.

* Interprofessional Polytrauma & Traumatic Brain Injury Rehabilitation Research Fellow, Department of

Veterans Affairs; B.A., 2015, University of Michigan; M.A., 2017, Cornell University; J.D., 2020, Cornell Law

School; Ph.D., 2021, Cornell University. A very special thank you to Amelia Hritz for her advice on this

manuscript. © 2023, David M. N. Garavito & Mary Kate Koch.

** Postdoctoral Research Associate, Department of Psychology, University of Florida; B.A., 2015, Gonzaga

University; M.A., 2018, Cornell University; Ph.D., 2022, Cornell University.

1

Further, we provide a solution to this problem in the hope of preventing this

shortcoming from producing similar gray areas in other legal realms—a process

that has already begun.

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

I. AN OVERVIEW OF CUSTODY AND MIRANDA RIGHTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

A. Legal Rights Associated with Custody . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

B. The History of Custody Litigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

II. ADDING YOUTH TO THE CUSTODIAL EQUATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

A. Youth and Custody . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

B. J.D.B. v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

C. Changes Post-J.D.B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

III. PUBERTY: TIMING AND TEMPO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

A. A General Overview of Puberty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

B. Variations in Puberty Based on Race, Sex, and Other Variables 24

IV. CONFLICTS AND RESOLUTION: J.D.B. VERSUS BIOLOGY AND A

FRAMEWORK FOR CHANGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

A. Issues and Incompatibilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

B. A Framework for Addressing Minors and Custody . . . . . . . . . 28

CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

INTRODUCTION

You have the right to remain silent. Whatever you say can and will be used

against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford

an attorney, one will be appointed for you. These statements are well-known in

American culture. To some, particularly those versed in law, they may be a re-

minder of the rights that the law guarantees them during a criminal investigation.

To others, particularly some in the general public, hearing these statements is just

one part of the often painful process associated with being suspected of a crime.

During this investigatory process, the police have extraordinary power—a power

that is perhaps most salient during the interrogation of suspects. Recognizing this

unique type of power, the Supreme Court of the United States has stated that police

interrogations are naturally coercive and include “compelling pressures” that work

to the detriment of the suspect.

1

Accordingly, suspects in these coercive environ-

ments are guaranteed those certain protections and must be made aware of those

protections.

2

The protections associated with stereotypical police interrogations, set forth by

Miranda v. Arizona

3

and stated at the start of this Article, are dependent on whether

1. Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 467 (1966).

2. Id.

3. Id.

2 AMERICAN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [Vol. 60:1