‘It is a shocking sight to see 20 or 30 children shackled’


The Bar Board of Governors have endorced a procedural rule prohibiting the presumptive shackling of children in delinquency appearances.

The board took the action as it reviewed proposed rule amendments for traffic, juvenile, and criminal court procedures at its July meeting.

One of the high profile matters was the proposed amendment to Juvenile Rule 8.100, which prohibits the routine shackling of children appearing in delinquency matters unless the court finds good reason for the restraints.

Rob Mason, immediate past chair of the Juvenile Court Rules Committee, noted that the Public Interest Law Section, the Legal Needs of Children Committee, and the 11th Circuit Public Defender’s Office spearheaded the effort to stop the indiscriminate shackling.

“The [rules] committee felt it was not necessary that that [shackling] happen and it should be an individual determination,” Mason said. “There are dangerous children and there are flight risks and the court can rule on those. There should not be a presumption for shackling.”

Board member Mayanne Downs, noting she had worked in juvenile court, agreed. “It is a shocking sight to see 20 or 30 children shackled,” she said.

The committee voted 12-11 to propose the rule change. The board endorsed it 30-0. That amendment was part of the three-year cycle changes proposed by the Juvenile Procedures Rules Committee. The board endorsed the other recommended amendments 30-0. Those included a requirement that a juvenile in a detention facility have a first court appearance within 24 hours and be represented by counsel, unless the child waives the right to counsel in writing.

Mason said many of the delinquency-related rule amendments stemmed from recommendations from the National Juvenile Defender Center.

The board endorsed the regular three-year cycle criminal procedure rule amendments by a vote of 30-0.

Board member David Rothman, liasion to the committee, noted the three-year cycle amendments were all noncontroversial and covered conforming the rules to recent statutory changes, editorial changes, and cross referencing corrections.

The board also endorsed the three-year cycle rule amendments for Traffic Court Rules. Peter Sartes, a member of the Traffic Court Rules Committee, said the main change was an amendment to allow traffic hearing officers to also hear boating infraction cases.

All the rules now go to the Supreme Court for review.