§ 6338. Other basic rights.
(a) General rule.--A party is entitled to the opportunity to introduce evidence and otherwise be heard
in his own behalf and to cross-examine witnesses.
(b) Self-incrimination.--A child charged with a delinquent act need not be a witness against or otherwise incriminate
himself. An extrajudicial statement, if obtained in the course of violation of this
chapter or which could be constitutionally inadmissible in a criminal proceeding,
shall not be used against him. Evidence illegally seized or obtained shall not be
received over objection to establish the allegations made against him. A confession
validly made by a child out of court at a time when the child is under 18 years of
age shall be insufficient to support an adjudication of delinquency unless it is corroborated
by other evidence.
(c) Statements and information obtained during screening or assessment.--
(1) No statements, admissions or confessions made by or incriminating information obtained
from a child in the course of a screening or assessment that is undertaken in conjunction
with any proceedings under this chapter, including, but not limited to, that which
is court ordered, shall be admitted into evidence against the child on the issue of
whether the child committed a delinquent act under this chapter or on the issue of
guilt in any criminal proceeding.
(2) The provisions of paragraph (1) are in addition to and do not override any existing
statutory and constitutional prohibition on the admission into evidence in delinquency
and criminal proceedings of information obtained during screening, assessment or treatment.
(Oct. 9, 2008, P.L.1396, No.109, eff. 60 days)
2008 Amendment. Act 109 added subsec. (c).
Cross References. Section 6338 is referred to in sections 6315, 6368 of Title 23 (Domestic Relations).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
17
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1982–2023 · leading case:
In the Interest of T.P., 78 A.3d 1166 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2013).
In the Interest of T.P., 78 A.3d 1166 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2013).
· cites it 8× “42 Pa.C.S. § 6338(b). In setting forth a Miranda violation contention, the applicability of § 6338(b) was fairly presented to the court.”
In the Interest of: A.N.P., a Minor Appeal of: E., 155 A.3d 55 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017).
“Section 6338 of the Juvenile Act, 42 Pa.C.S. § 6338, provides that a party is entitled to the opportunity to introduce evidence and otherwise be heard on his own behalf and to cross-examine witnesses.”
In Re N.M. Appeal of N.M., 141 A.3d 539 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016).
· cites it 2× “" 42 Pa.C.S. § 6338(a). Notwithstanding the above, the right to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in one's favor "is qualified to the extent of existing testimonial privileges of witnesses, such as the privilege against self-incrimination.”
Commonwealth v. McKee, 452 A.2d 878 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1982).
· cites it 4× “§ 6355, to an "adult" court, I disagree with the majority's view that Appellant's constitutional right to a fair trial as an "adult" was adequately protected in this instance where the trial court took judicial notice of the factual findings of the *17 transfer hearing judge and…”
Commonwealth v. Martell, 452 A.2d 873 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1982).
· cites it 4× “§ 6355, to an "adult" court, I disagree with the majority's view that Appellant's constitutional right to a fair trial as an "adult" was adequately protected in this instance where the trial court took judicial notice of the factual findings of the transfer hearing judge and…”
In the Interest of Davis, 546 A.2d 1149 (Pa. 1988).
· cites it 2× “See: 42 Pa.C.S. § 6338(b). In dispositional hearings, however, the statute provides that "all evidence helpful in determining the questions presented, including oral and written reports, may be received by the court and relied upon to the extent of its probative value even…”
Commonwealth v. Davis, 586 A.2d 914 (Pa. 1991).
· cites it 2× “In adjudicatory proceedings, hearsay evidence is prohibited by state statute, 42 Pa.C.S. § 6338(b), and the due process clause of the United States Constitution, In re Gault, 387 U.”
L.W.B. v. Sosnowski, 543 A.2d 1241 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1988).
“Concerning dependency proceedings in Juvenile Court — as to which the Judicial Code expressly recognizes a right of cross-examination, 42 Pa. C. S. §6338(a) — the new provisions include a significant section on the admission of hearsay, as follows: A statement made by a child…”
In the Interest of Cunningham, 573 A.2d 1096 (Pa. 1990).
· cites it 2× “In my view, the contention is waived. I would affirm the order of disposition placing Cunningham on two years' probation.”
In re T.D., 57 A.3d 650 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2012).
“’s mother is not a party in this delinquency proceeding; T.D. is the party, and he received appointed counsel.”
Phil. Elec. v. Unemp. Comp. Bd. of Rev., 565 A.2d 1246 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1989).
“The Superior Court held that a probation revocation hearing was somewhere between an adjudicatory proceeding (where extra-judicial statements would not be admissible under the Juvenile Act, 42 Pa.C.S. § 6338(b)), and a dispositional hearing (where such statements would be…”
Philadelphia Elec. Co. v. Commonwealth, 565 A.2d 1246 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1989).
“The Superior Court held that a probation revocation hearing was somewhere between an adjudicatory proceeding (where extra-judicial statements would not be admissible under the Juvenile Act, 42 Pa.C.S. § 6338(b)), and a dispositional hearing (where such statements would be…”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 6338(a) — 6 cases
L.W.B. v. Sosnowski, 543 A.2d 1241 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1988).
“Concerning dependency proceedings in Juvenile Court — as to which the Judicial Code expressly recognizes a right of cross-examination, 42 Pa. C. S. §6338(a) — the new provisions include a significant section on the admission of hearsay, as follows: A statement made by a child…”
In Re N.M. Appeal of N.M., 141 A.3d 539 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016).
“" 42 Pa.C.S. § 6338(a). Notwithstanding the above, the right to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in one's favor "is qualified to the extent of existing testimonial privileges of witnesses, such as the privilege against self-incrimination.”
In the Interest of Cunningham, 573 A.2d 1096 (Pa. 1990).
“In my view, the contention is waived. I would affirm the order of disposition placing Cunningham on two years' probation.”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 6338(b) — 7 cases
In the Interest of T.P., 78 A.3d 1166 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2013).
“42 Pa.C.S. § 6338(b). In setting forth a Miranda violation contention, the applicability of § 6338(b) was fairly presented to the court.”
In the Interest of Davis, 546 A.2d 1149 (Pa. 1988).
“See: 42 Pa.C.S. § 6338(b). In dispositional hearings, however, the statute provides that "all evidence helpful in determining the questions presented, including oral and written reports, may be received by the court and relied upon to the extent of its probative value even…”
Commonwealth v. Davis, 586 A.2d 914 (Pa. 1991).
“In adjudicatory proceedings, hearsay evidence is prohibited by state statute, 42 Pa.C.S. § 6338(b), and the due process clause of the United States Constitution, In re Gault, 387 U.”
In Re N.M. Appeal of N.M., 141 A.3d 539 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016).
“" 42 Pa.C.S. § 6338(a). Notwithstanding the above, the right to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in one's favor "is qualified to the extent of existing testimonial privileges of witnesses, such as the privilege against self-incrimination.”
Phil. Elec. v. Unemp. Comp. Bd. of Rev., 565 A.2d 1246 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1989).
“The Superior Court held that a probation revocation hearing was somewhere between an adjudicatory proceeding (where extra-judicial statements would not be admissible under the Juvenile Act, 42 Pa.C.S. § 6338(b)), and a dispositional hearing (where such statements would be…”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 6338(c) — 1 case
In the Interest of T.P., 78 A.3d 1166 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2013).
“42 Pa.C.S. § 6338(b). In setting forth a Miranda violation contention, the applicability of § 6338(b) was fairly presented to the court.”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 6338(c)(1) — 2 cases
In the Interest of T.P., 78 A.3d 1166 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2013).
“42 Pa.C.S. § 6338(b). In setting forth a Miranda violation contention, the applicability of § 6338(b) was fairly presented to the court.”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 6338(c)(2) — 1 case
In the Interest of T.P., 78 A.3d 1166 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2013).
“42 Pa.C.S. § 6338(b). In setting forth a Miranda violation contention, the applicability of § 6338(b) was fairly presented to the court.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.