18 U.S.C. § 5031

Definitions

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar

For the purposes of this chapter, a “juvenile” is a person who has not attained his eighteenth birthday, or for the purpose of proceedings and disposition under this chapter for an alleged act of juvenile delinquency, a person who has not attained his twenty-first birthday, and “juvenile delinquency” is the violation of a law of the United States committed by a person prior to his eighteenth birthday which would have been a crime if committed by an adult or a violation by such a person of section 922(x).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 349 cases (17 in the last 5 years), 1948–2025 · leading case: Duarte-Ceri v. Holder, 630 F.3d 83 (2d Cir. 2010).
Duarte-Ceri v. Holder, 630 F.3d 83 (2d Cir. 2010). · cites it 14× “§ 1101(a)(27)(I)(i) (referring to certain conditions that must be performed "no later than [one's] twenty-fifth birthday" to qualify as a "special immigrant"); see also 18 U.S.C. § 5031 ("For the purposes of this chapter, a `juvenile' is a person who has not attained his…”
United States v. Juv. Male, 670 F.3d 999 (9th Cir. 2012). · cites it 5× “Defendants argue that SORNA’s registration requirement contravenes the confidentiality provisions of the Federal Juvenile Delinquency Act (FJDA), 18 U.S.C. § 5031 et seq., and also challenge its constitutionality.”
United States v. Blake, 571 F.3d 331 (4th Cir. 2009). · cites it 3× “18 U.S.C.A. § 5031 (West 2000). Blake was born on June 1, 1985, and, consequently, was 17 on September 19, 2002, the date of the carjacking.”
United States v. Male Juv. (Pierre Y.), 280 F.3d 1008 (9th Cir. 2002). · cites it 3× “§ 1153 ) and the Federal Juvenile Delinquency Act ( 18 U.S.C. §§ 5031 et seq.). An overview of how these statutes work together will be helpful in addressing each of Pierre’s claims.”
State v. Shaun M. Sanders, 912 N.W.2d 16 (Wis. 2018). · cites it 2× “18 U.S.C. § 5031 (2000). 20 No. 2015AP2328-CR family court shall have exclusive jurisdiction in all proceedings .”
United States v. Flores, 572 F.3d 1254 (11th Cir. 2009). · cites it 2× “The district court dismissed these latter charges for lack of jurisdiction because Sandoval was 16 years old at the time of the alleged murder and *1269 the government failed to get Department of Justice Approval to prosecute him for these crimes, as required by the Juvenile…”
In Re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967). · cites it 2× “1964), holding a confession inadmissible in proceedings under the Federal Juvenile Delinquency Act ( 18 U. S. C. § 5031 et seq. ) because, in the circumstances in which it was made, the District Court could not conclude that it "was freely made while Morales was afforded all of…”
United States v. Luz-Estella Alvarez-Porras, Jose Garcia-Perez, & Roberto Colon-Diaz, 643 F.2d 54 (2d Cir. 1981). · cites it 4× “Second, appellant Colon-Diaz argues that, in determining his age for purposes of the juvenile offenders procedures in 18 U.S.C. §§ 5031 — 42, the trial judge improperly considered an otherwise suppressible statement made after an illegal arrest.”
United States v. Gregory M. Thomas, 114 F.3d 228 (D.C. Cir. 1997). · cites it 3× “Donnell Williams’ Jurisdictional Challenge Appellant Donnell Williams argues that because he was a juvenile when he became embroiled in the R Street Crew conspiracy and remained a juvenile for most of the time that he was engaged in illegal activity, the Federal Juvenile…”
United States v. Alexsi Lopez, 860 F.3d 201 (4th Cir. 2017). · cites it 3× “Lopez argues, first, that because he was under 18 when the robbery was committed, he should have been tried as a juvenile notwithstanding the passage of time before his indictment, and that to the extent the Juvenile Delinquency Act, 18 U.S.C. § 5031 , provides otherwise, it is…”
United States v. E.T.H., JUV, 833 F.3d 931 (8th Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “argues that the total combined term of detention and supervision exceeds the maximum possible term under the Federal Juvenile Delinquency Act (FJDA), 18 U.S.C. § 5031 et seq. We reverse and remand with *933 instructions to enter a sentence not to exceed the statutory maximum set…”
United States v. Alejandro Ceja-Prado, 333 F.3d 1046 (9th Cir. 2003). · cites it 2× “The Federal Juvenile Delinquency Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 5031 et seq., provides that federal courts have no jurisdiction over certain prosecutions for acts of juvenile delinquency unless the cases have been certified for prosecution by the Attorney General or his specified…”
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.