Tenn. R. Juv. P. 205
Advisory Commission Comments.
Children alleged to be delinquent and children alleged to be unruly and in jeopardy of being removed from the home have the right to an attorney pursuant to T.C.A. § 37-1-126. In addition, this statute also mandates appointment of an attorney for a child who is "not represented by the child's parent, guardian, guardian ad litem, or custodian" and who is alleged to be delinquent, or unruly and in jeopardy of being removed from the home. The statute contemplates that a child will not appear in court without adult guidance and representation. Parents are not automatically disqualified from fulfilling this function. However, as the Supreme Court has observed in a different context, "As a general rule, counsel should be provided, and .?.?. any doubt should be resolved in favor of appointment of counsel." State ex rel. Gillard v. Cook, 528 S.W.2d 545, 548 (Tenn. 1975).
A "knowledgeable adult who has no interest adverse to the child," referenced in subdivision (b)(3), is a person who can provide advice to the child and who will have no interests that interfere with providing dispassionate and mature advice to the child. This person should have no interests that prevent the person from keeping the child's best interests and the child's desires in the forefront. A person who now or in the past brought charges against the child generally does not qualify. Where possible, this person should have a pre-existing relationship with the child. While parents generally satisfy this requirement, the court should determine the level of trust between the child and the child's parents before allowing the parent to satisfy this requirement. When a child is in the custody of the Department, its employees do not satisfy the requirement of this rule. Depending on the circumstances, a foster parent may qualify.
It is the responsibility of the attorney representing the child charged with a delinquent or unruly offense to fully advise the child of his or her rights. If a child chooses to waive his or her rights, the child can only do so once the court has determined that the child has been advised of each and every right and knowingly and voluntarily is waiving each of the rights.
All waivers of rights shall be made orally and in open court and confirmed in a writing signed by both the judge and the child waiving the rights. The confirming document can be a preprinted form, but must specify the rights that are being waived and must acknowledge that the individual is choosing to waive those rights.
Subdivision (c) provides that the court shall only accept a waiver by a child of his or her rights only if the child is able to make an intelligent and understanding decisionbased on certain factors. The Tennessee Supreme Court has applied the totality-of-the-circumstances test in analyzing juvenile waivers. See State v. Callahan, 979 S.W.2d 577 (Tenn. 1998).
The court should address the child, not the parents or other adults who are present in the courtroom, and should always take into account the child's age, mental condition, education, experience and the nature and complexity of the case when deciding how to question the child about the child's understanding of the rights and whether the child waives those rights. The court must address the child in language appropriate to that particular child.