Youth in the Adult Criminal Justice System ( Criminal Justice, Law Enforcement and Corrections )

Publication series :Criminal Justice, Law Enforcement and Corrections

Author: Nathaniel Dudziak  

Publisher: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.‎

Publication year: 2016

E-ISBN: 9781626180109

Subject: D916 司法制度

Keyword: 司法制度,法律

Language: ENG

Access to resources Favorite

Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.

Youth in the Adult Criminal Justice System

Chapter

IV. WHAT ARE THE ISSUES, IMPACTS AND OPTIONS FACING PUBLIC SAFETY SYSTEMS WHEN YOUTH ARE CONVICTED, AND COMMITTED TO THE ADULT SYSTEM?

V. WHAT ARE THE ISSUES, IMPACTS AND OPTIONS FACING PUBLIC SAFETY SYSTEMS WHEN YOUTH WHO CONVICTED IN ADULT COURT ARE ON PROBATION OR PAROLE?

Community Supervision – Corrections’ Stepchild?

Options for Corrections Systems, and Federal, State and Local Policymakers

VI. CONCLUSION

APPENDIX I: SUMMARY OF POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

APPENDIX II: ATTENDEES AND CONTRIBUTORS

End Notes

Chapter 2 TRYING JUVENILES AS ADULTS: AN ANALYSIS OF STATE TRANSFER LAWS AND REPORTING

A MESSAGE FROM OJJDP

ALL STATES SET BOUNDARIES WHERE CHILDHOOD ENDS AND ADULT CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY BEGINS

Transfer Laws Alter the Usual Jurisdictional Age Boundaries for Exceptional Cases

Most States Have Multiple Transfer Mechanisms

Nearly All States Give Courts Discretion to Waive Jurisdiction Over Individual Cases

In Presumptive Waiver Cases, the Burden of Proof Shifts to the Juvenile

State Laws May Require Juvenile Court Judges to Waive Jurisdiction in Certain Cases

Nonjudicial Transfer Cases Bypass Juvenile Courts Altogether

Prosecutors’ Discretion to Opt for Criminal Handling Is Often Unfettered

Statutory Exclusion Laws Restrict Juvenile Courts’ Delinquency Jurisdiction

In Most States, Criminal Prosecution Renders a Juvenile an “Adult” Forever

Many States Give Courts Special Flexibility in Handling Youth Subject to Transfer

STATE TRANSFER LAWS CHANGED RADICALLY IN THE CLOSING DECADES OF THE 20TH CENTURY

Before 1970, Transfer in Most States Was Court-Ordered on a Case-bycase Basis

States Adopted New Transfer Mechanisms in the 1970s and 1980s

The Surge in Youth Violence That Peaked in 1994 Helped Shape Current Transfer Laws

In Recent Years, Transfer Laws Have Changed Little

FOR EVERY 1,000 PETITIONED DELINQUENCY CASES, ABOUT 9 ARE JUDICIALLY WAIVED TO CRIMINAL COURT

Juvenile Court Data Provide a Detailed Picture of Waiver in the U.S.

The Use of Judicial Waiver Has Declined Steeply Since 1994

NATIONAL INFORMATION ON JUVENILE CASES FILED DIRECTLY IN CRIMINAL COURT IS FRAGMENTARY

No National Data Set Tracks Cases That Bypass Juvenile Courts

BJS Research Provides Glimpses of Transfer Case Characteristics

Most Prosecutors’ Offices Report Trying Juveniles as Adults

MOST STATES DO NOT TRACK AND ACCOUNT FOR ALL OF THEIR JUVENILE TRANSFER CASES

The Transfer Data Project Documented State Transfer Reporting Practices

Only 13 States Publicly Report All Transfers

States Are More Likely to Track Judicial Waiver Cases Than Other Kinds of Transfers

THERE ARE WIDE VARIATIONS IN THE WAYS STATES DOCUMENT JUVENILE TRANSFERS

Only a Few States Report Significant Details About Transfer Cases

Total volume

Pathways

Available Data Show Dramatic Differences in States’ Transfer Rates

Detailed Transfer Reporting in Some States Makes Indepth Comparison Possible

Overall Rates

Transfer Pathways

Demographics

Offenses

Case Outcomes

NEARLY 14,000 TRANSFERS CAN BE ACCOUNTED FOR IN 2007—BUT MOST STATES ARE MISSING FROM THAT TOTAL

The Size of the Gaps in Available Transfer Data Can Be Broadly Estimated

States with Extremely Narrow Nonjudicial Transfer Laws

States with Extremely Broad Nonjudicial Transfer Laws

Other States

JURISDICTIONAL AGE LAWS MAY “TRANSFER” AS MANY AS 175,000 ADDITIONAL YOUTH TO CRIMINAL COURT

In13 States, Youth Become Criminally Responsible Before Their 18th Birthdays

A Total Of 2.2 Million Youth Younger Than 18 Are Subject to Routine Criminal Processing

JUVENILES IN MOST STATES CAN BE JAILED WHILE AWAITING TRIAL IN CRIMINAL COURT

Contact with Adult Inmates Is Sometimes But Not Always Restricted

A 2009 Survey Found That More Than 7,000 Youth Who Were Younger Than 18 Were in Jails

CONVICTED JUVENILES DO NOT ALWAYS RECEIVE HARSHER SANCTIONS IN THE ADULT SYSTEM

Sentencing and Correctional Handling of Transferred Youth Vary From State to State

Convicted Youth May Sometimes Serve Part of Their Sentences in Juvenile Facilities

State Prisons, the Bulk of Them in the South, Held More Than 2,700 Juveniles in 2009

TRANSFER LAWS GENERALLY HAVE NOT BEEN SHOWN TO DETER CRIME

Some Research Suggests That Transfer May Increase Subsequent Offending

REFERENCES

Chapter 3 JUVENILE TRANSFER LAWS: AN EFFECTIVE DETERRENT TO DELINQUENCY?

A MESSAGE FROM OJJDP

GENERAL AND SPECIFIC DETERRENCE

GENERAL DETERRENCE: DO TRANSFER LAWS PREVENT JUVENILE CRIME?

Potential Deterrence

Specific Deterrence

RECENT OJJDP-FUNDED STUDIES

Transferred Juveniles More Likely to Offend

Greater Likelihood of Rearrest

Transfer Found To Increase Recidivism

WHY DO JUVENILES TRIED AS ADULTS HAVE HIGHER RECIDIVISM RATES?

Implications for Policymakers and Practitioners

CONCLUSION

REFERENCES

End Notes

INDEX

The users who browse this book also browse