Overview of Juvenile Justice

CRIM 309

Overview of the Juvenile Justice System

The JJS is a relatively new system—the first juvenile court was established in 1899

The JJS was created to address criminal and problem behaviors among children between the ages of (approx.) 10 to 18– Criminal offenses (aka delinquency)– Status offenses– Abuse/neglect cases

Basis of the JJS Different levels of culpability (I.e., responsibility) of

adolescents compared to adults served as the basis of the JJS

“Childhood” was created in the early 19th century and stages of childhood, specifically adolescence was defined shortly afterward

Developmentally distinguished adolescents from adults emotionally, psychologically, and physically

Supported the notion that (1) adolescents were less culpable than adults, and (2) adolescents were more amenable to change than adults

Are Adolescents Different from Adults? Increasingly, research demonstrates that adolescents are not

little adults Adolescence is a period of intense physical, emotional, and

cognitive development– Forced to make choices under the worst conditions– Exposed to highly risky situations– Often overestimate their understanding of a situation while

underestimating the consequences of their actions Further complicated when youths live in disadvantaged, high

risk environments Perhaps most important for this discussion is the fact that

adolescents process ‘emotionally charged’ information from a more reactive, gut-level place than adults

JJS v. CJS The JJS was purposely developed as a different

system from the adult criminal justice system (CJS)

The JJS recognized the need for different responses and emphasized rehabilitation over punishment

JJS differs significantly from the the CJS:– Informal proceedings– Confidential– Less adversarial– Different responses, with an emphasis on treatment

Juvenile v. Adult Justice Systems

Juvenile System Adult System

Basis Civil (no due process) Criminal (due process)

Goal(s) Rehabilitation Punishment

Style Non-Adversarial Adversarial

Terminology Medical Model Legal/Constitutional

Role of Family Very Significant Little to No Significance

Functioning Private, confidential Open

Process Adjudication/Delinquent Trial/Guilty or Innocent

Sentencing Indeterminate-Broad Determinate-Focused

History of the Juvenile Court

Prior to Juvenile Court

Prior to 19th century, children were either viewed as:– Not culpable for crime (ages <7)– As responsible and subject to the same penalties

as adults 19th century—Introduction of “childhood” and

recognition of developmental differences between children and adults

Efforts were made by reformers to remove juveniles from criminal court and treat them differently from adults using legal precedent of parens patriae

Reformers and the Juvenile Court

19th Century time of drastic change as a result of industrialization and high rates of immigration

Wealthy and middle class develops and turns its attention to social ills of the nation– Child-Savers—MC/W women who took on a

variety of social issues– Progressive Reformers—growing intelligentsia that

wanted to reduce social problems with the creation of professional organizations

Reforming the System

Reformers focused on evils of urbanization and poor upbringing—family was at the center of their criticism and a target for their efforts– Benevolent Reform turns into bias– Class, Race, & Gender Bias

Utilize the legal precedent of parens patriae to justify work in many areas related to children– Parens Patriae=provides state the right to intervene

in the best interest of a person– This precedent is critical to all reforms, including

juvenile justice, compulsory education, and child labor

Origins of Juvenile Court

House of Refuge 1825 Concerns regarding this development led to court

cases– Ex Parte Crouse, 1835—upheld parens patriae– People v. Turner, 1860—struck parens patriae down

Response: Cottage House Systems and reformatories-mid 1800s

“Placing Out”—sending juveniles west Each of these institutions were an attempt to:

– Separate juveniles from adults– Provide “treatment” to prevent youths from adopting a life of

crime

Purpose of the New Response

Differential treatment of juveniles (from adults) was intended to save juveniles from themselves—salvage their souls

Treatment” in these institutions translated to vocational skills training and religious training– Based on stereotypes and role expectations of the time– Juveniles in these institutions were largely poor,

immigrant, and female– Black youths were often processed by and placed in

adult system. When allowed into the juvenile system, these youths were segregated from Whites and given custodial types of tasks

Creation of the Juvenile Court Concern over legal challenges led reformers to

seek permanent placement of juvenile court in law,culminating in the creation of the first juvenile court---1899 in Cook County, Illinois

Created legal categories and jurisdiction for juvenile delinquency, status offending, and abuse/neglect

System was separate from adult court in theory and practice

By 1925, all states except Maine and Wyoming had functioning juvenile courts

Evolution of Juvenile Justice

1905 Commonwealth v. Fisher: – Brought legal question once again to

parens patriae– Court upheld legal doctrine and creation of

separate legal jurisdiction for juvenile delinquents, status offenders, and abused/neglected youth

– Legitimacy not questioned again until the 1960s

Juvenile Justice in 20th Century

60s: Legal/court reform– Kent v. United States, 1966

• Hearings required for transfer to adult court

– In Re Gault, 1967• Representation for all offenders who face institutionalization

– In Re Winship, 1970• Standard of proof, “beyond a reasonable doubt,” required

– Breed v. Jones, 1975• Protection against double jeopardy

– McKeiver v. Pennsylvania, 1971• Rejected access to jury trial

20th Century Continued

70s: Federal reform– Focus on prevention and concern over status

offenders– Juvenile Justice Delinquency Prevention Act

• Federal Act that– Prohibited placement of status offenders in secure facilities– Required sight and separation of juveniles and adults in

detention and correctional facilities– Removal of juveniles from adult jails and lockups

• Voluntary compliance but connected to funding• Reauthorization by Congress in 1988 required states to

examine over representation of minorities in secure confinment

20th Century Continued

80s: Crime Control Policies– Increase in facility use– Increase waivers– Increase in statutory limitations – Death penalty– New ways of sentencing

90s: Distinguishing Offenders 2000: Punitive mixed with integrating

sanctions and rehabilitation & restorative justice

Juvenile Justice In Context Creates a contradiction between our social policies

related to children and adolescents and our treatment of children and adolescents who break the law: – Assumption that the nature of adolescence is to face

ambiguous decisions and learn appropriate behaviors/choice-making

– Social policies reflect the lack of maturity and skills to make certain decisions

– Criminal justice policies reject many of these notions and put juvenile offenders on same level as adult offenders

– Complicated further by the fact that adolescence is the highest period of criminal activity

Structure of the Juvenile Justice System

Contemporary Juvenile Court Structure Juvenile justice is state-based; there is no federal

juvenile justice system The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency

Prevention provides guidance on policy and resources for program development, but it has no authority over juvenile justice systems operating in any state

Juvenile courts may be located organizationally as general jurisdiction courts, special jurisdiction courts, or limited jurisdiction courts

Extent to which juvenile courts have jurisdiction in all matters involving juveniles varies by state

The Juvenile Justice System

1st Step in the JJ Process: Arrest/Referral

Juveniles can enter the jjs through:– Parent referrals– School referrals– Social service referrals– Police referrals

Police are responsible for the majority of referrals to the juvenile justice system

Policing and Juveniles

Juveniles are responsible for a lot of police contacts

Nature of Police-Juvenile Encounters– Often difficult– Developmental differences and lack of training– Hostile behavior – Officer response can significantly impact result– Role conflict—what is their role

Police Organization of Juvenile Work Depends on the size of the police

department, the community, amount & quality of resources available, and policing philosophy of department– Special units-officers specially trained– Special units are more likely to exist in

large, urban areas. Smaller areas are less likely to have specialized juvenile officers

Police and the Law

Police have more latitude in handling juveniles:– Charging decisions– Ability to detain

If juvenile is charged as an adult, he/she is entitled to full due process

If juvenile is taken into custody as a juvenile, police act “in the role of parents” and have more control over what happens to the youth

Police Discretion

Discretion=Use of personal decision-making and choice in carrying out operations in the justice system (I.e., deciding whether to arrest)

Discretion applies to all processing stages of the juvenile and adult justice systems

Particularly large amount of discretion used in the case of juveniles

Informality and “individualized” treatment lends itself to discretion

Impact of Discretion Discretion can keep offenders out of the system--

have significant impact of who enters the system and who does not

Discretion can increase chance of being placed in the system

Discretion can deteriorate into discrimination and other abuses

Personal, environmental, departmental, and situational factors impact the extent to which discretion plays a role in processing juveniles into the juvenile justice system

2nd Stage of the JJ Process: Detention

Police decide whether to detain an offender or release him/her to parents

Intake officer determines whether the placement is necessary (using a risk tool)

Offenders can be detained for their own safety or the safety of the community—no bond. Must be released by prosecutor or order of the judge

Many negative consequences to detention—efforts growing to build alternatives

Types: Shelter, Staff-Secure, & Secure Detention can be used at any time in the process

3rd Stage of the JJ Process: Charging In some states, Prosecutor decides how to charge the case—

decision is based on state statute around juvenile court jurisdiction and waivers to adult court– Also has the option to not charge or offer diversion to an

offender– The diversion option allows the offender to avoid processing

if they complete the diversion program successfully In other states, Juvenile Court Intake makes the decision to

informally handle or formally handle– Decision is then sent to the Prosecutor– Diversion is also possible at this point

Transferring Cases to the Adult Court

Case may be waived to adult court by a judge prior to adjudication– Judicial waiver– Hearing to determine whether case warrants transfer to the

adult court In some states, case may also be charged directly in adult court

by a prosecutor– Prosecutorial waiver– No hearing; defense can file a reverse waiver to transfer the

case to juvenile court In most states, legislatures have mandated that certain cases

be automatically processed in adult court—statutory exclusion

4th Stage of JJ Process: Adjudication

Formal Processing Arraignment Hearing

– Charges read in court– Need for Representation Assessed– If represented, type of responsibility is entered

If responsiblecase goes to disposition If not responsiblecase goes to adjudication

hearing (I.e., trial)– If responsiblecase goes to disposition– If not responsiblecase is dismissed

Plea bargaining occurs during these stages

5th Stage of JJ Process: Assessment Pre-disposition assessments

– Thorough evaluations of juvenile’s risk and need levels

– Judge orders at adjudication hearing– Report completed and returned to judge

prior to the disposition– Report contains recommendations to the

judge on what type of disposition the offender should receive

Content of Pre-Disposition Assessment This stage may include any or all of the following:

1. Individual factors: previous jj experience, peers, living situation, etc.

2. Family factors: occupations, living situation, history of abuse/neglect, relationships, etc.

3. School factors: attendance, performance, behavior Also provides the opportunity for:

1. Substance abuse screening2. Mental health screening3. Risk Assessment4. Referral for further assessment (SA, MH, medical, family,

etc.)

6th Stage in JJ Process: Disposition Disposition Hearing (Sentence)

– Judge reviews pre-disposition materials (if available) and decides on the following options:

– Probation: Supervision in the community• Different levels• May include placement in camp or detention facility

– State Custody: Out-of-Home Placement • Different types of placements• Parole and Aftercare

– Blended Sentencing: Combination of juvenile and adult sentencing

Probation

Traditional Supervision (Low, Medium, and High)

Intensive Supervision (High Only) Drug Courts Camps Probation has conditions that can

include curfews, treatment, family counseling, etc.

State Custody

Foster/Group Homes Correctional Facility Treatment Facility Placements Parole Aftercare Programming

Caveats to JJ Process

Offender placed on probation who violates the conditions of that order, can return to court and be moved into state custody

Offender place in state custody who makes parole and violates the conditions of parole, can return to court and to an institution