Transfer or Waiver Also at the intake stage, youth accused of very serious offenses may be transferred or waived out of the juvenile court to stand trial as adults in criminal court. In some states, transfers can be ordered by a prosecutor, but in most states the transfer decision is made by a juvenile court judge in response to a recommendation for transfer from the prosecutor or intake worker.
Many states have statutory provisions that automatically transfer youth accused of certain offenses, though some of these states also have provisions allowing for judges to transfer youth back to juvenile court in at least some cases. Detention For cases formally processed in juvenile court, the next decision is whether to detain the young person until his or her adjudication hearing, or to permit the young person to remain at home during the pre-adjudication period. In most states, judges order pretrial detention only when the young person is deemed a danger to the community or a flight risk.
Typically, a detention hearing is convened within 24 hours of arrest or other referral. Alternatively, the youth may be found innocent or the charges may be dismissed.
As in the adult justice system, the vast majority of cases in juvenile court are not contested in court. Instead, they are resolved in plea agreements in which the youth admits to a lesser charge, or in consent decrees or similar agreements to defer prosecution while the young person adheres to specific conditions, which in most cases includes a period of informal probation supervision.
If the case is contested and an adjudication hearing takes place, a juvenile court judge rules based on the evidence presented in court by prosecutors and defense attorneys. There are no jury trials in juvenile court. Disposition After a youth is adjudicated delinquent, the next step is a dispositional hearing, which is like a sentencing hearing in adult court. Typically, prior to this hearing, a probation officer examines the case, interviews the young person and develops a recommended intervention plan.
Probation By far the most common disposition for youth adjudicated delinquent is probation. In addition, 72, youth who entered into consent decrees or had their cases deferred were placed informally on probation and 49, more youth were placed on informal probation after their cases were diverted from court at intake. Failure to comply with these rules and requirements may result in a probation violation and possible placement into a residential facility for those adjudicated and formally disposed to probation or may result in youth being returned to court, adjudicated delinquent and placed either on formal probation or in a residential facility for those who were diverted or placed on informal probation as part of a consent decree.
These facilities vary widely in their characteristics. Aftercare For youth who are removed from home and placed in a correctional institution or other residential facility after being adjudicated, the final phase of the process may be a period of aftercare, where the young person is supervised and supported during the transition back to the community.
Does diversion from the juvenile justice system work? Research comparing the outcomes for the youth under different scenarios has yielded two primary findings: Diversion — handling cases outside the justice system — typically leads to better outcomes than formal processing in juvenile court.
The preponderance of evidence indicates that youth whose cases are formally processed in juvenile court typically have worse outcomes than similar youth whose cases are handled informally, both in terms of future involvement in the justice system and success in education and employment.
This is especially true for youth accused of lower-level misbehavior and those who do not have a long history of past arrests.
Some studies have found that transfer has a neutral effect on subsequent justice system involvement, 9 10 while others show that transfer leads to worse outcomes. Widespread violence and maltreatment in juvenile facilities. Since the first juvenile reformatories were created in the 19th century, facilities dedicated to housing and rehabilitating youth have been prone to sometimes horrific abuses. The Casey Foundation has identified systemic or recurring violence in juvenile corrections facilities across the nation.
This troubling evidence shows that large, conventional juvenile corrections facilities — or plainly stated, youth prisons — are inherently prone to abuse. Pervasive overreliance on confinement, even for youth accused of minor misbehavior posing minimal risk to public safety. In , when Congress first enacted the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act , more than , youth were admitted to juvenile detention or corrections facilities, and the daily population of youth in confinement was 79, Youth of color, especially Black youth, are subject to harsher treatment than white youth at most every stage of juvenile justice.
The U. Redesigned YE4C. Keeping youth in school and out of the justice system. Myth Busters: National Reentry and Medicaid. Programs Federal Youth Court Program. Gang Resistence and Education Program. Reintegration of ExOffenders Program. Publications National Gang Threat Assessment. Aftercare Services. Amber Alert: Best Practices. Criminal Career Patterns. Curriculum for Training Educators of Youth in Confinement.
Employment and Training for Court-Involved Youth. Explanations for Offending. Fact Sheet: Disproportionate Minority Contact. Federal Justice Statistics, Functional Impairment in Delinquent Youth. Graphic Novels for Youth in Custody. Highlights of the National Youth Gang Survey.
Improving Literacy Skills of Juvenile Detainees. Juvenile Arrests Juvenile Court Statistics Juvenile Justice Bulletin: Gang Prevention. Juvenile Mentoring Program: Report to Congress. Juveniles in Residential Placement, Make a Friend-Be a Peer Mentor. Native American Traditional Justice Practices. Predictors of Youth Violence. Supreme Court determined that the Constitution requires that youth charged with delinquency in juvenile court have many of the same due process rights guaranteed to adults accused of crimes, including the right to an attorney and the right to confront witnesses against them.
Following Gault , the Supreme Court extended additional constitutional rights to youth, including the right to have the charges against them proven beyond a reasonable doubt and the right against double jeopardy. In , the Supreme Court ruled that youth were not entitled to jury trials in juvenile court, but several states have judicially or legislatively elected to provide youth a right to jury trial.
States enacted mechanisms to move youth from juvenile to adult criminal court for trial and punishment. In some cases, these new laws saddled children with the most severe sentences—death and life without the possibility of parole.
Many of the new state laws also exposed youth to the dangers and potential abuses attributed to incarceration with adult offenders—much like they had experienced before the creation of the original juvenile court more than a century earlier. Since the s, juvenile crime rates have steadily decreased, yet the harsh penalties of the s remain in many state laws. The most recent studies demonstrate that putting young offenders in adult prisons leads to more crime, higher prison costs, and increased violence.
Predictions on juvenile crime are greatly exaggerated. While some headlines have irresponsibly suggested that a "ticking time bomb" of so-called "superpredator children" is waiting to explode, the studies show it is more a "cyclical time bulge. The public also holds greatly inflated perceptions about the prevalence and severity of juvenile crime. Below are some little-known, but basic facts on juvenile crime: What Ever Happened to Prevention? The most comprehensive study done in this area recently concluded that crime prevention costs less than imprisonment.
In contrast, the report said investing the same amount in prisons would prevent only 60 crimes a year. Greenwood, Peter, et al. Dozens of crime prevention programs across the country have been held up as successful models.
0コメント