Chapter 15 Juvenile Justice

The History of Juvenile Justice Originally based on the parens patriae philosophy The modern practice of legally separating adult and juvenile offenders Traces back to the development of Elizabethan-era poor laws and the creation of the English chancery court Poor laws and chancery courts were brought from England to colonial America Learning Objective One

The History of Juvenile Justice Almshouses, Poorhouses, and Workhouses Local jurisdictions developed these to accommodate dependent youths The child savers Influenced state and local governments to create independent correctional institutions to house minors Learning Objectives One & Three - This nineteenth century photo shows indigent boys sleeping on the front door landing of an abandoned tenement building in New York City. The child savers were concerned that if left alone, children such as these would enter a life of crime. Critics, however, accused the child savers of class and race discrimination and thought they sought to maintain control over the political system.

The History of Juvenile Justice Reform schools The first of opened in: Westboro, MA in 1848 Rochester, NY in 1849 Charles Lorring Brace (1853) New York philanthropist who helped develop the Children’s Aid Society Placed neglected and delinquent youths in private homes in rural communities

The History of Juvenile Justice The child savers Lobbied for an independent, state-supported juvenile court Their efforts prompted the development of the first comprehensive juvenile court in Illinois in 1899

The History of Juvenile Justice The “best interests of the child” The main concern Not strict adherence to legal doctrine, constitutional rights, or due process of law Youngsters found delinquent in juvenile court could spend years in a state training school

The History of Juvenile Justice The Supreme Court radically altered the juvenile justice system when it issued a series of decisions that established the right of juveniles to receive due process of law Status offenders Juvenile Justice 1980-2000 Public concern Shift to crime control and punishment Learning Objectives One, Two, & Five

Thinking Point Juvenile Justice Do you advocate the shift to a crime control model that occurred in the juvenile justice system after the 1980s? Why or why not? How does this positively or negatively impact youth?

The History of Juvenile Justice Juvenile Justice Today The juvenile justice system has jurisdiction over delinquents and status offenders Maximum ages Exclusion of certain types of offenders More than 450 juvenile drug courts The juvenile justice system is responsible for processing and treating almost 2 million cases of youthful misbehavior annually Learning Objectives One & Two

Similarities and Differences Between Juvenile and adult Justice Systems Learning Objective Five

Chart of Juvenile Justice Case Flow Figure 15.1 Chart of Juvenile Justice Case Flow

Police Processing of the Juvenile Offender Police officers arrest about 1.3 million juveniles each year Most states do not have specific statutory provisions distinguishing the arrest process for children from that for adults Police also engage in delinquency prevention efforts Students do not lose their rights at the schoolhouse door. However, they do not have the same protections as adults in society. For example, they can be searched without a warrant if they violate school rules, even if their behavior does not amount to a crime. And although they have the right to limited, passive free speech, such as wearing a peace symbol, they can be suspended if school officials believe that their behavior constitutes a security risk. For example, writing an article in the school newspaper explaining how to smoke marijuana might not be allowed.

Police Processing of the Juvenile Offender Use of discretion is based on: Type and seriousness of the child’s offense Ability of the parents to be of assistance in disciplining the child Child’s past contacts with police Degree of cooperation obtained from the child and parents and their demeanor, attitude, and personal characteristics Whether the child denies the allegations in the petition and insists on a court hearing Learning Objective Six

Police Processing of the Juvenile Offender Legal Rights of Juveniles in Custody Same Fourth Amendment rights as adults Generally afforded more protection than adults Legal Rights in the School Setting School resource officers Searching for drugs as per New Jersey v. T.L.O. Learning Objective Six - Savana Redding is flanked by her mother, April Redding, and her attorney, Adam Wolf, as she speaks to reporters outside the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on April 21, 2009. Redding was 13 when Safford (Arizona) Middle School officials, on a tip from another student, ordered her to remove her clothes and shake out her underwear. They were looking for ibuprofen pills because the school had banned prescription and over-the-counter drugs from campus. The Supreme Court ruled that the search was humiliating and unjustified by the circumstances, a ruling that seta precedent limiting the right of schools to conduct drug-related searches.

The Juvenile Court Process Juvenile found to have engaged in delinquent or incorrigible behavior: Police agencies are charged with the decision to release or to detain the child and refer him to juvenile court Once in custody, a juvenile has the same right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures as an adult does

The Juvenile Court Process The Intake Process Review and screening The Detention Process There has been an ongoing effort to reform detention Juvenile Justice Act of 1974 Legal issues The most important reform has been the successful effort to remove status offenders from lockups containing delinquents Learning Objective Nine

The Juvenile Court Process Bail Parents considered an acceptable substitute to money bail Plea Bargaining Before trial, prosecutors in the juvenile courts may attempt to negotiate a settlement to the case Learning Objectives Nine

The Juvenile Court Process A waiver A practice in which the juvenile court waives its jurisdiction over a juvenile and transfer the case to adult criminal court for trial In some states, a waiver hearing is held to determine jurisdiction Waiver of Jurisdiction Direct file waiver Excluded offense waiver Judicial waiver Reverse waiver Blended sentencing laws Learning Objective Eight

The Juvenile Court Process Waiver does not seem to influence crime or recidivism rates One reason may be that juveniles whose cases are waived to criminal court are sentenced more leniently than they would have been in juvenile court Although some youths transferred to adult court never spend a day in an adult prison, some become enmeshed in the daily life of an adult correctional facility

The Juvenile Court Process Risks faced by juveniles in adult court include: Sexual assault Suicide Damage to communities and public safety Youngsters who commit serious crimes can be waived to the adult court, but the decision can be a difficult one. Jonas Dixon (left) arrives in Caledonia District Court in St. Johnsbury, Vermont, to face a charge of second-degree murder. The 15-year-old boy pleaded not guilty in the shooting death of 24-year-old Jacob A. McDowell. Dixon and McDowell, his mother’s boyfriend, were involved in a dispute before the shooting. Although Dixon was originally charged as an adult,the waiver decision was appealed, and the Vermont Supreme Court ruled that the lower court did not adequately weigh the events leading up to the shooting, such as the failure of the state Department of Children and Families to protect or remove Dixon and his younger sister from the horrible living conditions they endured in their mother’s house. The Supreme Court noted that Dixon and his sister “were living in a remote rural area with a mentally ill and unstable mother with firearms in the house” and that “the combination of acute parental mental illness, desperation, drug and alcohol use, children, and firearms was a recipe for disaster.” Dixon eventually pleaded guilty to manslaughter and received a 15-month sentence and a youthful offender status, which allowed him to be treated by the juvenile court.

Thinking Point Juveniles and the Adult Court Given the potentially negative impacts of transfer to adult court of juveniles, do you advocate transfer for most juveniles? In which circumstances would this be acceptable?

The Juvenile Court Process Should Youths be Transferred to Adult Court? Is waiver effective? Death penalty and life in prison Learning Objective Eight - In 1991, gang members instructed 13-year-old Ian Manuel to commit a robbery during which he shot Debbie Baigrie in the face and got a life sentence for attempted murder. Manuel’s attorney told him to plead guilty in exchange for a 15-year prison sentence. Manuel accepted responsibility and pleaded guilty but was sentenced to life imprisonment without possibility of parole. His lawyer never appealed or withdrew the plea. Manuel was sent to prison, where he was so small no prison uniform fit him. He spent years in solitary confinement and repeatedly attempted suicide. When the Supreme Court in 2012 ruled that juveniles can’t be given life sentences, Manuel’s life sentence was vacated by the Florida courts.

Thinking Point Death Penalty and Juveniles Would you advocate the use of the death penalty for a juvenile under any circumstances? What would these circumstances be? Defend your position.

The Juvenile Court Process Adjudication Initial appearance Similar to arraignment in the adult system Trial Court hears evidence on the allegations Significance of In re Gault Disposition and Treatment Suspended judgment Probation Placement in a community treatment program Commitment Learning Objective Nine

The Juvenile Court Process There has been an ongoing effort for almost 30 years to deinstitutionalize status offenders (DSO) Juvenile Sentencing Reform Least intrusive measures Remove status offenders Standardize juvenile dispositions Learning Objective Nine

The Juvenile Correctional Process Probation Most common formal sentence Special rules Alternative sanctions Intensive Supervision Decarceration Control Community ties/reintegration Mixed results Learning Objective Nine

The Juvenile Correctional Process Institutionalization State statutes vary when determining the length of the child’s commitment The number of youths held in some form of incarceration has declined between 2000 and today Deinstitutionalization Status offenders Learning Objectives Ten

The Juvenile Correctional Process Aftercare is the final stage of the formal juvenile justice process Supervision and support Intensive Aftercare Program (IAP) Preparing youths for responsibility Facilitating youth-community interaction Working with the offender and the community Developing new resources/support Monitoring Learning Objective Ten

The Juvenile Correctional Process Preventing Delinquency Intervening in young people’s lives before they engage in delinquency in the first place YMCA, YWCA, Boys and Girls Club Learning Objective Ten - Portland, Oregon, police officer Kristine Butcher congratulates a fifth-grader for his outstanding participation in the Gang Resistance Education and Training (G.R.E.A.T.) program at Alder Elementary School. The G.R.E.A.T. program is a school-based, law enforcement officer-instructed classroom curriculum. With prevention as its primary objective, the program is intended as an immunization against delinquency, youth violence, and gang membership.

Thinking Point From your perspective: How important is a preventive approach (as opposed to a reactionary approach) in the juvenile justice system? Why is this important? Should it be more or less important in the juvenile system than the adult system? Defend your position.

The Future of Juvenile Justice Currently at a crossroads Ongoing effort to modify the juvenile justice system Public’s fear of predatory juvenile offenders Reaction to high profile cases Learning Objective Ten