Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Graphs from Chapter 7: Juvenile Offenders in.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
MARGARET NOONAN STATISTICIAN BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS DEATHS IN CUSTODY REPORTING PROGRAM Mortality in Local Jails,
Advertisements

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Graphs from Chapter 6: Juvenile Offenders in.
Overview of Juvenile Justice in Michigan John Evans, Director Bureau of Juvenile Justice Michigan Department of Human Services 1.
Statutory Rape from the Perspective of Law Enforcement Howard N. Snyder Conference on Sexual Exploitation of Teens Washington. DC, March 23, 2005 © National.
PROCESSING OF YOUTHFUL AND JUVENILE OFFENDERS IN NORTH CAROLINA Youth Accountability Planning Task Force December 10, 2009.
Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Graphs from Chapter 5: Law Enforcement and Juvenile.
Sponsored by: CCSU’s Women’s Center; Center for Public Policy & Social Research and the Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice.
Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Graphs from Chapter 3: Juvenile Offenders Copyright.
Unit 5 – Juvenile Justice
Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Graphs from Chapter 1: Juvenile Population Characteristics.
BJS CORRECTIONS IN THE UNITED STATES
A few facts and figures…. US population composition.
Council of State Governments Justice Center | 1 Michael Thompson, Director Council of State Governments Justice Center July 28, 2014 Washington, D.C. Measuring.
Misspent Youth - Opportunities for Juvenile Justice Address by The Hon Wayne Martin Chief Justice of Western Australia JOHN CURTIN INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC.
Teen pregnancy Anthony Evans. Table of Contents Topic Introduction Reflection Page Research Articles Charts and Tables Reflection page II Work Cited.
Massachusetts: Juvenile Justice System
1 Book Cover Here Copyright © 2011, Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved Chapter 5 Juveniles and Community Corrections Corrections in the Community, 5e.
Juvenile Justice History Review New York House of Refuge – First juvenile detention center – Became a place to put delinquent youth Included kids without.
Youth in the Adult Criminal Justice System 18 th National Symposium on Juvenile Services October 16, :00-11:00am.
Understanding the “System”
Council of State Governments Justice Center | 1 Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Michael Thompson, Director June 22,
September 8, 2014 VIRGINIA CRIMINAL SENTENCING COMMISSION Two Decades of Truth-in- Sentencing in Virginia Update.
NYS Office of Children & Family Services Race and Ethnicity: Path Through the Juvenile Justice System Deputy Commissioner Joyce Burrell March 2008.
2010 JJAG Annual Report Detention, Economic, and Education Data Juvenile Justice Data for 2010 by County and Region.
Criminal Justice Today CHAPTER Criminal Justice Today, 13th Edition Frank Schmalleger Copyright © 2015, © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Juvenile Justice How and why juvenile justice differs from adult justice.
Chapter 16: Juvenile Justice
Data Analysis and Forecasting Project – Interim Report Delivered to the DJJ January 2008 Jennifer Lewis Priestley, Ph.D. Shan Muthersbaugh, MS Candidate.
Department of Criminal Justice California State University - Bakersfield CRJU 330 Race, Ethnicity and Criminal Justice Dr. Abu-Lughod, Reem Ali Minority.
Punitiveness in the Imprisonment of Women, Natasha A. Frost Northeastern University.
Juvenile Crime and Punishment. Causes of Youth Violence Complex interplay of factors Correlations, not predictions Accumulation of risk Number of resources.
STANFORD FORUM ON JUVENILE JUSTICE REFORM Not your father’s youth authority… For example: 71% of youth in DJJ institutions last November were committed.
Navigating the Juvenile Justice System.  Taxpayers save $2 million for each child who is prevented from beginning a life of crime  20% of teens live.
Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Graphs from Chapter 4: Juvenile Justice System.
Juvenile Justice A GUIDE TO THE SYSTEM Why do we have it?  Children and adults were incarcerated together  Judges had to sentence a child by:  jail.
Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Graphs from Chapter 2: Juvenile Victims Copyright.
Raise the Age Lessons from the first 2 years. Background: CT added 16-year-olds to the juvenile system January 1, 2010.
Facts to Consider: Presentation to the Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Howard N. Snyder National Center for Juvenile.
Girls Study Group Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Quarterly Meeting June 6, 2008 Washington, D.C. Margaret A. Zahn,
Compliance with the Separation Core Requirement: The Oregon & Missouri Experiences JJDPA Today: CJJ Summit on Reauthorization of the JJDP Act Washington,
Disproportionate Minority Confinement
Source: John Jay College calculations of national arrest estimates using data from Crime in the United States, 1980 through Washington, DC: Federal.
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Office of Research 1.
Muskie School of Public Service 2008 Maine Crime and Justice Data Book March, 2009.
Yavapai County Jail Planning Services Presentation to: Yavapai County Board of Supervisors January 6, 2016.
Racial Disparities in Criminal Justice in Wisconsin Pamela Oliver.
Oregon Youth Authority Meeting the Challenge through Collaboration and Partnerships Oregon´s juvenile justice system is composed of a network of local.
Texas: Not Just Death Row The Juvenile Justice System By: Avery Moore, Nick Rubino, Calyn Jones, and Nick Hogan.
Juvenile Justice. Certification Certification – the proceeding in juvenile court in which the court determines if a juvenile will stand trial as an adult.
Aim: How does the Juvenile Justice System operate in the United States.
JUVENILE JUSTICE In Minnesota. History of Juvenile Law  Originally, juvenile offenders were treated the same as adult criminals  Beginning in 1899,
7X Wednesday MN Juvenile Justice System Describe the goals, offenses, penalties, long-term consequences, and privacy concerns of Minnesota’s.
Prisoners: Characteristics of U.S. Inmate Populations
BJS CORRECTIONS IN THE UNITED STATES
HIV Surveillance by Race/Ethnicity.
Understanding the Criminal Justice System
HIV Surveillance by Race/Ethnicity
From , blacks/African Americans constituted the largest percentage of diagnoses of HIV infection each year. In 2008, of adults and adolescents.
Maryland Juvenile Services Long Term Trends FY 2007 – FY December 2016
Metro Region Juvenile Services Long Term Trends: Counties of Montgomery and Prince George’s DJS Office of Research and Evaluation, January 2017.
Baltimore City Juvenile Services Long Term Trends
The upper curve represents estimated AIDS incidence (number of new cases); the lower one represents the estimated number of deaths of adults and adolescents.
Disproportionate Minority Confinement
Epidemiology of HIV Infection through 2009
Eastern Region Juvenile Services Long Term Trends: Counties of Caroline, Cecil, Dorchester, Kent, Queen Anne’s, Somerset, Talbot, Wicomico, and Worcester.
Central Region Juvenile Services Long Term Trends: Counties of Baltimore, Carroll, Harford, and Howard DJS Office of Research and Evaluation, January 2017.
Southern Region Juvenile Services Long Term Trends: Counties of Anne Arundel, Calvert, Charles, and St. Mary’s DJS Office of Research and Evaluation, January.
Western Region Juvenile Services Long Term Trends: Counties of Allegany, Frederick, Garrett and Washington DJS Office of Research and Evaluation, January.
Prince George’s County Juvenile Services Long Term Trends
Presentation transcript:

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Graphs from Chapter 7: Juvenile Offenders in Correctional Facilities Copyright 2006 National Center for Juvenile Justice 3700 S. Water Street, Suite 200 Pittsburgh, PA Suggested Citation: Snyder, Howard N., and Sickmund, Melissa Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. More information is available online. The full report, report chapters, and data files for the graphs can be downloaded from Additional statistics are available from OJJDP's Statistical Briefing Book, located at:

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report In 2003, public and private facilities held 32% more delinquents and 32% fewer status offenders than in 1991

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Public facilities drive the trend for the delinquency population; private facilities drive the trend for status offenders

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Between 1991 and 2003, the detained delinquency population in public and private facilities increased 38%

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report The number of committed delinquents held in public or private facilities as part of a court-ordered disposition was 28% greater in 2003 than in 1991

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report In 2003, the national detention rate was 83 juvenile offenders in custody for every 100,000 juveniles in the population Juveniles detained in residential placement per 100,000 in the population

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report In 2003, the national commitment rate was 219 juvenile offenders in custody for every 100,000 juveniles in the population Juveniles committed to residential placement per 100,000 in the population

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Although national custody rates declined from 1997 to 2003, not all states experienced a decline

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report More than half of the states had lower commitment rates in 2003 than in 1997

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report New Hampshire, Oregon, and Colorado had the highest proportions of person offenders in the custody population; Mississippi, Nebraska, and Wyoming had the lowest Percent of juvenile offenders held for person offenses

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Massachusetts and North Carolina had the highest proportions of person offenders among detained juveniles; Connecticut and Mississippi had the lowest Percent of detained juvenile offenders held for person offenses

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Oregon and New Hampshire had the highest proportions of person offenders among committed juveniles; Mississippi, Nebraska, and Wyoming had the lowest Percent of committed juvenile offenders held for person offenses

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report The number of male offenders in custody increased 23% from 1991 to 2003

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report The number of female offenders in custody increased 52% from 1991 to 2003

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report In nearly all states, females represented a relatively small proportion of juvenile offenders in residential placement in 2003 Female proportion of juveniles in custody

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Between 1991 and 2003, detained youth constituted about one- quarter of all male delinquents in residential placement

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Between 1991 and 2003, detained youth constituted more than one-third of all female delinquents in residential placement

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report In every state except Vermont, the custody rate for black juvenile offenders exceeded the rate for whites Ratio of minority custody rate to white rate

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Ratio of minority rate to white rate for detained offenders in 2003

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Ratio of minority rate to white rate for committed offenders in public facilities in 2003

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report In 2003, 34% of committed offenders but just 3% of detained offenders remained in placement 6 months after admission

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Males tended to stay in facilities longer than females in 2003

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Half of detained white offenders remained in custody after 14 days; half of detained minority offenders remained in custody after 15 days

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report 2003 time-in-placement patterns largely overlapped for detained youth held for property, drug, public order, and status offenses

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report In 2003, committed person offenders were in placement longer than other types of offenders

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Compared with youth in the general population, at all ages, higher proportions of youth who are reentry candidates are themselves parents

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report On a typical day in 2004, about 7,000 persons younger than 18 were inmates in jails in the U.S.—most were held as adults

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Between 1996 and 2002, the number of new admissions of youth younger than 18 to state prisons fell 45%

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report The population of older inmates grew 16% between 1997 and 2004

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report The population of inmates younger than age 18 fell 54% between 1997 and 2004

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report Although 20 states had death penalty provisions for offenders age 17 or younger when Roper v. Simmons was decided in 2005, few applied those provisions