Juvenile Waiver Research Articles

What Predicts the Use of Blended Sentences Among Eligible Juveniles? A State-Wide Examination

In response to critiques of traditional juvenile justice processing and waiver to adult court, several states have adopted blended sentencing. These sentences fall in between these two approaches as they offer the benefits of the more rehabilitative-oriented juvenile system, with the option to deploy more punitive adult criminal sanctions. While previous research has indicated violent offenders were more likely to receive a blended sentence, it has not distinguished between those who were eligible for a blended sentence but did not receive this sanction. The current study seeks to address this gap and examine legal and extralegal predictors of receiving a blended sentence among those eligible. The analyses indicated that while those adjudicated for homicide and aggravated robbery were most likely to be given a blended sentence, other predictors such as prior probation failure and previous violence toward the family were associated with a decreased likelihood of receiving this sentence.

Sexual Victimization of Juveniles Incarcerated in Jails and Prisons: An Exploratory Study of Prevalence and Risk Factors

ABSTRACTThis exploratory research quantifies the prevalence of sexual victimization of juvenile inmates ages 16–17 housed in the adult correctional system in the United States, using data collected from 1,618 juveniles during the National Inmate Survey (NIS-3) conducted between 2011 and 2012. The study presents a number of policy directives to further reduce the number of inmates under the age of 18 subject to sexual crimes while incarcerated. First, there is a need for inmates aged 16 and 17 to be extensively screened for risk of victimization at intake. Second, correctional administrations need to clearly define, communicate, and model appropriate behavior for employees, and to respond swiftly and definitively when a reported incident occurs. Lastly, states, counties, and territories must reassess both their juvenile waiver policies and their protocols for housing juveniles in facilities with older inmates. The NIS data, as well as prior research, indicate that juveniles are being waived into the adult justice system, and housed pretrial in adult facilities, for non-violent offenses. Key stakeholders in criminal justice, child welfare, state legislatures, and the general public should demand greater transparency within the waiver process.

여자소년범죄자들에 대한 여가활동 중심 개입방안 모색

여자소년범죄자들에 대한 여가활동 중심 개입방안 모색

Unpacking Adultification: Institutional Experiences and Misconduct of Adult Court and Juvenile Court Youth Living Under the Same Roof.

The present study explores the ability of juvenile waiver policy and the resulting adult court status to impact the experiences and behavior of male youth originating from differing jurisdictions but incarcerated together within state-level juvenile correctional facilities. Using official agency data and youth survey data, this research examines how "adult" status influences behavior for waived youth compared with their juvenile court counterparts. Structural equation modeling and multiple group analysis is used to determine the extent to which adult status moderates the measurement structure of models related to individual characteristics, institutional experiences, and institutional misconduct. Results reveal an improvement in model fit to occur when estimated across the two groups of juvenile court and adult court youth, beyond that which occurs when parameters are constrained to be equal for these two groups. This work reveals adult status to be powerful enough to moderate the effects of who a youth is and what that youth experiences, on how that youth behaves during a term of juvenile incarceration.

REVISITING JUVENILE WAIVER: INTEGRATING THE INCAPACITATION EXPERIENCE*

AbstractMore than 20 years after an expansion of juvenile transfer policies, questions remain regarding the specific deterrent effect of juvenile waiver given the singular focus on the court of jurisdiction and neglect of other critical aspects of the provision, such as the incapacitation experience. Prior research has also not been focused on identifying the mediating mechanisms that produce criminogenic, null, or deterrent effects. We use data from the Pathways to Desistance Study, propensity score methodology, and mediational analyses to examine how and why the waiver‐incapacitation experience is related to recidivism rates during emerging adulthood. We find that the prior focus on a binary “waiver effect” is potentially misleading as it masks meaningful variation. Furthermore, we find that the path to increased recidivism in emerging adulthood is indirect and we identify stymied educational attainment as a mediator. Our discussion is focused on the criminogenic effects of incapacitation for juveniles and its implications for juvenile transfer research. The discussion also calls for future research to explore treatment heterogeneity further.

JUVENILE WAIVER AS A MECHANISM OF SOCIAL STRATIFICATION: A FOCUS ON HUMAN CAPITAL*

The historic transformations of the criminal justice system must be justified and interpreted through the effects on criminals (Maruna and Immarigeon, 2011). The push for harsher sentencing policies for juvenile offenders specifically through the use of juvenile waiver to criminal court is one such policy that is not well understood in terms of its effects on offenders, especially in terms of broader outcomes beyond recidivism. We use data from the Pathways to Desistance Study, which consists of a sample of adolescent offenders followed for 7 years postadjudication, to investigate the effect juvenile waiver has on human capital acquisition and yield among 557 adolescents from Maricopa County, Arizona. By using various matching specifications, our findings demonstrate that juveniles transferred to adult court experience no deleterious effects on human capital in terms of educational acquisition compared with similar youth retained in the juvenile system, yet they still earn considerably less income 7 years postadjudication. These results suggest that an important and unintended collateral consequence of juvenile waiver is an increase in social stratification potentially through labeling and labor market discrimination.

Juvenile Waiver 2014: A Review of State Statutes

AbstractJuvenile waiver has received much attention from the public, practitioners, and scholars. Prior studies have documented the increased use and effects of waiver. In this study we examine the current state of the law regarding juvenile waiver. We replicate 1995 and 2003 studies that examined state waiver statutes and detail the changes in prosecutorial, judicial, and legislative waiver since 2003. While the juvenile crime rate has dropped dramatically, it is unclear why legislatures’ fascination with juvenile waiver has also decreased. In this study we determine that juvenile waiver remains popular with legislatures, although there are signs of change.

Assessing the impact of race on the juvenile waiver decision: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PurposeThis paper provides a systematic review of the current state of knowledge about the effect of race on the decision to waive a juvenile defendant to criminal court. MethodsFollowing comprehensive search strategies a total of 20 independent studies were identified that met the review's inclusion criteria, eighteen of which could be included in the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis was used to generate weighted mean effect sizes of the effect of race on the waiver decision. Moderator analyses were also performed to explore heterogeneity. ResultsThe average effect of race in the included studies was positive but not statistically significant. Analysis also revealed substantial heterogeneity among the studies. Moderator analyses revealed that within several of the subgroups of studies, race was significantly associated with waiver decisions. ConclusionsOur findings suggest a nuanced and exceedingly complicated story about the role of race in waiver decisions. Most directly, the positive but nonsignificant average effect of race should raise doubts that race impacts waiver decisions in a direct fashion. However, simple claims that race does not matter are also not supported by existing knowledge. The nature of the review facilitates the development of specific recommendations for future research.

A Study on the Discretion of Juvenile Waiver in the US and its Implications

A Study on the Discretion of Juvenile Waiver in the US and its Implications

Criminal Mind or Inculpable Adolescence? A Glimpse at the History, Failures, and Required Changes of the American Juvenile Correction System

This Comment provides an historical analysis of the principles, understandings and laws that have formed and altered the American juvenile correction system. Part I offers an historical synopsis of the societal understanding that juvenile offenders are less culpable than their adult counterparts and explains the process by which this concept came to permeate early American common law. By discussing the early nineteenth-century juvenile correction reformation movement and the cases that followed, Part I also illustrates the development and early failures of the American juvenile correction system. Part II explains the history of juvenile waiver laws, from their early presence in the American juvenile correction system to their stringent nationwide alteration during the 1980s and 90s. In Part III, this Comment discusses the unconstitutional results of increased juvenile waiver legislation and examines the United States Supreme Court’s judicial correction of such effects. Part IV concludes that despite the roadblocks to effectuating necessary changes within the juvenile correction system, the interaction among various omnipresent and undeniable forces requires that the States and their judiciaries do so.

Adult Crime, Adult Time? Benchmarking Public Views on Punishing Serious Juvenile Felons

During the 1980s and 1990s, policy makers became alarmed by the perceived increase in juveniles’ involvement in serious crime. As a result, a number of laws were passed to increase the penalties associated with the commission of such crimes, including laws making juvenile waiver to adult court easier. Although research exists regarding public support for transferring juveniles, limited research is available to shed light on whether the public supports juveniles receiving “adult time” for “adult crimes.” This study expands on the current literature by assessing the public’s views on the appropriate level of punishment for juveniles who have committed a serious felony offense. Drawing on public responses to vignettes and data from the National Judicial Reporting Program, we also benchmark public preferences against actual sentences in criminal court. Although our results show that the public favors less severe penalties for many juveniles, we also find evidence of a public sentiment that “adult crime” merits “adult time.”

The potentially biasing effects of voir dire in juvenile waiver cases.

An analysis of transcripts from cases in which a juvenile is adjudicated in adult criminal court showed that potential jurors may be questioned about their attitudes toward juvenile waiver during voir dire. If jurors express concerns about trying juveniles in adult criminal court, they are excused from the jury for cause (Danielsen et al., Paper presented at the meetings of the American Psychology-Law Society, 2004). We conducted a series of three studies to examine whether questions about juvenile adjudication practices and juvenile offenders during voir dire influenced jurors' pretrial and post-trial judgments of defendant guilt. Jurors who viewed a juvenile qualification voir dire provided higher pretrial probabilities of defendant guilt than did jurors who watched a standard voir dire that did not contain juvenile qualification questions. However, this pretrial guilt bias as a function of voir dire type did not persist after the presentation of trial evidence. Jurors who viewed a juvenile qualification voir dire and jurors who viewed a standard voir dire did not differ in their post-trial judgments of defendant guilt. Implications for the abilities of juvenile defendants to receive a fair trial in adult court are discussed.

Applying Roper v. Simmons in Juvenile Transfer and Waiver Proceedings

In 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court held the death penalty unconstitutional as applied to juveniles in Roper v. Simmons. The Court reasoned that juveniles were less criminally culpable than adults because they lack maturity, they are more vulnerable to peer influence, and their character is not as well formed as that of adults. Although Roper addressed the imposition of the ultimate punishment of death within the context of a juvenile's moral blameworthiness for a crime of murder, this article considers the application of the Court's reasoning in Roper to the issue of juvenile waiver. Specifically, the author asks the question whether Roper's ultimate language distinguishing juveniles from adults in capital cases should apply to the conventional practice of their trial and sentencing as adults. Despite the fact that juvenile transfer is a less serious sanction than the death penalty, this inquiry confronts the traditional objective of the juvenile court system, a system of punishment that was founded on rehabilitation rather than retribution. The author questions whether the punitive objectives of deterrence and retribution are satisfied by juvenile waiver and whether the mitigating effect of adolescence negates the trial of youth as adults.

Psychiatric Symptoms Among Juveniles Incarcerated in Adult Prison

Although studies reveal substantial mental health treatment needs among youths in the juvenile justice system, far less is known about young offenders transferred to adult criminal court. This statewide study examined the mental health needs of young offenders who committed serious crimes and were transferred to adult court and subsequently incarcerated in a prison for adults. Sixty-four boys aged 16 and 17 years who were incarcerated in the Texas adult correctional system completed the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument-Version 2 (MAYSI-2), a mental health screening measure widely used in the juvenile justice system. Scores from the youths in adult prison were compared with those of a matched sample of youths in juvenile correctional facilities, drawn from the MAYSI-2 normative data. Youths in adult prison reported substantial symptoms of mental health problems. Most youths surveyed (51%) scored above the highest clinical cutoff (the "warning" range) on at least one MAYSI-2 subscale. For every clinical subscale except suicide ideation, the majority of youths (54% to 70%, depending on the subscale) scored above the "caution" range. Juveniles in adult prison reported higher rates of symptoms than did those in juvenile correctional facilities (effect sizes ranged from d=.18 to d=.65, depending on the subscale). Although the mental health needs of youths in the juvenile justice system are well documented, this study reveals that mental health treatment needs appear to be even more pronounced in the small subgroup of youths transferred to the adult criminal justice system and incarcerated in adult prison.

The Effects of Juvenile Transfer to Criminal Court on Incarceration Decisions

Juvenile waiver laws allow youthful defendants who have not reached the age of adulthood to be transferred out of the juvenile court and into adult criminal court where they are subject to prosecution as if they were an adult. Using data collected from 37 urban counties, this study expands on a recent study by Kurlychek and Johnson (2004) by comparing the pretrial detention and imprisonment outcomes of juveniles transferred to criminal court to those received by adult defendants 29 years of age or younger. This study also examines the potential effects of county context on incarceration rates of the county court communities. Findings revealed that transferred juveniles are disadvantaged at sentencing stage, and that incarceration decisions regarding young defendants are shaped by the context of the county in which they are processed.

Juvenile Transfer and Deterrence: Reexamining the Effectiveness of a “Get-Tough” Policy

Although research has examined the effectiveness of juvenile transfer on recidivism, there has been a lack of research done in assessing how well juvenile waiver to adult court meets the criteria necessary for deterrence to occur (i.e., certainty, severity, and swiftness of punishment). The purpose of this study is to assess how well juvenile transfer meets these criteria, using data on 345 youths legislatively waived to adult court in Pennsylvania. The findings indicate that there is greater punishment severity in adult court, but there is no difference in punishment certainty between the two court systems. In addition, court processing occurred more quickly in juvenile court. In other words, only one element of deterrence theory is achieved with juvenile transfer. Implications for subsequent research and policy are discussed.

Juvenile Waiver, Boot Camp, and Recidivism in a Northwestern State

The waiver of juveniles to adult criminal court, an increasing phenomenon in recent years, transfers young offenders out of the juvenile system and into the adult criminal justice system, where the range of sanctions is presumably greater. Boot camps, one such sanction, are an intermediate response that are typically designed for youthful, first-time offenders, making waived youth likely candidates for placement there. The authors examine the effectiveness of a boot camp program in terms of recidivism for juveniles waived to criminal court in a northwestern state. They compare juveniles in the boot camp program to juveniles waived to criminal court and sentenced to probation using a 2-year follow-up period.

Juvenile Waiver 2003: Where Are We Now?

ABSTRACTJuvenile waiver has received much attention from the public, practitioners, and scholars during the last decade. Prior studies have documented the increased use and effects of waiver. In this study we examine the current state of the law regarding juvenile waiver. We replicate a 1995 study of state waiver statutes and detail the changes in prosecutorial, judicial, and legislative waiver since 1995. While the juvenile crime rate has slowed, legislatures' fascination with waiver has increased. In less than 10 years, the number of states utilizing prosecutorial waiver has increased 25%, 27 states have modified their judicial waiver statutes, and 30 states have modified their legislative waiver statutes.

Juvenile waiver to adult criminal courts: Prototypes for dangerousness, sophistication–maturity, and amenability to treatment.

Juvenile waiver to adult criminal courts: Prototypes for dangerousness, sophistication–maturity, and amenability to treatment.

Juvenile waiver to adult criminal courts: Prototypes for dangerousness, sophistication-maturity, and amenability to treatment.

Juvenile waiver to adult criminal courts: Prototypes for dangerousness, sophistication-maturity, and amenability to treatment.