NCJ Number
74092
Date Published
1979
Length
154 pages
Annotation
This report presents the results of an intensive investigation of the operation of the juvenile justice system in three Minnesota counties.
Abstract
The research documents the variability in the types of offenders and their processing across county jurisdictions, and examines and tests the feasibility of using various system evaluation measures in the juvenile justice system. Offense history and available social history information were collected on 854 juveniles from court, law enforcement, and probation records in Cass, Pennington, and Washington Counties. Major research findings include these observations: (1) considerable variation exists between counties in the type of behavior that is petitioned to court, and (2) considerable variation exists between counties in the processing of both the status offender and the serious offender in the use of preadjudicatory detention, the use of certification or reference to adult court, and the provision of legal representation of juveniles. Other findings show that the dispositions afforded by the courts tend to be similar for both the serious and minor offenders within a given county, but that there is considerable variation between counties; the provision of 'due process' and 'right to treatment' varies greatly between counties; and a lack of consistent and comparable recordkeeping exists both within and between the counties. In addition, the investigation found that the overwhelming majority of juveniles in court are males, more youth are referred to court for status and minor offenses than for serious offenses, and no evidence exists to show that less serious or status offenders progress to more serious of violent/hardcore behavior. The report concludes that objective criteria with reasonable statewide uniformity are needed in juvenile court for diversion decisions, referral procedures for certification to adult court, disposition decisions, and provision of legal representation for adjudication of serious offenses or when detention or commitment is contemplated. Furthermore, uniform baseline data and recordkeeping for all juvenile courts is a necessity for both operational decisionmaking and self-evaluation. Finally, juvenile court priority should focus on the young offender (14 or under) who commits acts which would be felonies if he/she were an adult, and program strategies should be directed toward this age group. Tables, a bibliography of 18 references, and appended data and study instruments are provided. For Part 2 of this report, see NCJ 74093. (Author abstract modified)