NCJ Number
190808
Date Published
2001
Length
71 pages
Annotation
This paper reports on the findings and recommendations of a study of Maryland's legislation and implementation of waivers of juveniles to adult court.
Abstract
The study compared a sample group of youths across four pathway categories (at risk, reverse waived, waived, and legislatively waived). It also compared the same group between two processing categories (juvenile justice system and criminal justice system). Maryland's Commission on Juvenile Justice Jurisdiction also reviewed the literature and received testimony from national experts concerning other States' use of other permutations to address the issue of juvenile versus adult jurisdiction. The Commission did not reach an agreement on the full impact of legislation that excludes young offenders from juvenile court jurisdiction, because data collection on excluded and waived youth was not adequate or easily obtained; and significant philosophical differences made agreement difficult. The Commission did conclude that youth spend too long in adult jail pending decisions on whether they should be transferred to juvenile court. Further, the Commission concluded that it is unfair for youth charged but not convicted of an excluded offense to remain in the adult system without the possibility of transfer to the juvenile justice system. Other Commission conclusions were as follows: Maryland's exclusionary laws have a disproportionate effect on African-American youth; insufficient resources are available for the rehabilitation and treatment of youthful offenders in either the adult or juvenile system; there is a need for better outcome data to verify the effectiveness of juvenile programs and strategies, especially regarding the identification and matching of the needs of individual youth; and although the State has implemented many programs, there is a significant need for additional programs and approaches. Commission recommendations are as follows: data collection for excluded and waived youth should be enhanced; the process of deciding whether a person should be adjudicated in the adult criminal court or in the juvenile justice system should be accelerated; youth charged but not convicted of an excluded offense should be eligible for transfer to the juvenile justice system if convicted of a lesser offense; further study is needed on whether additional resources should be allocated to the waiver and transfer decision making process; a new Commission on Juvenile Justice Jurisdiction, similar in structure and representation to the current Commission, should be established in 3 to 5 years; a youthful offender program merits further consideration by the Department of Juvenile Justice; until more complete data are obtained, the Commission is unable to recommend any fundamental changes in Maryland's juvenile jurisdiction; and judicial discretion to waiver and transfer should be maintained. 70 notes and 28 references