NCJ Number
94055
Journal
New Designs for Youth Development Volume: 5 Issue: 1 Dated: (January/February 1984) Pages: 1-8
Date Published
1984
Length
8 pages
Annotation
Ohio's Act 440, pertaining to juveniles, emphasizes the severity of the offense, legality, uniformity, and a deterrence-oriented conception of justice, indicating waning support for individualization and a pessimistic view of the feasibility and desirability of rehabilitation for serious juvenile offenders.
Abstract
After years of legislative debate and conflicts between the judiciary and the State executive agency, the Ohio Youth Commission (OYC), a major piece of legislation, H.B. 440, was enacted on November 23, 1981. To a large extent, this act reflects the juvenile judges' belief that the OYC had superseded the judicial branch of government by direct community placements of youth permanently committed to it; however, some are concerned that Act 440 extends the role of the judiciary into the executive realm. Under the act, the juvenile court has the additional responsibilities of holding revocation hearings, altering terms of aftercare, and deciding on early release from institutions. Also, since the legislation is offense-oriented, the objective appears to have shifted from reforming juveniles to establishing effective deterrence. However, the act prohibits the commitment of status offenders and misdemeanants to State institutions, indicating that the juvenile justice system may be using two different strategies, depending on type and severity of offense. Another major concern about the legislation is the increasing 'criminalization' of the juvenile court, with greater importance given to charging policy on subsequent 'bindovers', possible legitimation of plea bargaining, selective reliance on institutionalization, and a generally conservative milieu. Thirty-seven footnotes are provided.