Pre-trial Detention - Delinquency Cases Only (From Juvenile Justice Standards Symposium, P 255-314, 1979 - See NCJ-76912)

• NCJ Number: 76917
• Author(s): J M Sufian
• Date Published: 1979
• Length: 60 pages
• Publication Format: Document
• Publication Type: Conference Material
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: This document is available on microfiche under NCJ 76912.

Annotation

A symposium presentation and subsequent discussion examine the issue of whether pretrial detention for juveniles should be restricted to delinquency cases; three proposed sets of standards on the subject are compared.

Abstract

The proposed standards include those of the Joint Commission of the Institute for Judicial Administration/American Bar Association (IJA/ABA), the National Advisory Committee for Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (NAC), and the Task Force on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (Task Force). All the standards start from the premise, which is supported by the recent literature, that the detention of juveniles is currently being overused and misused. The standards also identify similar causes for these problems and adopt similar solutions for solving them. In particular, they seek to increase the accountability and visibility of judges and other persons making decisions affecting detention and to limit the scope of discretion by establishing detention criteria, by requiring that the reasons for detention be stated on the record, and by providing for review hearings. The standards also set time limits for detention and require a probable cause determination. The purposes of detention and the factors to be considered in deciding what status and/or facility are necessary to serve the purposes are most narrowly drawn by the IJA/ABA standards. IJA/ABA would never permit coercive detention for a child's protection, in contrast to the Task Force and NAC. IJA/ABA standards also provide strict criteria to guide the discretion to remove a child from the home to shelter care or a secure facility, while the other standards are less stringent. It is concluded that severe limits on juvenile detention practice do not represent an abandonment of the goals of a separate juvenile justice system. Changes in the system that will limit the number of children detained before conviction of any wrongdoing deserve the support of persons concerned with children's welfare. The subsequent discussion focuses on preventive detention, especially in relation to preventing property crimes.