NCJ Number
188048
Journal
Crime and Delinquency Volume: 47 Issue: 2 Dated: April 2001 Pages: 243-264
Editor(s)
Ronald E. Vogel
Date Published
April 2001
Length
22 pages
Annotation
This study is an evaluation of the Dona Ana County Teen Court in Las Cruces, New Mexico examining its processes and recidivism rates.
Abstract
Teen courts are becoming a popular method for diverting youngsters charged with relatively minor offenses. The use of such diversion programs has gained momentum and acceptance both within and outside the juvenile justice system. This study examines the Dona Anna County Teen Court in Las Cruces, New Mexico. The goals of the teen court are to utilize peer pressure to correct negative behavior, decrease the juvenile court's workload, diminish labeling and instilling a knowledge of the law (law-related education-LRE), and provide community service and a sense of closure for victims through apology or restitution. Two specific hypotheses guided the study: (1) a prediction that teen courts should have recidivism rates of 20 percent or less, and (2) a prediction that those who do not complete the teen court process (fulfill their sentences) are significantly more likely to re-offend than those who complete the entire process. Four-hundred and seventy-eight participants were randomly selected from the Dona Anna County program and traced through the local Juvenile Probation and Parole Office database. Interviews were conducted with a teen court staff member, JPPO staff members, and former teen court participants. A 25 percent recidivism rate was found between 1994 and 1998, affected by gender, age, the presence of a prior referral, whether the youngster competed the teen court program, with whom the juvenile resided, and the severity of the jury sentence. Additional findings included: juveniles completing teen court were less likely to recidivate than those not completing the program, and a slight relationship was found between the head of household and the likelihood of the juvenile being rearrested. The interviews conducted generated more questions than answers. Study limitations are discussed, such as the recidivism rate for teen court is less meaningful when it cannot be compared with a similar group, there were gaps in the information, and minor status offenses were included as recidivism. Several issues are discussed for future studies on teen court. References