An Overview of Juvenile Justice inthe United Statesc h a p t e r1C h a p t e r o u t l i n eChapter ObjectivesIntroductionThe Juvenile Justice SystemA Process or System?Who Are Juvenile Offenders?Juvenile Offenders DefinedThe Age Jurisdiction of Juvenile CourtsParens PatriaeModern Interpretations of Parens PatriaeThe Get-Tough MovementJuvenile Delinquents and DelinquencyJuvenile DelinquentsJuvenile DelinquencyStatus OffendersRunawaysTruants and Curfew ViolatorsJuvenile and Criminal Court Interest in Status OffendersThe Deinstitutionalization of Status Offenses (DSO)The JJDPA of 1974Changes and Modifications in the JJDPADSO DefinedPotential Outcomes of DSOSome Important Distinctions between Juvenile andCriminal CourtsAn Overview of the Juvenile Justice SystemThe Ambiguity of Adolescence and AdulthoodBeing Taken into Custody and Being ArrestedJuveniles in JailsReferralsIntakeAlternative Prosecutorial ActionsAdjudicatory ProceedingsJuvenile DispositionsNominal DispositionsConditional DispositionsCustodial DispositionsJuvenile CorrectionsJuvenile ProbationJuvenile ParoleSummaryKey TermsQuestions for ReviewInternet Connections000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.As the result of reading this chapter, you will accomplish the following objectives:1. Understand the basic components of the juvenile justice system.2. Learnaboutthedoctrineofparenspatriae and howjuvenilescontinuetobeaffected by this doctrine.3. Understand the difference between juvenile delinquents and status offenders.4. Determine what is meant by juvenile delinquency.5. Distinguish between juvenile delinquents and the broad class of status offenders,including runaways, truants, and curfew violators.6. Understand the meaning of the deinstitutionalization of status offenders.7. Differentiate between and understand the primary characteristics of juvenile andcriminal courts.8. Understand the intake process for screening juveniles.9. Learn about different prosecutorial options for pursuing cases against juveniles.10. Acquireanunderstandingofthedifferenttypesofjuvenilecourtdispositions,including nominal, conditional, and custodial sanctions that may be applied.Case StudyA16-year-oldboyinMilledgeville, Georgia, wasarrestedforarmedrobbery. Policeallegedthattheyouthassaultedandrobbeda34-year-oldresident. Theadultwasstruck in the head numerous times with a gun wielded by the youth who stole the manswallet following the assault and ed in the victims car. Police arrested the youth a shorttimelater. Theprosecutorsaidtheyouthwouldbechargedasanadultandtriedincriminal court. [Source: Adapted from the Associated Press, Juvenile Arrested on Rob-bery Charge, October 25, 2007.]In Clackamas County, Oregon, a 17-year-old, Jose Pablo Hernandez, armed with aknife and gun, entered and robbed a food market. Police arrested Hernandez a shorttimelaternearthestore, whereHernandezwashidinginsomebushes. [Source:AdaptedfromtheAssociatedPress, ClackamasCountyJuvenileAccusedof ArmedRobbery, October 29, 2007.]Case StudyAt Mercer Middle School in Seattle, Washington, Tam Chau, 15, hated school. He cutclasses repeatedly, preferring to hang out with his friends at a mall in an arcade room.Eventually a truancy court ordered Chau to attend school. Violating this court orderthree times subsequently led to Chaus arrest and connement in a juvenile detentionfacility, with juvenile robbers, murderers, and thieves. Chaus arrest and detention is theresult of Beccas Bill, an initiative signed into law by the Washington governor. The billis named after Rebecca Hedman, a 13-year-old, who in 1993 had been abused by herbiological mother and placed in foster care. She ran away from the foster home, becom-ing a drug addict and prostitute. She was found beaten to death that same year. The billgave rise to truancy courts and empowered judges to jail runaway, at-risk, or incorrigi-ble youths like Tam Chau. [Source: Adapted from the Associated Press, Should KidsServe Time for Skipping School?, May 9, 2007.]In Fort Pierce, Florida, kids roaming the streets after 10:00 P.M. are subject to arrestandovernightdetention. TheprocurfewargumentandactiontakenbyFortPierce2 Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United Statesc h a p t e r o b j e c t i v e s000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United States 3authorities is simple: if kids dont have the opportunity to commit crime, they wont.JustaskShelwandRiley, 15. Shewaspunchedandpeppersprayedbypoliceofcerswhen she resisted arrest for violating curfew and possibly possessing stolen property.[Source: Adapted from the Associated Press, Broken Curfew=Broken Arm, October 10,2007.]AndinCharlotteCounty, Florida, 17-year-oldBrianCrist, arunawayteen, wasarrestedbypoliceofcersafterhewaslocatedandfoundinpossessionof nearlythree poundsof marijuana. Ijustfoundit, Cristclaimed. Cristwaschargedwithfelonypossession of marijuana with intent to distribute. [Source: Adapted from theAssociated Press, Runaway Found, Then Arrested, November 16, 2007.]IntroductionEach of these cases is different. But there are similarities. One boy beats and robs a manandstealshiscar. Anotheryouthholdsupafoodstoreatgunpoint. Anotheryouthshuns school, is arrested by police, and is placed in detention. Another youth is arrestedas a curfew violator and for possessing stolen merchandise. Another youth is a runawaywith nearly three pounds of marijuana in his possession. All of these arrested youthsarejuveniles. Eachof themhascommittedoneormoreoffensesthathavebroughtthem into the juvenile justice system.This book is about the juvenile justice system and describes its principal compo-nents. The organization of this chapter is as follows. First, the juvenile justice system isdescribed. Sometimes the expression juvenile justice process is preferred, since thereis much fragmentation and differentiation within organizations that process juveniles.Severalof thesimilaritiesanddifferencesamongthesesystemswillbedescribedingreater detail in later chapters.Juvenile delinquents are dened and described, as well as the types of offenses theycommit. Differentdenitionsof juvenilesandjuveniledelinquencyarepresented.Every jurisdiction has its own criteria for determining who juveniles are and whetherthey are encompassed within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court. A majority of statesclassify juveniles as ranging in age from 7 to 17, and juvenile courts in these states havejurisdictionoverthesejuveniles. Somestateshavenominimum-ageprovisionsandconsider each case on its own merit, regardless of the youthfulness of the juvenile.Because juveniles are not considered adults and fully responsible for some of theiractions, special laws have been established that pertain only to them. Thus, violations ofthe laws pertaining only to juveniles are called status offenses. Juveniles who commitsuch infractions are called status offenders. Juveniles who commit crimes are consid-ered juvenile delinquents, and their actions are labeled juvenile delinquency. Differenttypes of status offenses are discussed. These offenses are not considered crimes if adultscommit them. Examples of status offenses include runaway behavior, truancy, and cur-fewviolation. Thesewillbedenedandexplained. Thecharacteristicsof youthsinvolved in such behaviors will also be described.In 1974, the U.S. Congress passed the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency PreventionAct(JJDPA). Thisact, althoughnotbindingonthestates, encouragedallstatestoremovetheirstatusoffendersfromsecureinstitutionsjuvenileprisonsorcustodialfacilitieswheretheywerebeingheldformoreorlesslengthyperiods. Manystatessubsequently removed their status offenders from these institutions and placed theseyouthsincommunity, socialservice, orwelfareagencies. Thisprocessiscalledthedeinstitutionalizationof statusoffenses(DSO) andwillbedescribedinsomedetail.Several meanings of DSO will be presented. Both anticipated and unanticipated conse-quences of DSO have occurred. These consequences will be listed and discussed.Next, a general overview of the juvenile justice system will be presented. While laterchapters will focus upon each of these components in greater detail, the juvenile justice000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.juvenile justice systemStages through which juvenilesare processed, sentenced, andcorrected after arrests forjuvenile delinquency.4 Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United Statessystem consists of all of the processes involved whenever juveniles come into contactwith law enforcement. There are several parallels between the criminal and juvenile jus-tice systems. These will be described. For those juveniles who advance further into thesystem, prosecutors make decisions about which cases to pursue. These decisions areoftenprecededbypetitionsfromdifferentpartiesrequestingaformaljuvenilecourtproceeding. When juveniles appear before a juvenile court judge, they face an adjudica-toryproceedingandhavetheircasesadjudicated. Juvenilecourtjudgeshaveamorelimitedrangeof punishmentoptionscomparedwithcriminalcourtjudges. Juvenilecourt judges may impose nominal, conditional, or custodial dispositions. These differ-ent kinds of dispositions will be described.The Juvenil e Justice SystemThe juvenile justice system, similar to criminal justice, consists of a more or less inte-gratednetworkof agencies, institutions, organizations, andpersonnelthatprocessjuvenile offenders. This network is made up of law enforcement agencies; prosecutionandthecourts; corrections, probation, andparoleservices; andpublicandprivatecommunity-based treatment programs that provide youths with diverse services. Thisdenitionisqualiedbythephrase moreorlessintegrated becausetheconceptofjuvenile justice has different meanings for individual states and for the federal govern-ment. Also, in some jurisdictions, the diverse components of the juvenile justice systemarecloselycoordinated, whileinotherjurisdictions, thesecomponentsare, atbest,loosely coordinated. There is no single nationwide juvenile court system. Instead, thereare 51 state systems, including the District of Columbia, and most of them are dividedinto local systems delivered through either juvenile or family courts at the county level,local probation ofces, state correctional agencies, and private service providers. Thesesystems do, however, have a common set of core principles that distinguish them fromcriminal courts for adult offenders, including: (1) limited jurisdiction (up to age 17 inmoststates); (2)informalproceedings; (3)focusonoffenders, nottheircrimes;(4) indeterminate sentences; and (5) condentiality (Feld, 2007).A Process or System?Many criminologists and criminal justice professionals prefer process rather thansystem when referring to juvenile justice. This is because system connotes a condi-tionof homeostasis, equilibrium, orinternalbalanceamongsystemcomponents. Incontrast, processfocusesonthedifferentactionsandcontributionsof eachof thesecomponentsindealingwithjuvenileoffendersatvariousstagesof theprocessingthrough the juvenile justice system. Furthermore, system implies coordination amongelements in an efcient production process; but in reality, communication and coordi-nationamongjuvenileagencies, organizations, andpersonnelinthejuvenilejusticesystem are often inadequate or nonexistent (Congressional Research Service, 2007).Further blurring the concept of juvenile justice is that different criteria are used todene juveniles among local, state, and federal jurisdictions. Within each of these juris-dictions, certainmechanismsexistforredeningparticularjuvenilesasadultssothatthey may be legally processed by the adult counterpart to juvenile justice, the criminaljusticesystem. Despitethesedenitionalambiguitiesandsystemicinterfacesamongjurisdictions, most scholars who investigate juveniles understand what is meant by juve-nile justice. As with pornography, these scholars and investigators recognize the juvenilejustice process whenever they see its components, even if they may not always be able todene it precisely.criminal justiceAn interdisciplinary fieldstudying nature and operationsof organizations providingjustice services to society;consists of lawmaking bodiesincluding state legislatures andCongress, local, state andfederal agencies that try toenforce the law.law enforcementagencies, lawenforcementAny organization whose purposeis to enforce criminal laws; theactivities of various public andprivate agencies at local, state,and federal levels that aredesigned to ensure compliancewith formal rules of societythat regulate social conduct.prosecution andthe courtsOrganizations that pursuecases against criminal suspectsand determine whether theyare guilty or innocent ofcrimes alleged.criminologistsPersons who study crime, thescience of crime and criminalbehavior, the forms of criminalbehavior, the causes of crime,the definition of criminality, andthe societal reaction to crime.criminal justiceprofessionalsAnyone interested in studyingthe criminal justice system;may have a Ph.D. or mastersdegree in criminal justiceor a related field; may be apractitioner, such as a policeofficer, corrections officer,probation or parole officer,prosecutor, or judge.000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.juvenile offendersAny infant or child who hasviolated juvenile laws.Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United States 5Who Are Juvenil e Offenders?Juvenil e Offenders DefinedJuvenileoffenders areclassiedanddenedaccordingtoseveraldifferentcriteria.According to the 1899 Illinois Act that created juvenile courts, the jurisdiction of suchcourts would extend to all juveniles under the age of 16 who were found in violation ofany state or local law or ordinance (Ferzan, 2008). About a fth of all states place theupper age limit for juveniles at either 15 or 16. In most other states, the upper age limitfor juveniles is 17, except for Wyoming, where the upper age limit is 18. Ordinarily, thejurisdiction of juvenile courts includes all juveniles between the ages of 7 and 18. Fed-eral law denes juveniles as any persons who have not attained their eighteenth birth-day (18 U.S.C., Sec. 5031, 2009).The Age Jurisdiction of Juvenil e CourtsThe age jurisdiction of juvenile courts over juveniles depends upon established legisla-tivedenitionsamongthestates. Thefederalgovernmenthasnojuvenilecourt.Although upper and lower age limits are prescribed, these age limits are not uniformamong jurisdictions. Common law has been applied in many jurisdictions where theminimum age of accountability for juveniles is seven. Youths under the age of seven arepresumed to be incapable of formulating criminal intent and are thus not responsibleunder the law. While this presumption may be rebutted, in most cases, it isnt. Thus, if asix-year-oldchildkillssomeone, deliberatelyoraccidentally, he/shewilllikelybetreated rather than punished. In some states, no lower age limits exist to restrict juve-nile court jurisdiction. Table 1.1 shows upper age limits for most U.S. jurisdictions.Those states with the lowest maximum age for juvenile court jurisdiction includeConnecticut, New York, and North Carolina. In these states, the lowest maximum agefor juvenile court jurisdiction is 15. The states having the lowest maximum age of 16 forjuvenilecourtjurisdictionareGeorgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan,Missouri, SouthCarolina, andTexas. AllotherstatesandthefederalgovernmentjurisdictionPower of a court to hear anddetermine a particular type ofcase; also, territory withinwhich a court may exerciseauthority such as a city,county, or state.Ta b l e 1 . 1Age at Which Criminal Courts Gain Jurisdiction over Youthful Offenders, 2008Age (years) States16 Connecticut, New York, North Carolina17 Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Missouri, South Carolina, Texas18 Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida,Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi,Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio,Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia,Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Federal districts19 WyomingSource: Jeffrey A. Butts et al. (1996). Juvenile Court Statistics 1993: Statistics Report. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and DelinquencyPrevention. Updated 2008 by author.000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.parens patriaeLiterally parent of thecountry and refers to doctrinewhere the state oversees thewelfare of youth; originallyestablished by the king ofEngland and administeredthrough chancellors.6 Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United Statesuse age18astheminimumageforcriminalcourtjurisdiction. UndertheJJDPA,juveniles are persons who have not attained their eighteenth birthday (18 U.S.C., Sec.5031, 2009).Juvenileoffenderswhoareespeciallyyoung(underageseveninmostjurisdic-tions) are often placed within the control of community agencies such as departmentsof human services or social welfare. These children frequently have little or no respon-sible parental supervision or control. In many cases, the parents themselves may havepsychological problems or suffer from alcohol or drug dependencies. Youths from suchfamilies may be abused and/or neglected, and in need of supervision and other formsof care or treatment. Instead of punishing those under the age of seven, various kindsof treatment, includingsocialtherapyandpsychologicalcounseling, aremostfre-quentlyrequired. Somestateshavefurtherage-accountabilityprovisions. Tennesseepresumes, for instance, that juveniles between the ages of 7 and 12 are accountable fortheir delinquent acts, although this presumption may be overcome by their attorneysthrough effective oral arguments and clear and convincing evidence.Some states have no minimum age limit for juveniles. Technically, these states havethe power to decide matters involving children of any age. This control often involvesplacement of children or infants in foster homes or under the supervision of commu-nityserviceorhumanwelfareagencies. Neglected, unmanageable, abused, orotherchildren in need of supervision are placed in the custody of these various agencies, atthediscretionof juvenilejudges. Thus, juvenilecourtsgenerallyhavebroaddiscre-tionarypowersovermostpersonsundertheageof 18. Undercertaincircumstancesthat will be discussed in a later chapter, some juveniles, particularly young ones such as11-year-olds and 12-year-olds, may be treated as adults for the purpose of prosecutingthem in criminal court for alleged serious crimes.Parens PatriaeParens patriae is a concept that originated with the King of England during the twelfthcentury. It means literally the father of the country. Applied to juvenile matters, parenspatriae means that the king is in charge of, makes decisions about, and has the respon-sibility for all matters involving juveniles. Within the scope of early English commonlaw, parentalauthoritywasprimaryintheearlyupbringingof children. However, aschildren advanced beyond the age of seven, they acquired some measure of responsibil-ity for their own actions. Accountability to parents was shifted gradually to accounta-bility to the state, whenever youths seven years of age or older violated the law. In thename of the king, chancellors in various districts adjudicated matters involving juve-niles and the offenses they committed. Juveniles had no legal rights or standing in anycourt. Theywerethesoleresponsibilityof thekingorhisagents. Theirfutureoftendepended largely upon chancellor decisions. In effect, children were wards of the court,and the court was vested with the responsibility of safeguarding their welfare (McGheeand Waterhouse, 2007).Chancery courts of twelfth- and thirteenth-century England, and later years, per-formed many tasks, including the management of children and their affairs, as well asthe management of the affairs of the mentally ill and incompetent. Therefore, an earlydivision of labor was created, involving a three-way relationship among the child, theparent, and the state. The underlying thesis of parens patriae was that the parents aremerely the agents of society in the area of childrearing, and that the state has the pri-maryandlegitimateinterestintheupbringingof itschildren. Thus, parenspatriaeestablished a type of duciary or trust-like parentchild relation, with the state able toexercise the right of intervention to delimit parental rights (Friday and Ren, 2006).Since children could become wards of the court and subject to their control, a keyconcern for many chancellors was for the future welfare of these children. The welfare000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.get-tough movementView toward criminals anddelinquents favoring maximumpenalties and punishments forcrimes or delinquent act.Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United States 7interests of chancellors and their actions led to numerous rehabilitative and/or treat-mentmeasures. Someof thesemeasuresincludedplacementof childreninfosterhomes or their assignment to various work tasks for local merchants (Rockhill, Green,and Furrer, 2007). Parental inuence in these child placement decisions was minimal.In the context of parens patriae, it is fairly easy to trace this early philosophy of childmanagement and its inuence on subsequent events in the United States, such as thechild saver movement, houses of refuge, and reform schools. These latter developmentswerebothprivateandpublicattemptstorescuechildrenfromtheirhostileenviron-ments and meet some or all of their needs through various forms of institutionalization.Modern Interpretations of Parens PatriaeParens patriae in the present is very much alive throughout all juvenile court jurisdic-tions in the United States, although some erosion of this doctrine has occurred duringthe past three or four decades. The persistence of this doctrine is evidenced by the widerange of dispositional options available to juvenile court judges and others involved inthe early stages of offender processing in the juvenile justice system. Most of these dis-positional options are either nominal or conditional, meaning that the connement ofanyjuvenileformostoffensesisregardedasalastresort. Nominalorconditionaloptionsinvolverelativelymildsanctions(e.g., verbalwarningsorreprimands, diver-sion, probation, makingnancialrestitutiontovictims, performanceof communityservice, participationinindividualorgrouptherapy, orinvolvementineducationalprograms), and these sanctions are intended to reect the rehabilitative ideal that hasbeen a major philosophical underpinning of parens patriae.The Get-Tough MovementHowever, thestrongtreatmentorrehabilitativeorientationreectedbytheparenspatriae concept is in conict with the contemporary juvenile justice themes of account-ability, justice, anddueprocess. Contemporaryjuvenilecourtjurisprudencestressesindividualaccountabilityforonesactions. Increasinglythereisatrendtowardjustdeserts and justice in the juvenile justice system. This get-tough movement is gearedtoward providing law violators with swifter, harsher, and more certain justice and pun-ishmentthanthepreviouslydominantrehabilitativephilosophyof Americancourts(Mears et al., 2007).For juveniles, this means greater use of nonsecure and secure custody and incarcer-ative sanctions in state group homes, industrial schools, or reform schools. For thosejuveniles charged with violent offenses, this means transferring larger numbers of themto the jurisdiction of criminal courts for adults, where more severe sanctions such aslife imprisonment or the death penalty may be imposed. Not everyone agrees that thisis a sound trend, however. It has been suggested that while many people favor a juvenilejustice system separate from the criminal justice system, they exhibit a strong prefer-ence for a system that disposes most juveniles to specialized treatment or counselingprograms in lieu of incarceration, even for repeat offenders.Inuencing the parens patriae doctrine are the changing rights of juveniles. Sincethemid-1960s, juvenileshaveacquiredgreaterconstitutionalrightscommensuratewiththoseenjoyedbyadultsincriminalcourts. Asjuvenilesarevestedwithgreaternumbersof constitutionalrights, agradualtransformationof thejuvenilecourtisoccurringtowardoneof greatercriminalization. Interestingly, asjuvenilesobtainagreater range of constitutional rights, they become less susceptible to the inuence ofparens patriae.Anotherfactoristhegradualtransformationof theroleof prosecutorsinjuve-nile courts. Asprosecutorsbecomemoreinvolvedinpursuingcasesagainstjuvenile000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.George B. Mumma, Jr.Senior Investigator, Jefferson County,District Attorneys Ofce, Littleton, COStatistics:B.A. (criminal justice), Columbia College;CertiedJuvenileCourtAdministrator, Universityof Nevada,Reno; Colorado P.O.S.T. CertiedBackgroundI am a Senior Investigator for the Jefferson County Dis-trictAttorneysOfceassignedtotheJuvenileCrimeUnit. I currently supervise the Special Operations Groupand ofce rearms program. I have been in law enforce-ment for the past 29 years. I started out joining the BoyScouts, earningtheEagleScoutaward. Later, Iwasamemberof theArapahoeRescuePatrol(ARP)forveyears. TheARPisayouthsearchandrescuegroupinLittleton, Colorado. I have always enjoyed service work,andsubsequentlyIworkedasaparamedic. Eventually,I wasexposedtopolicework. Afterbeingaparamedicforthreeyears, IbeganworkingattheLittletonPoliceDepartment (LPD).My life in the LPD started as a patrol ofcer writingticketsandtakingreports, andsincethoseearlydays,I have worked in a variety of assignments. I was a mem-ber of the SWAT Team, where my rst assignment was assniper/observeronateam, thenbreacheronanentryteam, then team leader of an entry team, and now a spe-cial operations supervisor of seven operators.IlefttheLPDtoworkforalargerdepartmentinLakewood, Colorado, in1983. After10yearswiththatdepartment, IleftpatrolworkandbeganpursuinganinvestigationscareerwhereIworkedbrieyinInternalAffairsbeforetakingadetectiveassignmentintheCrimesAgainstChildrenUnit. Ultimately, IjoinedtheJuvenile Crime Unit. It was during this time that I foundmy passion, though my time in Crimes Against Childrentook its toll. I became somewhat depressed dealing withvictimizedchildren. Manyof thesechildrenhadbeenso severely abused that I knew they would have perma-nentemotionalandphysicalscars. Manyof themhadbeensexuallyassaultedbyteachers, babysitters, andpedophiles, andhadalsobeenforcedintoincestuousrelationships within their own homes.Latein1994, IwasaskedbytheDistrict AttorneysOfce to act as the County Law Enforcement Liaison totheJeffersonCountyJuvenileAssessmentCenter. TheJuvenileAssessmentCenterisacollaborativeoperationinvolving partners from the school district, human serv-ices, mental health, and law enforcement, all acting in thebest interests of county children. I accepted the positionand was told there was no real plan, just a concept, and soI would have to create a workable plan and implement it.TheJeffersonCountyJuvenileAssessmentbecameamodelforassessmentcentersacrossthecountry, andIcurrently work with other collaborative players to ensurethatallchildreninourjurisdictionreceivepromptandpositiveoutreach, whetheritinvolvesjuvenilejustice,truancy, human service, or mental health components ofthe system.In my role as the law enforcement liaison, I assist thecountytruancyofcer, theDivisionof YouthCorrec-tions, inmanagingthenumberof detaineesinthedetention center; teach juvenile justice to 174 area schoolstudentsandparents; teachattwoareacollegesinthecounselingprogram; writearrestwarrantsandmakearrests in juvenile delinquency cases; assist with the dis-trictattorneysintakeprocess; andreviewarealawenforcement warrantless arrest afdavits.At least one case stands out in my mind as motivat-ing me to enter and stick with juvenile work. One familyhadsomechildrenwithproblems, especiallytheirdaughters. Iwascontactedbytheschooldistrictstruancyofcerwhowantedmetogotoanelementaryschoolwithherandtalkwithtwosecretarieswhohad reportedtwolittlegirlswithlice. WhileIbelieved8 Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United States1.1 C a r e e r S n a p s h o t000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United States 9thisshouldbeahumanservicesissue, Iwentalonganyway. WhenIarrivedattheschoolandspoketothesecretaries, theyadvisedthattheyhadreportedtheproblemtohumanservicesbutweretoldthathumanservicesdidntdealwiththattypeof asituation.Shortlythereafter, the girlsreturnedtoschoolaftera 52-dayabsenceand theystillhadlice. Thesecretaryworriedthatthemanwhobroughtthegirlstoschoollooked like Eddie Munster and that she was unsure ofhisrelationshipwiththechildren. Iwenttothehousethatsamedayandfoundthetwolittlegirls, akinder-gartener and a rst grader, living in a trailer. The front ofthetrailerwasmissingandthatturnedouttobetheirbedroom!I knockedonthedoorandthelittlekinder-garteneranswered. Iaskedwherehermotherwasandshesaidshehadntseenherforfourdays. Iaskedwhowasbabysittingandsheyelledforthebabysitterwhocame to the door. He resembled Eddie Munster, just asthesecretarieshaddescribed. Iaskedhimwherethemother was, and he said she was with her boyfriend inanothercity. I toldEddie Iwouldneedtocomein,and when I entered, I saw a large hole in the trailer roof.The home was a complete wreck, lthy and very unsafefor occupancy.At this point, I met the rst grader. I asked her if shehadeatenbreakfast, andshesaidIwouldnteatany-thing in this house. She took me to the kitchen where Ifound bugs crawling out of cereal boxes. The refrigeratorwaslthy, alsolledwithcrawlingpests. Caseworkersfromhumanservicesweresummonedtothesceneand immediatelytookcustodyof thetwogirls. Subse-quently, themotherreturnedandmadeasceneaboutthe house becoming so dirty in just four days. This was acompletefabrication, asthehousehadbeenlthyforquite some time.Theredepartmentcondemnedthehomelater,and the case workers advised that the girls had been tor-tured and sexually molested. I arrested the mother andbabysitter, charging them both with child endangermentand other offenses. The girls were placed in foster care.After two years, the girls were returned to their motherwho had become rehabilitated. This case was just one ofmany where children were put at risk and were saved bya public servant. When I speak to school personnel, I tellthem that that they are the people who must look out fortheir children, and I continue to do what I can to protectyouth from those who might prey on them.IspentfourmonthsinvestigatingtheColumbinetragedy, aneventthatcontinuestohauntmycommu-nity. Its been 10 years since the shootings, and the mag-nitude of the event is always on my mind. I am deliberateaboutmyworkandwilldoeverythinginmypowertoseethatthistypeof tragedywillnothappenagainonmy watch.Advice to Students If you arent enthusiastic about police work, you arein the wrong eld. Police work is demanding. You may not get off whenyourshiftends; youmustalwayscompleteyourtasks thoroughly before you end your shift. Yourreportreectsyourworkandwillbeusedin court. Makesureitisaccurate, thorough,and complete. Interview everyone, dont leave out the obvious. Treat everyone with respect, even the suspects. Youhave the authority given to you and you dont haveto prove that to anyone. Policeworkis99percentboredom, and1percentsheer terror. Train hard and practice. You must be in shape, skilledwith your weapon, and prepared for anything. Police work is not just a job, it is a lifestyle. You arealways on duty and must represent yourself and theprofessioninapositiveway. Youareviewedasahero, actlikeone. Therearentmanyheroesany-more and you can be one.defendants, the entire juvenile justice process may weaken the delinquency preventionroleof juvenilecourts(Sungi, 2008). Thus, moreaggressiveprosecutionof juvenilecasesisperceivedasmovingawayfromdelinquencypreventionforthepurposeofdeterring youths from future adult criminality. The intentions of prosecutors in mostcases are to ensure that youths are entitled to due process, but the social costs may be tolabel these youths in ways that will propel them toward adult criminality rather thanaway from it (Mears et al., 2007).000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.infantsLegal term applicable tojuveniles who have notattained the age of majority(in most states it is 18).10 Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United StatesJuvenil e Delinquents and DelinquencyJuvenil e DelinquentsInlaw, juvenilesarereferredtoasinfants. Legally, therefore, ajuveniledelinquentis any infant of not more than a specied age who has violated criminal laws or engagesin disobedient, indecent, or immoral conduct, and is in need of treatment, rehabilita-tion, or supervision. These youths are juvenile delinquents. A juvenile delinquent is adelinquentchild (Champion, 2009). Thesedenitionsaresomewhatambiguous.Whatisindecent orimmoralconduct? Whoneedstreatment, rehabilitation, orsupervision?Andwhatsortof treatment, rehabilitation, orsupervisionisneeded?What is a specied age? These ambiguities have never been fully resolved.Juvenil e DelinquencyFederallawsaysthatjuveniledelinquency istheviolationof anylawof theUnitedStates by a person prior to his eighteenth birthday, which would have been a crime ifcommitted by an adult (18 U.S.C., Sec. 5031, 2009). A broader, legally applicable, de-nition of juvenile delinquency is a violation of any state or local law or ordinance byanyone who has not yet achieved the age of majority. Although not especially perfect,these denitions are qualitatively more precise than the former ones.Juvenile courts most often dene juveniles and juvenile delinquency according totheir own standards. For many jurisdictions, a delinquent act is whatever a court says itis. To illustrate the implications of such a denition for any juvenile, consider the fol-lowing scenarios.Scenario #1: It is 10:15 P.M. on a Thursday night in Detroit. There is a curfew in effectforyouthsunderage18prohibitingthemfrombeingoncitystreetsafter10:00P.M.A police ofcer in a cruiser notices four youths standing at a street corner, holding gymbags and conversing. One youth walks toward a nearby jewelry store, looks in the win-dow, andreturnstothegroup. Shortlythereafter, anotherboywalksuptothesamejewelrystorewindowandlooksinit. Theofcerpullsupbesidetheboys, exitsthevehicle, and asks them for IDs. Each of the boys has a high school identity card. Theboys are 16 and 17 years of age. When asked about the jewelry store interest, one boysays that he plans to get his girlfriend a necklace like one in the store window, and hewanted his friends to see it. The boys explain that they are waiting for a ride, since theyare members of a team and have just nished a basketball game at a local gymnasium.Oneboysays, Idontseewhyyourehasslingus. Werenotdoinganythingwrong.You just did, says the ofcer. He makes a call on his radio for assistance from otherofcers, and makes all of the youths sit on the curb with their hands behind their heads.Two other cruisers arrive shortly and the youths are transported to the police stationwheretheyaresearched. Thesearchturnsuptwosmallpocketknivesandabottleopener. The youths are charged with carrying concealed weapons and conspiracy tocommit burglary. Juvenile authorities are notied.Scenario #2: A highway patrol ofcer spots two young girls with backpacks attempt-ingtohitcharideonamajorhighwayinFlorida. Hestopshisvehicleandasksthegirls forIDs. Theydonthaveany, butclaimtheyareover18andaretryingtoget to Georgia to visit some friends. The ofcer takes both girls into custody and to alocal jail where a subsequent identication discloses that they are respectively 13- and14-year-oldrunawaysfromaMiamisuburb. Theirparentsarelookingforthem.They are detained at the jail until their parents can retrieve them. In the meantime, anearby convenience store reports that two young girls from off the street came in anhourearlierandshopliftedseveralitems. Jaildeputiessearchthebackpacksof thejuvenile delinquentAnyone who, under theage of his/her majority, hascommitted one or more actsthat would be crimes if adultscommitted them.juvenile delinquents,delinquent childInfant of not more than aspecified age who has violatedcriminal laws or engagesin disobedient, indecent,or immoral conduct, andis in need of treatment,rehabilitation, or supervision.juvenile delinquencyViolation of the law byany person prior to his/hereighteenth birthday;punishable by juvenilecourts; violation of any lawor ordinance by anyone whohas not achieved the age oftheir majority.000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.status offensesAny act committed by a minorthat would not be a crime ifan adult committed it (e.g.,truancy, runaway behavior).girls and nd the shoplifted items. They are charged with theft. Juvenile authoritiesare notied.Scenario #3: A 15-year-old boy who has been suspended from a local Atlanta schoolfor pushing another student is being held in the juvenile psychiatric wing of a mentalhospital while undergoing some juvenile court-ordered tests to determine his mentalcondition. During the night, he sneaks away from the facility but is caught by police thenext day. He is charged with escape. Juvenile authorities are notied.These and a thousand other scenarios could be presented. Are these scenarios thesame? No. As the facts are presented, some of these scenarios are not especially serious.Can each of these scenarios result in a nding of delinquency by a juvenile court judge?Yes. Whether juveniles are hanging out on a street corner late at night, whether theyhave shoplifted, or whether they have run away from a psychiatric institution, it is pos-sible in some juvenile court somewhere that all of them could be dened collectively asdelinquent or delinquency cases. Some juvenile offending is more serious than othertypes of juvenile offending. Breaking windows or violating the town curfew would cer-tainly be less serious than armed robbery, rape, or murder. The wide range of offenseseriousness has caused many jurisdictions to channel less serious cases away from juve-nile courts and toward various community agencies where the juveniles involved canreceive assistance rather than punishment. Should ones age, socioeconomic status, eth-nicity or race, attitude, and other situational circumstances inuence police responseone way or another? The fact is that regardless of the offenses alleged, all juveniles areconfrontedbysubjectiveappraisalsandjudgmentsfromthepolice, prosecutors, andjuvenile court judges on the basis of both legal and extralegal factors. Because of theirstatus as juveniles, youths may also be charged with various noncriminal acts. Such actsare broadly described as status offenses.Status OffendersStatus offenders are of interest to both the juvenile justice system andthe criminal justice system. Status offenses are any acts committed byjuveniles that would (1) bring the juveniles to the attention of juvenilecourtsand(2)notbecrimesif committedbyadults. Typicalstatusoffenses are running away from home, truancy, and curfew violations.Adults wouldnt be arrested for running away from home, truancy, orwalking the streets after some curfew time for juveniles. However, ifjuvenilesdothesesortsof thingsinparticularcities, theymaybegrouped within the broad delinquency category, together with moreseriousjuvenileoffenderswhoarechargedwitharmedrobbery,forcible rape, murder, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, vehiculartheft, or illicit drug sales.RunawaysIn2007, itwasestimatedtherewereover300,000runaways intheUnited States reported to police (Ofce of Juvenile Justice and Delin-quencyPrevention, 2007). Thisrepresentslessthan1percentof alloffenses charged that year. Over half of those runaways were 15 to 17years of age. Runaways are those youths who leave their homes, with-outpermissionortheirparents knowledge, andwhoremainawayfrom home for prolonged periods ranging from several days to severalyears. Many runaways are eventually picked up by police in differentChapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United States 11One type of status offense is underage drinking.runawaysJuveniles who leave theirhome for long-term periodswithout parental consent orsupervision; unruly youthswho cannot be controlledor managed by parents orguardians.000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.truantsJuveniles who are habituallyabsent from school without excuse.12 Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United Statesjurisdictionsandreturnedtotheirhomes. Othersreturnof theirownfreewillandchoice. Some runaways remain permanently missing, although they are likely a part ofagrowingnumberof homelessyouthsroamingfarawaycitystreetsthroughouttheUnitedStates(Slesnicketal., 2007). Informationaboutrunawaysandothertypesofstatus offenders is compiled annually through various statewide clearinghouses and thefederal funded National Incidence Studies of Missing, Abducted, Runaway, and Throw-naway Children (NISMART).Runaway behavior is complex and difcult to explain, although researchers tend toagreethatmanyrunawaysgenerallyhaveseriousmentalhealthneeds(Chenetal.,2007). Many of these youths seek out others like them for dependency and emotionalsupport(Kempf-LeonardandJohansson, 2007). Somerunawaysregardotherslikethemasrolemodelsandpeers, andoften, delinquencyamongthemoccursandincreasesthroughsuchpeermodeling. Studiesof runawaysindicatethatmanyboysand girls have psychological and/or familial adjustment problems and have been physi-callyandsexuallyabusedbytheirparentsorcloserelatives. Evidencesuggeststhatmanyrunawaysengageintheftorprostitutiontonancetheirindependenceawayfrom home and are exploited (Armour and Haynie, 2007).Althoughallrunawaysarenotalike, therehavebeenattemptstoprolethem.Depending upon how authorities and parents react to children who have been appre-hendedafterrunningaway, theremaybeeitherpositiveornegativeconsequences.Empathy for runaways and their problems is important for instilling positive feelingswithin them. Various runaway shelters have been established to offer runaways a non-threatening residence and social support system in various jurisdictions. These sheltersoften locate particular services for runaways that will help meet their needs. Many chil-dren accommodated by these shelters report that they have been physically and sexu-ally abused by family members. Thus, there is some coordination of these homes withvarious law enforcement agencies to investigate these allegations and assist parents inmaking their homes safer for their children.Truants and Curfew Viol atorsTruants. Other types of status offenders are truants and curfew and liquor law viola-tors. Truants arethosewhoabsentthemselvesfromschoolwithouteitherschoolorparental permission. Very little is known about the numbers or characteristics of truantsin the United States. This is due to several reasons: each school district denes truancydifferent from other districts; sociodemographic characteristics of truants are not nor-mallymaintained, evenbyindividualschools; andnoconsistent, centralreportingmechanisms exist for data compilations about truants. For instance, in Wisconsin, a tru-ant may be a youth who absents himself/herself from school without excuse for ve ormore consecutive school days. In other states, a truant may be dened as someone whomisses one day of school without a valid excuse.There are probably 200,000 or more truants in the United States on any given day.This gure is most likely an underestimate of the actual number of truants. On a city-by-city basis, where records of truants are maintained, we can glean much about thetrue magnitude of truancy. For instance, in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, on any given day,there are 3,500 students absent from school, with about 70 percent of these absencesunexcused. InPhiladelphia, thereare2,500studentstruanteachday. Onedisturbingdimension of truancy is that about two-thirds of all juvenile males arrested while tru-ant have tested positive for drug use (Chiang et al., 2007).Truancy is not a crime. It is a status offense. Youths can be charged with truancyand brought into juvenile court for a status offense adjudication. Truancy is taken quiteseriously in many jurisdictions, since evidence suggests that daytime crime and truancyare highly correlated.000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.truancy courtsSpecial bodies that convene todetermine punishments foryouths who absent themselvesfrom school.Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United States 13Rhode Island Truancy Court. Several states, such as Rhode Island, have establishedformal mechanisms to deal with the problem of truancy. The Family Court system ofRhodeIslandhasestablishedtruancycourts forthepurposeof heighteningstatusoffender accountability relating to truancy issues. Chronic truants are referred to theTruancy Court where their cases are formalized. This formal process dealing with tru-ancyinvolvestruants, theirparents/guardians, atruantofcer, andaTruancyCourtmagistrate. Participants must sign a Waiver of Rights Form, illustrated in Figure 1.1.This form outlines the rights of truants, including the right to challenge any truancyaccusationagainstthem. Severalimportantdueprocessrightsareincludedontheform. Thepurposeof theTruancyCourtistoavoidformaljuvenilecourtactionbyobeyingthebehavioralrequirementsoutlined. Theseinclude(1)attendingschoolevery day; (2) being on time; (3) behaving; and (4) doing classroom work and home-work. Failure to comply with one or more of these requirements may result in a referralto Family Court or placement in the Department of Children, Youth, and Families andremoval from the home. This means possible institutionalization if ones truancy per-sists following the Truancy Court hearing.The Truancy Court also requires parents to sign a form that permits the release ofcondentialinformationaboutthetruant. Thisinformationisnecessaryindevisinganytypeof treatmentprogramandprovidinganycounselingorservicesthetruantmay require. Thus, the Family Court is vested with the power to evaluate, assess, andplanactivitiesforthetruantthataredesignedtopreventfurthertruancy. Variousinterventions are attempted in an effort to heighten the youths awareness of the seri-ousness of truancy and the importance of staying in school. This form is illustrated inFigure 1.2.Two other documents are required by the Truancy Court: a Treatment ReferenceSheet (Figure 1.3) and an Ofcial Family Court Order (Figure 1.4).TheTreatmentReferenceSheetshowninFigure1.3 isaninformationaldocu-ment designedtoprovidetheTruancyCourtmagistratewithvaluableinformationaboutthe studentsprogresspriortotheTruancyCourthearing. Someof thisinfor-mation pertains to the parents and whether they have any criminal history, the statusof theirmentalhealth, andtheirowneducationalattainment. Itisbelievedthattheparents backgroundisasignicantconsiderationinanytreatmentrecommenda-tion made for the truant. For instance, information is acquired relating to whether theyouthhasanydisabilitiesormentalhealthproblems,whichcouldaccountforhis/hertruantconduct. Theyouths grades in different subjects are also recorded forthemagistratesinspection. Figure1.4 isaformalcourtorder outlining any sanctions the magistrate believes willheightenthetruantsaccountability. Theseincludepos-siblehomeconnementandanyspecialconditionsthecourt chooses to impose. Rhode Island Family Court of-cersarepleasedwiththeresultsof theTruancyCourtprocess thus far.Curfew Violators. Curfew violators are those youthswho remain on city streets after specied evening hourswhen they are prohibited from loitering or not being inthe company of a parent or guardian. In 2007, there wereover282,000youthschargedwithviolatingcurfewandloitering laws in the United States (Ofce of Juvenile Jus-tice and Delinquency Prevention, 2007).Curfew violators tend to differ from runaways in thattheyaremoreseriousoffenders. However, truantsand Shoplifting is a common status offense.000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.14 Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United StatesSource: Reprinted by permission of the Rhode Island Family and Truancy Court.F i g u r e 1 . 1 Rhode Island Truancy Court Waiver of Rights Form000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United States 15F i g u r e 1 . 2 Rhode Island Release of Confidential Information FormSource: Reprinted by permission of the Rhode Island Family and Truancy Court.000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.16 Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United StatesSource: Reprinted by permission of the Rhode Island Family and Truancy Court.F i g u r e 1 . 3 Rhode Island Truancy Court Treatment Reference Sheet000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United States 17Source: Reprinted by permission of the Rhode Island Family and Truancy Court.F i g u r e 1 . 4 Rhode Island Official Family Court Order000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.liquor law violators are more inclined to become chronic offenders and to engage inmore serious, possibly criminal, behaviors. This is because truancy and curfew viola-tions are viewed as undisciplined offenses (Chen et al., 2007).In an effort to decrease the incidence of juvenile crime, many cities throughout theUnited States have enacted curfew laws specically applicable to youths. The theory isthatif juvenilesareobligedtoobservecurfewsintheircommunities, thentheywillhave fewer opportunities to commit delinquent acts or status offenses (Urban, 2005).For example, in New Orleans, Louisiana, in June 1994, the most restrictive curfew lawwent into effect. Under this law, juveniles under age 17 were prohibited from being inpublic places, including the premises of business establishments, unless accompaniedby a legal guardian or authorized adults. The curfew began at 8:00 P.M. on weeknightsand at 11:00 P.M. on weekends. Several exceptions were made for youths who might betravelingtoandfromworkorwhowereattendingschool, religious, orcivilevents.A study of the impact of this strict curfew law was conducted, and it revealed that juve-nile offending shifted to non-curfew hours. Furthermore, the enforcement of this cur-fewlawbyNewOrleanspolicewasdifcult, sincecurfewviolationsoftenoccurredoutside of a police presence. If anything, the curfew law tended to induce rebelliousnessamong those youths affected by the law. Curfew laws have not been an especially effec-tive deterrent to status offending or delinquency generally (Urban, 2005).Juvenil e and Criminal Court Interest in Status OffendersAmongstatusoffenders, juvenilecourtsaremostinterestedinchronicorpersistentoffenders, such as those who habitually appear before juvenile court judges (Hill et al.,2007). Repeated juvenile court exposure by status offenders may eventually be followedby adult criminality, although there is little support for this view in the research litera-ture. The chronicity of juvenile offending seems to be inuenced by the amount of con-tact youths have with juvenile courts. Greater contact with juvenile courts is believed bysomepersonstostigmatize youthsandcausethemtoacquirelabelsorstigmas asdelinquents or deviants (Feiring, Miller-Johnson, and Cleland, 2007). Therefore, diver-sionof certaintypesof juvenileoffendersfromthejuvenilejusticesystemhasbeenadvocated and recommended to minimize stigmatization.One increasingly popular strategy is to remove certain types of offenses from thejurisdiction of juvenile court judges (Trulson, Marquart, and Mullings, 2005). Becausestatus offenses are less serious than juvenile delinquency, many state legislatures havepushed for the removal of status offenses from juvenile court jurisdiction. The removalof status offenders from the discretionary power of juvenile courts is a part of what isgenerally known as the DSO.The Deinstitutionalization of StatusOffenses (DSO)The JJDPA of 1974The U.S. Congress passed the JJDPA of 1974 in response to a national concern aboutgrowing juvenile delinquency and youth crime (Bjerk, 2007). This Act authorized theestablishment of the Ofce of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP),which has been extremely helpful and inuential in matters of disseminating informa-tion about juvenile offending and prevention and as a general data source.Changes and Modifications in the JJDPAIn1977, CongressmodiedtheActbydeclaringthatthejuvenilesbeseparatedby bothsightandsoundfromadultoffendersindetentionandcorrectionalfacilities.stigmas, stigmatize,stigmatizationSocial process wherebyoffenders acquire undesirablecharacteristics as the resultof imprisonment or courtappearances; undesirablecriminal or delinquent labelsare assigned those who areprocessed through the criminaland juvenile justice systems.18 Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United StatesJJDPA (Juvenile Justiceand DelinquencyPrevention Act) of 1974Legislation recommendingvarious alternatives toincarcerating youths, includingdeinstitutionalization of statusoffending, removal of youthsfrom secure confinement, andother rehabilitative treatments.Office of JuvenileJustice and DelinquencyPrevention (OJJDP)Agency established byCongress under the JJDPAof 1974; designed to removestatus offenders fromjurisdiction of juvenile courtsand dispose of their cases less formally.chronic offendersHabitual offenders; repeatoffenders; persistent offenders;youths who commit frequentdelinquent acts.000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.decarcerationType of deinstitutionalizationwhere juveniles are removedfrom secure and nonsecurecustodial facilities and put onprobation, required to attendtreatment or service programs,and subjected to otherbehavioral restraints.Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United States 19This mandate become known as the deinstitutionalization of status offenses or DSO.Nonoffenders, such as dependent and neglected children, were also included. CongressrelaxedcertainJJDPArulesandgavestatesadditionallatituderegardingtheirplace-ment options for status offenders.In1980, Congressrecommendedthatstatesshouldrefrainfromdetainingjuve-niles in jails or lockups. Explicit compliance with this recommendation by any state iscomplicated by several factors. First, many juveniles appear to be adults when arrestedfor various offenses. Second, the relatively easy access to false identication cards anddrivers licenses makes a precise determination of ones age difcult. Sometimes it maytake days or weeks for police to determine the identity and age of any particular youthbeing held in a jail or lockup. Congress also directed that states should examine theirsecureconnementpoliciesrelatingtominorityjuvenilesandtodeterminereasonsandjusticationforthedisproportionatelyhighrateof minorityconnement. Con-gress also established an exception to the DSO by declaring that juveniles who violate avalid court order can be placed in secure connement for a period of time.By 1992, Congress directed that any participating state would have up to 25 percentof its formula grant money withheld to the extent that the state wasnt in compliancewith each of the JJDPA mandates. Thus, it is clear that state compliance with these pro-visionsof theJJDPAwasencouragedandobtainedbyprovidinggrants-in-aidtovariousjurisdictionswantingtoimprovetheirjuvenilejusticesystemsandfacilities.There has been almost universal compliance with the JJDPA mandate throughout thevarious state juvenile justice systems, and it has served as a signicant catalyst for majorreform initiatives.DSO DefinedThemostpopularmeaningof DSOistheremovalof statusoffendersfromjuvenilesecure institutions. However, the JJDPA has extended the meaning of DSO to includealternativewaysof ensuringthatstatusoffendersareseparatedfromdelinquentoffenders. Presently, DSO occurs in three major ways: (1) decarceration; (2) divertingdependent and neglected children to social services; and (3) divestiture of jurisdiction.Decarceration. Decarceration means to remove status offenders from secure juve-nile institutions, such as state industrial schools. Prior to the JJDPA of 1974, it was com-monpracticeinmoststatestoincarceratebothstatusanddelinquentoffenderstogether in reform schools or industrial schools (Champion, 2008a). But more than afew people, scholars and the general public alike, questioned this practice. Why shouldtruants, curfewviolators, runaways, anddifcult-to-controlchildrenbeplacedinprison-likefacilitiestogetherwithadjudicatedjuvenilemurderers, rapists, burglars,thieves, robbers, arsonists, andotherviolentandpropertyfelonyoffenders?Qualita-tively, there are substantial differences between status offenders and delinquent offend-ers. Do status offenders deserve to be treated the same as delinquent offenders for suchdrastically different offending behaviors? No.Prevalent opinion suggests that causing status offenders to live and interact withdelinquentsinsecureconnement, especiallyforprolongedperiodsof time, isde-nitelydetrimentaltostatusoffenders. Themereexposureof statusoffenderstothecriminogenic inuence of, and close association with, hard-core delinquents adverselyaffects the social and psychological well-being of status offenders. The damage to a sta-tus offenders self-concept and esteem is incalculable (Champion, 2008a). This particu-lar problem has been acknowledged outside of the United States as well. Countries suchas China have implemented similar reforms in their juvenile justice systems in recentyears, inordertoseparateless-seriousjuvenileoffendersfrommoreseriousones(Champion, 2008a). Themanypotentialproblemsassociatedwithcombiningstatusoffenders with delinquent offenders in secure institutions no doubt was a compellingfactor leading to the passage of the JJDPA.deinstitutionalization ofstatus offenses (DSO)Eliminating status offensesfrom the broad category ofdelinquent acts and removingjuveniles from or precludingtheir confinement in juvenilecorrectional facilities; theprocess of removing statusoffenses from jurisdiction ofjuvenile court so that statusoffenders cannot be subject tosecure confinement.000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.dependent andneglected childrenYouths considered by socialservices or the juvenile courtto be in need of some typeof adult supervision.20 Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United StatesSubsequently, moststateshaveimplementeddecarcerationpoliciesforstatusoffenders. For instance, Pennsylvania does not place status offenders in secure facilities.However, insomepredominantlyruralstates, suchasMontanaandNorthDakota,some status offenders have continued to be disposed to secure institutions by juvenilecourt judges. One reason is that juvenile court judges view incarcerating these youths asanappropriatepunishmentandapotentialcurefortheirstatusoffending. Anotherreason is that these state legislatures have not devised alternative strategies for treatingstatus offenders through other state agencies or services. A third reason is that often,facilities simply dont exist in rural areas to meet status offender needs and provide thesocial services they require. Thus, the only alternative for their treatment and punish-ment is to be locked up in secure juvenile facilities together with delinquent offenders.Inordertoexpeditethedecarcerationof statusoffendersfromsecurejuvenilefacilities, the federal government has made available substantial sums of money to thestatesforthepurposeof establishingalternativesocialservices. Usually, stateswhoagree to accept federal money in exchange for implementing the DSO are given severalyearsoverwhichtoimplementthesereformsinhowstatusoffendersareprocessed.Thus, aperiodof timeisallocatedinwhichtophaseouttheincarcerationof statusoffendersandphaseinthecreationof alternativesocialserviceagenciesdesignedtoaccommodate them and meet their needs.Under certain conditions, however, states may incarcerate status offenders who areunder some form of probationary supervision. For instance, a Texas juvenile, E.D., wason probation for a status offense (In re E.D., 2004). During the term of E.D.s probation,one or more probation conditions were violated. The juvenile court elected to conneE.D. to an institution for a period of time as a punishment for the probation violation.The juvenile appealed, contending that as a status offender, he should not be placed in asecure facility. The appellate court disagreed and held that the juvenile court judge hadbroad discretionary powers to determine E.D.s disposition, even including placementin a secure facility. The appellate court noted that secure placement of a status offenderis warranted whenever the juvenile probation department (1) reviewed the behavior oftheyouthandthecircumstancesunderwhichthejuvenilewasbroughtbeforethecourt; (2) determined the reasons for the behavior that caused the youth to be broughtbefore the court; and (3) determined that all dispositions, including treatment, otherthan placement in a secure detention facility or secure correctional facility, have beenexhausted or are clearly inappropriate.The juvenile court judge set forth an order that (1) it is in the childs best interests tobe placed outside of his home; (2) reasonable efforts were made to prevent or eliminatethe need for the childs removal from his home; and (3) the child, in his home, cant beprovided the quality of care and support that he needs to meet the conditions of proba-tion. There was no suggestion in the record that the judge failed to comply with thesethree major requirements. Thus, even status offenders may suffer incarceration if theyfail to obey court orders while on probation despite the deinstitutionalization initiative.Diverting Dependent and Neglected Children to Social Services. A sec-ondtypeof DSOdealswithdependentandneglectedchildren. Whilethejuvenilecourt continues to exercise jurisdiction over dependent and neglected youths, diversionprograms have been established to receive these children directly from law enforcementofcers, schools, parents, or even self-referrals. These diversion programs provide crisisintervention services for youths, and their aim is to eventually return juveniles to theirhomes. However, more serious offenders may need more elaborate services providedby shelter homes, group homes, or even foster homes (Sullivan et al., 2007).DivestitureofJurisdiction. Thethirdtypeof deinstitutionalizationiscalleddivestiture of jurisdiction. Underdivestiture, juvenilecourtscantdetain, petition,adjudicate, orplaceyouthsonprobationorininstitutionsforanystatusoffense.However, several studies of DSO implementation policies reveal that there are gaps indivestitureDeinstitutionalizing statusoffenders through the act ofjuvenile court judges giving up their jurisdiction over status offenses.000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.net-wideningPulling juveniles into thejuvenile justice system whowouldnt otherwise be involvedin delinquent activity; applies tomany status offenders (alsoknown as widening the net).Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United States 21coordinating interjurisdictional practices involving juveniles. Often, particular agenciescontinue to operate in their own philosophical contexts in contrast with, and sometimesin opposition to, legislative mandates for juvenile processing changes (Feld, 2007).Potential Outcomes of DSOFive potential outcomes of the DSO are the following:1. DSO reduces the number of status offenders in secure connement, especially inlocalfacilities. Greaternumbersof jurisdictionsareadoptingdeinstitutionalizationpolicies and the actual number of institutionalized status offenders is decreasing.2.Net-widening, orpullingyouthsintothejuvenilejusticesystemwhowouldnthave been involved previously in the system, has increased as one result of DSO. Manystatejurisdictionshavedrawnlargenumbersof statusoffendersintothenetof thejuvenile justice system following DSO. In past years, many status offenders would havebeen ignored by police or handled informally. But when specic community programswere established for status offenders, the net widened and many status offenders wereplaced in these programs regardless of whether they needed specic social services.3.Relabeling, or dening youths as delinquent or as emotionally disturbed who, inthe past, would have been dened and processed as status offenders, has occurred incertain jurisdictions following the DSO. For instance, police ofcers can easily relabeljuvenilecurfewviolatorsorloiterersaslarcenyorburglarysuspectsanddetaintheseyouths. In many instances, juvenile court judges have resisted DSO reforms for similarreasons (e.g., loss of discretionary control and power over status offenders).4. DSO has had little, if any, impact on recidivism rates among status offenders.5. DSO has created several service delivery problems, including inadequate services,nonexistentservicesorfacilities, orthegeneralinabilitytoprovideserviceswithinavoluntarysystem. Thisisbecausethereissomuchvariationamongstatusoffendersthat it is difcult to establish standardized programming and services that will be effec-tive for all of them.Regardless of the relative merits of DSO and the ambiguity of research results con-cerningitsshort-andlong-termeffects, thereisnodoubtthatDSOiswidespreadnationallyandhasbecometheprevailingjuvenilejusticepolicy. TheDSOhassetinmotion numerous programs in all jurisdictions to better serve the needs of a growingconstituency of status offenders. This necessarily obligates growing numbers of agen-ciesandorganizationstocontemplatenewandinnovativestrategies, rehabilitative,therapeutic, and/or educational, to cope with these youths with diverse needs. Greatercooperation between the public, youth services, and community-based treatment pro-grams is required to facilitate developing the best program policies and practices.Some Important Distinctions betweenJuvenil e and Criminal CourtsSome of the major differences between juvenile and criminal courts are indicated below.These generalizations are more or less valid in most jurisdictions in the United States.1. Juvenilecourtsarecivilproceedingsexclusivelydesignedforjuveniles, whereascriminal courts are proceedings designed to try adults charged with crimes. In criminalrelabelingAction, usually taken by policeofficers, of redefining juvenileacts as delinquent when in factsuch acts are harmless orstatus offenses; result isharsher treatment by police ofarrested juveniles.000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.adversarial proceedingsOpponent-driven courtlitigation, where oneside opposes the other;prosecution seeks to convictor find defendants guilty,while defense counsel seeksto defend their clients andseek their acquittal.convictionsJudgments of a court, based ona jury or judicial verdict, or onthe guilty pleas of defendants,that the defendants are guiltyof the offenses alleged.22 Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United Statescourts, adults are targeted for criminal court actions, although some juveniles may betried as adults in these same courts. The civil-criminal distinction is important becausea civil adjudication of a juvenile court case does not result in a criminal record for thejuvenile offender. In criminal courts, either a judge or jury nds a defendant guilty ornot guilty. In the case of guilty verdicts, offenders are convicted and acquire criminalrecords. These convictions follow adult offenders for the rest of their lives. However,when juveniles are tried in juvenile courts, their juvenile court adjudications are sealedorexpungedandgenerallyforgotten, withexceptions, oncetheyreachadulthoodorthe age of their majority.2. Juvenileproceedingsaremoreinformal, whereascriminalproceedingsaremoreformal. Attempts are made in many juvenile courts to avoid the formal trappings thatcharacterizecriminalproceedings. Juvenilecourtjudgesfrequentlyaddressjuvenilesdirectly and casually. Formal rules of criminal procedure are not followed relating tothe admissibility of evidence and testimony, and hearsay from various witnesses is con-sidered together with hard factual information and evidence. Despite attempts by juve-nilecourtstominimizetheformalityof theirproceedings, however, juvenilecourtprocedures in recent years have become increasingly formalized. In some jurisdictionsatleast, itisdifculttodistinguishcriminalcourtsfromjuvenilecourtsintermsoftheir formality.3. In39states, juvenilesarenotentitledtoatrialbyjury, unlessthejuvenilecourtjudge approves. In all criminal proceedings, defendants are entitled to a trial by jury ifthey want one, and if the crime or crimes they are accused of committing carry incar-cerative penalties of more than six months. Judicial approval is required for a jury trialfor juveniles in most jurisdictions. This is one of the remaining legacies of the parenspatriae doctrineincontemporaryjuvenilecourts. Elevenstateshavelegislativeman-dated jury trials for juveniles in juvenile courts if they are charged with certain types ofoffenses, if they are of certain ages, and if they make a timely request for a jury trial.4. Juvenilecourtandcriminalcourtareadversarialproceedings. Juvenilesmayormay not wish to retain or be represented by counsel (In re Gault, 1967). In almost everyjuvenilecourtcase, prosecutorsallegevariousinfractionsorlawviolationsagainstjuveniles, and these charges may be rebutted by juveniles or others. If juveniles are rep-resented by counsel, these defense attorneys are permitted to offer a defense to the alle-gations. Criminalcourtsareobligatedtoprovidecounselforanyonechargedwithacrime, if defendantscantaffordtoretaintheirowncounsel(Argersingerv. Hamlin,1972). Every state has provisions for providing defense attorneys to indigent juvenileswho are adjudicated in juvenile court.5. Criminalcourtsarecourtsofrecord, whereastranscriptsof mostjuvenilepro-ceedings are made only if the judge decides. Court reporters record all testimony pre-sentedinmostcriminalcourts. Allstatecriminaltrialcourtsarecourtsof record,whereeitheratape-recordedtranscriptof proceedingsismaintained, orawrittenrecord is kept. Thus, if trial court verdicts are appealed later by either the prosecutionor defense, transcripts of these proceedings can be presented by either side as evidenceof errors committed by the judge or other violations of ones due process rights. Origi-nalconvictionsmaybereversedortheymaybeallowedtostand, dependinguponwhatever the records disclose about the propriety of the proceedings. Juvenile courtsarenotcourtsof record. Thus, itisunlikelythatinanygivenjuvenileproceeding, acourt reporter will keep a verbatim record of the proceedings. One factor that inhibitsjuvenilecourtsfrombeingcourtsof recordisthesheerexpenseof hiringcourtreporters for this work. Courts of record are expensive to maintain. Certainly in someof the more afuent jurisdictions, some juvenile court judges may enjoy the luxury of acourt reporter to transcribe or record all court matters. But this is the exception ratherthan the rule. Furthermore, the U.S. Supreme Court has declared that juvenile courtsare not obligated to be courts of record (In re Gault, 1967).court of recordAny court where a written record is kept of court proceedings.court reportersCourt officials who keep awritten word-for-word and/ortape-recorded record of court proceedings.000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.standard of proofThe type of evidence requiredto sustain a petition ofdelinquency against a juvenile,depending on the seriousnessof the offense; how guilt ismeasured or determined.Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United States 236. Thestandardof proof usedfordeterminingonesguiltincriminalproceedingsis beyondareasonabledoubt. Thelessrigorouscivilstandardofpreponderanceofthe evidence is used in most juvenile court matters. However, the U.S. Supreme Courthas held that if any juvenile is in jeopardy of losing his/her liberty as the result of anadjudication by a juvenile court judge, then the evidentiary standard must be the crim-inal court standard of beyond a reasonable doubt (In re Winship, 1970). Losing libertymeans to be locked up for any period of time, whether it is for one day, one month, orone or more years. Thus, juveniles who face charges in juvenile court where the possiblepunishmentisconnementinasecurejuvenilefacilityforanyperiodof timeareentitled to the beyond a reasonable doubt criminal standard in determining their guilt.Therefore, it is expected of juvenile court judges that they will always apply this stan-dard when adjudicating a juveniles case and where ones loss of liberty is a possibility.7. Therangeof penaltiesjuvenilecourtjudgesmayimposeislimited, whereasinmost criminal courts, the range of penalties may include life-without-parole sentencesor the death penalty. The jurisdiction of juvenile court judges over youthful offenderstypically ends when these juveniles reach adulthood. Some exceptions are that juvenilecourtsmayretainjurisdictionovermentallyillyouthfuloffendersindenitelyafterthey reach adulthood. In California, for instance, the Department of the Youth Author-ity supervises youthful offenders ranging in age from 11 to 25.The purpose of this comparison is to show that criminal court actions are moreserious and have harsher long-term consequences for offenders compared with juve-nile court proceedings. Juvenile courts continue to be guided by a strong rehabilitativeorientationinmostjurisdictions, wherethemostfrequentlyusedpunishmentsareeither verbal reprimands or probationary dispositions. Secure connement is viewedbymostjuvenilecourtjudgesasalastresort, andsuchapunishmentisreservedforonlythemostseriousyouthfuloffenders, withexceptions(LaMade, 2008). Probablyless than 10 percent of all adjudicated delinquent offenders are incarcerated in securejuvenile facilities. However, in criminal courts, convicted offenders are more frequentlyjailedorimprisoned. Criminalcourtsalsouseprobationasapunishmentinabout60 percentof allcriminalcases, especiallyforrst-offendersorthosewhohavecommittedlessseriouscrimes. Althoughincreasingnumbersof juvenilecourtsareadoptingmorepunitivesanctionssimilartothoseof criminalcourts, manyyouthscontinuetoreceivetreatment-orientedpunishmentsratherthanincarcerationinsecure juvenile facilities.An Over vi ew of the Juvenil e Justice SystemThe Ambi guity of Adol escence and AdulthoodPolice have broad discretionary powers in their encounters with the public and dealingwith street crime. Although some evidence suggests that police have shifted their polic-ing priorities away from juveniles toward more serious adult offenders for various rea-sons (e.g., cases against juveniles are often dismissed or judges issue nothing more thanverbal warnings to them and return them to the custody of their parents), police arrestsand detentions of juveniles in local jails remains the major conduit of a juveniles entryinto the juvenile justice system.Manyjuvenilesareclearlyjuveniles. Itisdifculttondyouthsunder13whophysically appear 18 or older. Yet, nearly 10 percent of all juveniles held for brief peri-ods in adult jails annually are 13 years old or younger (Ofce of Juvenile Justice andDelinquency Prevention, 2007). For juveniles in the 1417 age range, visual determina-tion of ones juvenile or nonjuvenile status is increasingly difcult. Thus, at least somejustication exists for why police ofcers take many youthful offenders to jails initiallyfor identication and questioning.beyond a reasonabledoubtEvidentiary standard used incriminal courts to establishguilt or innocence of criminaldefendant.preponderance of theevidenceStandard used in civil courts todetermine defendant orplaintiff liability and where theresult does not involveincarceration.000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.jail removal initiativeAction sponsored by theOJJDP and the JJDPA todeinstitutionalize juvenilesfrom secure facilities, suchas jails.taken into custodyA protective action, usuallytaken by police officers, whichis designed to offer temporaryshelter for juvenile runawaysor truants; not the same asan arrest.24 Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United StatesOtherwaysthatjuvenilescanenterthejuvenilejusticesystemincludereferralsfrom or complaints by parents, neighbors, victims, and others (social work staff, proba-tion ofcers) unrelated to law enforcement. Dependent or neglected children may bereported to police initially. Following up on these complaints, police ofcers may takeyouths into custody until arrangements for their care can be made. Or police ofcersmay arrest youths for alleged crimes.Being Taken into Custody and Being ArrestedBeing taken into custody and being arrested are different procedures. For law enforce-ment ofcers, whenever youths are taken into custody, they are not necessarily arrested,and they may not necessarily be arrested later. Being taken into custody means preciselywhat it says. Ofcers take certain youths into custody as a protective measure so thatthey can determine what is best for the juvenile. Some youths who are taken into cus-todymightbethosesufferingfromchildsexualabuseorphysicalabuseinictedbyparents or others, runaways, or missing children (Armour and Haynie, 2007). Youthswandering the streets may also be taken into custody by police if they are suspected ofbeing truant from school.When youths are arrested, this is more serious police action. An arrest means thatthe juvenile is suspected of committing a crime. Charges may be led against arrestedyouths once it is determined who should have jurisdiction over them. Police authoritiesmay determine that the juvenile court has jurisdiction, depending on the age or youth-fulness of the offender. Or authorities may decide that the criminal court has jurisdic-tion and the youthful-appearing offender should be charged as an adult.Juvenil es in JailsIn 2007, there were 11,000 juveniles under the age of 18 being held in jails (Ofce ofJuvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 2007). About 89 percent of these juvenileswere being held as adults. This represents about 1 percent of all jail inmates held in jailsfor 2007. This gure is misleading, however. It does not reect the total number of juve-niles who are brought to jails annually after they have been arrested or taken into cus-tody by police. Many youths are jailed for short time periods, merely on suspicion, eventhough they havent committed any obvious offenses. Short time periods are often twoor three hours. Some states, such as Illinois, have passed laws preventing police ofcersfrom detaining juveniles in adult jails for more than six hours. Such laws reect the jailremoval initiative, whereby states are encouraged not to house juveniles in adult jails,even for short periods.The Illinois policy preventing the police from detaining juveniles in jails except forlimited periods is consistent with a major provision of the JJDPA of 1974. Although theJJDPA is not binding on any state, it does encourage law enforcement ofcials to treatjuveniles differently from adult offenders if juveniles are taken to jails for brief periods.For instance, the JJDPA recommends that status offenders should be separated in jailsby sight and sound from adult offenders. Furthermore, they should be held in nonse-cure areas of jails for periods not exceeding six hours. They should not be restrained inanywaywithhandcuffsorotherrestraintdeviceswhiledetained. Theirdetentionshould only be as long as is necessary to identify them and reunite them with their par-ents, guardians, or a responsible adult from a public youth agency or family services.Even more serious delinquent offenders brought to jails for processing should besubjecttosimilartreatmentbyjailofcials, accordingtoJJDPArecommendations.Sightandsoundseparationandsegregationfromadultoffendersisencouraged,although juveniles alleged to have committed delinquent offenses are subject to morerestrictivedetentionprovisions. Thegeneralintentof thisaspectof theJJDPAistominimizetheadverseeffectsof labelingthatmightoccurif juvenileswereprocessedjailsCity or county operated andfinanced facilities designed tohouse misdemeanants servingsentences of less than oneyear, pretrial detainees,witnesses, juveniles, vagrants,and others.000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.likeadultoffenders. Anotherfactoristherecognitionthat most of these offenders will eventually be processedby the juvenile justice system, which is a civil entity. Anyattributions of criminality arising from how juveniles aretreated while they are in adult jails are considered incom-patible with the rehabilitative ideals of the juvenile justicesystemandtheciviloutcomesorconsequencesulti-matelyexperiencedbymostjuvenileoffenders. Thus,someof theJJDPAgoalsaretopreventjuvenilesfrombeinginuencedpsychologicallyorphysicallybyadultsthrough jail contacts with them and to insulate juvenilesfrom dening themselves as criminals which might occurthrough criminal-like processing.Despite new laws designed to minimize or eliminateholding juveniles in adult jails or lockups, even for shortperiods, juvenilescontinuetobeheldinjailsforshorttime periods. In more than a few instances, these deten-tionsareunavoidable. Manyjuvenilesappearoldertopolice ofcers than they really are. They carry fake IDs or no IDs, give false names whenquestioned, or refuse to give police any information about their true identities. It takestime to determine who they are and what responsible adult or guardian should be con-tacted. Many runaways are from different states, and it takes time for their parents orguardians to reunite with them. Some of these juveniles are very aggressive, assaultive,andobviouslydangerous. Theymustbelockeduporrestrained, if onlytoprotectothers. Some are suicidal and need temporary protection from themselves.TheU.S. SupremeCourthasauthorizedthepreventivedetention of juvenilesin jailsforbrief periodswithoutviolatingtheirconstitutionalrights, especiallyforthose offenders who pose a danger to themselves or others (Schall v. Martin, 1984). Inthis particular case, a juvenile was detained by police on serious charges. He refused togive his name or other identication, and was deemed by those in charge to be danger-ous, eithertohimself ortoothers. HispreventivedetentionwasupheldbytheU.S.SupremeCourtasnotviolatinghisconstitutionalrighttodueprocess. PriortothisSupremeCourtruling, however, manystateshadsimilarlawsthatpermittedpretrialand preventive detention of both juvenile and adult suspects. Although pretrial deten-tion presupposes a forthcoming trial of those detained and preventive detention doesnot, both terms are often used interchangeably or even combined, as in preventive pre-trialdetention(Brookbanks, 2002). If 1percentof the13millionadmissionsandreleasestojailsannuallyarejuveniles, areasonableestimatewouldbethatatleast130,000 or more juveniles spend at least some time in jails annually, if only to deter-mine their identity and release them into the custody of their parents or guardians aftera few hours.ReferralsFigure 1.5 is a diagram of the juvenile justice system. Although each jurisdiction in theUnited States has its own methods for processing juvenile offenders, Figure 1.5 is suf-ciently general to encompass most of these processing methods. Focusing on the dia-gram in Figure 1.5, a majority of juvenile encounters with the juvenile justice systemare through referrals from police ofcers. Referrals are notications made to juvenilecourt authorities that a juvenile requires the courts attention. Referrals can be made byanyone, such as concerned parents, school principals, teachers, neighbors, and others.However, over 90 percent of all referrals to juvenile courts are made by law enforcementofcers. These referrals may be made for runaways; truants; curfew violators; unman-ageable, unsupervised, orincorrigiblechildren; childrenwithdrugoralcoholprob-lems; or for any youth suspected of committing a crime (Kuntsche et al., 2007).A small proportion of juvenilesengage in violent acts such asdrive-by shootings.lockupsSmall rooms or buildingsdesigned for confining arrestedadults and/or juveniles forshort periods, such as24 hours or less.preventive detentionConstitutional right of policeto detain suspects prior to trialwithout bail, where suspectsare likely to flee from thejurisdiction or pose seriousrisks to others.pretrial detentionHolding delinquent or criminalsuspects in incarcerativefacilities pending theirforthcoming adjudicatoryhearing or trial.Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justice in the United States 25referralsAny citation of a juvenile tojuvenile court by a lawenforcement officer, interestedcitizen, family member, orschool official; usually basedupon law violations,delinquency, or unrulyconduct.000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.THE JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEMDIVERSION TO COMMUNITY RESOURCESINTAKEADJUDICATIONDISPOSITIONPOST-ADJUDICATORY REVIEWDIVERSIONCOUNSEL AND

RELEASE TO PARENTSWARNINGWARNINGREPRIMANDREPRIMANDFOSTER HOMEFOSTER HOMEGROUP HOMEGROUP HOMECAMP/RANCH/SCHOOLCAMP/RANCH/SCHOOLSECURE FACILITYSECURE FACILITYCOMMUNITY SUPERVISIONCOMMUNITY SUPERVISIONFINEFINECOMMUNITY SERVICECOMMUNITY SERVICERESTITUTIONRESTITUTIONADULT CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEMRELEASEDIVERSION TO COMMUNITY RESOURCESINTAKE SCREENINGGUILTY PLEAPETITION FILEDCUSTODIALRELEASECONDITIONAL RELEASENOMINALACQUITTEDCHARGES DISMISSED

ADJUDICATIONRELEASEPOSSIBLECHANGE INDISPOSITIONOR RELEASEDETENTION HEARINGREVOCATIONLAW ENFORCEMENTNON-LAW ENFORCEMENT SOURCESJUDICIAL WAIVERJUDICIAL WAIVERTRANSFER TO JUVENILE COURTTRANSFER TO JUVENILE COURTPROSECUTORIALDISCRETIONPROSECUTORIALDISCRETIONSTATUTORYEXCLUSIONSTATUTORYEXCLUSIONAPPEALFigure 1.5Diagram of the Juvenile Justice System000200010270657112The Juvenile Justice System: Delinquency, Processing, and the Law, Sixth Edition, by Dean John Champion. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright 2010 by Pearson Education, Inc.petitionA document whereby an officialor private individual can bringcharges against a juvenileand ask the juvenile courtto hear the case.Chapter 1 An Overview of Juvenile Justic