The process of transferring juveniles to adult courts has shown no effects on decreasing recidivism or a deterrent outcome. Waiver as it is known has three means by which a juvenile can be transferred to an adult court. Judicial waiver offenses, statutory exclusions, and concurrent jurisdiction are the three methods in which a waiver can occur. This research will describe each one of these methods with detail. It will also provide statistical facts showing why waiver can be a very debatable topic within the juvenile criminal justice system. In its totality it will discuss the arguments for and against waiver. The age of the offender determines whether they meet the requirements for a judicial waiver offense. With that said not every state offers all three of the methods a juvenile can qualify for a waiver. In the process of judicial waiver offense the judge takes the final decision on waiving a case. There are other factors that affect the judge’s final decision. Aspects like the criminal history of the offender or the severity of the crime are crucial for the waiver to take place. Statutory Exclusion is when certain offenses are barred. By 1997, 28 states had statutory exclusions (Juvenile "waiver" (transfer to adult court)). Offenses commonly excluded are first degree murder, or any other felony. Similar to Judicial waiver age too play an important role in determining if the juvenile offender can be tried as an adult. In this mechanism it is not the judge who decides but the prosecutor. Once the prosecutor has made the decision to charge a juvenile with an excluded offense, the case must be filed in criminal court (Statutory Exclusion, 2008). A more complex method of waiver is the concurrent jurisdictio... ... middle of paper ... ...Like Adults Make a Difference?: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh Juvenile Justice Reforms in the United States. (n.d.). Retrieved September 20, 2011, from Juvenile Transfer to Criminal Courts: http://www.ojjdp.gov Males, M. and D. Macallair (2000). “ The Color of Justice: An Analysis of Juvenile Justice Adult Court Transfers in California.” Washington, DC: Justice Policy Institute, January. Olson, J. K. (2005, May). Waiver of Juvniles To Criminal Courts. Retrieved September 20, 2011, from Judicial Discretion and Racial Disparity: http://www.cjcj.org/files/waiver_of.pdf Reverse Waiver. (1998, December). Retrieved September 20, 2011, from Trying Juveniles as Adults in Criminal Courts: http://www.ojjdp.gov/pubs/tryingjuvasadult/transfer4.html Statutory Exclusion. (2008, December). Retrieved September 2011, from http://www.ojjdp.gov/pubs/tryingjuvasadult/transfer3.html
In some cases, the crime committed by a juvenile is so egregious, that it belongs in adult court. The waivers presented in this discussion are juvenile friendly, containing many safeguards for juveniles. Take for example, the juvenile waiver, this waiver contains a list of pertinent questions about the juvenile’s history, which is addressed, before a waiver is considered. Another example, prosecutorial discretion waiver, this waiver makes decisions around one important factor, the age of the juvenile. And then we have statutory exclusion waivers, which states that juveniles in prison or not, are considered a protected population (OJJDP, 1997). Now, with that said, waivers should be used under special circumstances. Circumstances that involve heinous crimes, and felonies committed by
Bartollas, Clemens and Miller, Stuart J. (2014). Juvenile justice in america (7 ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, 58-60.
Vito, Gennaro F., and Clifford E. Simonsen. Juvenile justice today. 4th ed. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson/Prentice Hall, 2004. Print.
juvenile justice” (Elrod & Ryder, 2011) is to detour juvenile crimes and not be so easy on
The Juvenile Justice system, since its conception over a century ago, has been one at conflict with itself. Originally conceived as a fatherly entity intervening into the lives of the troubled urban youths, it has since been transformed into a rigid and adversarial arena restrained by the demands of personal liberty and due process. The nature of a juvenile's experience within the juvenile justice system has come almost full circle from being treated as an adult, then as an unaccountable child, now almost as an adult once more.
Lanza-Kaduce, L., Frazier, C.E., Bishop, D.M., (2002). Juvenile Transfer to Criminal Court Study: Final Report. Florida Department of Juvenile Justice Prison Policy Initiative, 8 January 2002.
This paper will discuss the history of the juvenile justice system and how it has come to be what it is today. When a juvenile offender commits a crime and is sentenced to jail or reform school, the offender goes to a separate jail or reforming place than an adult. It hasn’t always been this way. Until the early 1800’s juveniles were tried just like everyone else. Today, that is not the case. This paper will explain the reforms that have taken place within the criminal justice system that developed the juvenile justice system.
Waiver varies from jurisdiction, however, is common to find judicial waiver legislative offense exclusion and prosecutorial discretion. A judicial waiver occurs when a juvenile court judge transfers a case from juvenile to adult court, after conducting a hearing to determine whether a juvenile is amenable to treatment or poses danger to the community, in order to deny the juvenile the protections that juvenile jurisdictions provide. There is a two prong approach to waiver: dispositional (amenability) phase and adjudicating phase. Phase 1 is a hearing to determine probable cause and Phase 2 is to determine whether the best interest of the public and the juvenile would be served by waiving jurisdiction of the juvenile to the adult court. (kent)
In juvenile court, the judge must decide if the teen gets tried as an adult or minor. If the juvenile gets sent to a juvenile detention center for murder they will live their lives there until they are twenty one, but if tried as an adult they will serve so many years in prison. There is a grey area of law for certain teens that commit serious crimes. In this case of the grey law, each state gets to decide upon the particular state how they person is tried. For most cases pertaining to the juvenile courts are case by case bases. Many believe that it isn’t fair for the teens to be locked up with adults. The U.S. House of Representatives made the Juvenile Justice Act encouraging states to find alternatives to having the teens go through such a process with people much older than themselves (Locked Up…).
June/July 21-26. Eldelfonso, Edward. A. Law Enforcement and the Youth offenders: Juvenile Procedures. New York: Wiley, 1967. Hyde, Margaret O. & Co.
This chapter examines the juvenile justice diversion as an alternative to formal adjudication of juvenile justice and the placement of children, particularly residential placement. Juvenile Diversion is based on the premise that youth exposure to justice may be more harmful than beneficial (Shelden, 1999).
for youngsters who have a long history of convictions for less serious felonies for which the juvenile court disposition has not been effective” (qtd. in Katel).
Therefore, Texas law provides that all seventeen-year-olds are automatically treated as adults in the justice system and excluded from the jurisdiction of the juvenile courts, regardless of the circumstances in which the violation of state or local law occurred.
Additionally, sixteen states fall under judicially controlled Transfer which says "All cases against juveniles begin in juvenile court and must literally be transferred
Criminal and Juvenile system can be complex for many people who do not understand how the system can work. Juvenile Justice would be concentered an important aspect to the American system. The system is in place to ensure or deter delinquencies from entering the adult structure. This paper examines the criminal justice system throughout history, juvenile versus criminal system, transition from juvenile to criminal justice, and the effectiveness of the justice system.