Adult Court

Author(s):  
Jason T. Carmichael ◽  
Jennifer Sigouin
Keyword(s):  
2000 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Austin ◽  
Kelly Dedel Johnson ◽  
Maria Gregoriou

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Kim ◽  
Julia Lee ◽  
Claudia Gavrilescu ◽  
Roshan Sharma ◽  
Jordan Bechtold ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 088740342110282
Author(s):  
Jessica M. Craig ◽  
Haley Zettler ◽  
Chad Trulson

In response to critiques of traditional juvenile justice processing and waiver to adult court, several states have adopted blended sentencing. These sentences fall in between these two approaches as they offer the benefits of the more rehabilitative-oriented juvenile system, with the option to deploy more punitive adult criminal sanctions. While previous research has indicated violent offenders were more likely to receive a blended sentence, it has not distinguished between those who were eligible for a blended sentence but did not receive this sanction. The current study seeks to address this gap and examine legal and extralegal predictors of receiving a blended sentence among those eligible. The analyses indicated that while those adjudicated for homicide and aggravated robbery were most likely to be given a blended sentence, other predictors such as prior probation failure and previous violence toward the family were associated with a decreased likelihood of receiving this sentence.


2001 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 311-332 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph B. Sanborn

For several decades, juvenile courts functioned like clinics. Judges assigned there were instructed to assume a variety of roles: jurist, psychologist, counselor, sociologist, and parent. The In re Gault decision in 1967 granted juvenile defendants several constitutional rights that transformed juvenile courts into criminal court-like operations. Juvenile court judges have not been told whether they should continue to be paternal or emulate their counterparts in adult court; research has not addressed this subject. In this study, 100 juvenile court workers (judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, probation officers) from three juvenile courts (urban, suburban, rural) were interviewed to ascertain how judges operate in juvenile court and what these workers perceive to be the proper role for the judge. The data show that most workers believe that the role of the juvenile court judge is and should be unique.


Author(s):  
Willie M. Brooks ◽  
Tonya Y. Willingham
Keyword(s):  

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (3/4) ◽  
pp. 94-106
Author(s):  
Jeffrey J. Roth ◽  
Mari B. Pierce

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to make evidence-based recommendations for improving the responses of criminal justice agencies to juvenile burglary offenders. Design/methodology/approach The paper first analyzes what is known about factors relevant to young offenders’ initiation into burglary and subsequent persistence in that offense. It then evaluates research regarding juvenile justice interventions that can mitigate those factors in order to prevent youth from becoming involved in burglary or to encourage desistance in juvenile burglars. Findings Effective early intervention with juvenile burglars is vital, as burglars often begin committing this crime in their early teens and quickly develop expertise in the offense. Evidence supports the importance of positive mentoring, substance abuse programs, some forms of restorative justice and multi-modal interventions with education and employment components, while waiving these youth to adult court appears to offer little benefit over less punitive approaches. Originality/value This work delivers an original contribution by providing an analysis of existing burglary and juvenile justice research that may be useful to policymakers, law enforcement and other justice practitioners.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document