Juvenile courts may divert some juveniles away from the formal justice system to other agencies for service or may decide to process juveniles formally with the filing of a petition. Juvenile courts may adjudicate these formal cases and may order probation or residential placement, or they may waive jurisdiction and transfer certain cases from juvenile court to criminal court. While their cases are being processed, juveniles may be held in secure detention.

This chapter quantifies the flow of delinquency cases through each stage of the juvenile court system by offense and by demographics (age, gender, and race) of the juveniles involved. The chapter focuses on cases disposed in 1998 and also examines trends from 1989.

Detention

When are youth detained?

Juvenile courts sometimes hold youth in secure detention facilities during court processing. Depending on the State’s detention laws, the court may decide detention is necessary to protect the community, to ensure a juvenile’s appearance at subsequent court hearings, or to secure the juvenile’s own safety. Detention may also be ordered for the purpose of evaluating the juvenile. This Report describes the use of detention only between referral to court and case disposition, although juveniles can be detained by police prior to referral and also after disposition while awaiting placement elsewhere.

The offense profile of detained delinquency cases has changed since 1989

• Compared with 1989, the 1998 detention caseload contained a greater proportion of person offense cases and a smaller share of property offense cases.

• In 1998, the percentage of cases involving detention was lower for property offenses than for any other offense category. Nevertheless, property cases accounted for the largest share of all cases involving detention, because they represented the largest share of the juvenile court caseload.

In 1998, juveniles were detained between referral and disposition in 19% of all delinquency cases processed

• For all four general offense categories, the probability of detention was lower in 1998 than in 1989. This pattern was most pronounced for drug cases.

• Property offense cases were least likely to involve detention.

Although the percentage of delinquency cases involving detention decreased between 1989 and 1998, the number of such cases increased

• The number of delinquency cases involving detention increased 25% between 1989 and 1998. Person cases had the largest percent increase in the number of detained cases (63%), followed by drug cases (55%) and public order cases (44%). In contrast, the number of detained property cases declined 6%.

• Despite the decline in the number of detained property cases, these cases still accounted for the largest volume of cases involving detention in 1998.

In 1998, detention was used more frequently for older juveniles than for younger juveniles

• Overall, the likelihood of detention increased through age 17.

• Across all ages, property offense cases were less likely to involve detention than were cases in any other offense category.

  ---

The number of cases involving detention increased 20% among males and 56% among females between 1989 and 1998

• Although the percent increase in cases involving detention was greater for females than for males, the number of cases involving detention remained much greater for males than for females. In 1998, males accounted for 81% of cases involving detention.

• Between 1989 and 1998, the percent increase in cases detained was greater for females than for males in every offense category. For example, the number of person offense cases involving detention increased 138% for females and 49% for males.

Juveniles younger than 16 accounted for 53% of cases involving detention in 1998

• The age profile for detention cases changed only slightly between 1989 and 1998.

In 1998, 20% of male delinquency cases and 14% of female cases involved detention

• Between 1989 and 1998, changes in the likelihood of detention were generally comparable for males and females.

• For both males and females, the greatest decline in the use of detention was for drug cases (15 and 9 percentage points, respectively).

• In 1998, both males and females were least likely to be detained in cases involving property offenses (16% and 9%, respectively).

Trends in the use of detention varied by race and offense

• In 1998, youth were detained at some point between referral and disposition in 17% of delinquency cases involving white juveniles, 23% of cases involving blacks, and 21% of cases involving youth of other races.

• The largest racial variation in detention use in 1998 was for cases involving drug law violations. Detention was used in 18% of drug cases involving white juveniles, 35% of cases involving blacks, and 20% of cases involving youth of other races.

• The proportion of cases involving detention decreased for all racial groups between 1989 and 1998, but the decline was only 1 percentage point for white youth, compared with 6 percentage points for black youth and youth of other races.

• For all racial groups, the greatest decline in the use of detention between 1989 and 1998 was for drug cases (down 5 percentage points for white youth, 21 for black youth, and 12 for youth of other races).

Between 1989 and 1998, the percent increase in the number of cases involving detention was twice as great for white juveniles as for black juveniles

• For white juveniles, the number of delinquency cases involving detention increased 33% from 1989 to 1998. For black juveniles, the increase was 15%. For youth of other races, the increase was 19%.

For each racial group, the likelihood of detention was lower in 1998 than in 1989

Black juveniles accounted for a smaller share of delinquency cases involving detention in 1998 than in 1989

Data Table
Year	White	Black	Other Races	Total
1989	57%	39%	4%	100%
1990	57	38	4	100
1991	56	40	4	100
1992	58	38	4	100
1993	57	39	4	100
1994	58	37	4	100
1995	57	39	4	100
1996	56	39	5	100
1997	58	38	4	100
1998	61	35	4	100
Note: Detail may not total 100% because of rounding.

• In 1989, blacks accounted for 39% of the detention caseload; by 1998, their proportion had decreased to 35%. Juveniles of other races remained at 4% of the detention caseload from 1989 through 1998.

Black youth were overrepresented in detention caseloads in 1998

Black youth were overrepresented in the detention caseload, compared with their proportions in the overall delinquency caseload. Although black youth made up 29% of all delinquency cases processed in 1998, they were involved in 35% of detained cases. This overrepresentation was greatest for drug offenses: blacks accounted for 29% of all drug cases processed but 44% of drug cases detained.

In all offense categories, youth of other races made up less than 5% of all cases processed and of those involving detention.

Intake Decision

In 1998, 57% of all delinquency cases were formally processed

Formal processing of a case involves the filing of a petition that requests an adjudicatory or waiver hearing. Informally processed cases, on the other hand, are handled without a petition and without an adjudicatory or waiver hearing.

• In each year between 1989 and 1998, drug offense cases were more likely than other cases to be handled formally.

• Compared with nonpetitioned cases, petitioned cases in 1998 involved higher proportions of person, drug, and public order offenses and a lower proportion of property offenses.

The number of petitioned delinquency cases increased 62% between 1989 and 1998

• Between 1989 and 1998, the number of nonpetitioned cases increased 25%, and the overall delinquency caseload increased 44%.

• Since 1992, petitioned cases have outnumbered nonpetitioned cases. In 1998, there were 32% more petitioned than nonpetitioned delinquency cases.

Between 1989 and 1998, the petitioned caseload increased for all offense categories

• The number of petitioned drug offense cases increased 152% between 1989 and 1998—more than any other offense category.

Age

• In each year between 1989 and 1998, delinquency cases involving juveniles age 16 or older were more likely to be petitioned than were cases involving younger juveniles.

• In 1998, 54% of delinquency cases involving youth age 15 or younger were petitioned, compared with 61% of cases involving older youth.

• Between 1989 and 1998, both age groups had a large increase in the proportion of public order cases petitioned.

Gender

• In 1998, juvenile courts were less likely to petition delinquency cases involving females (48%) than cases involving males (60%).

• In 1998, for females, the cases most likely to be petitioned were those involving public order offenses (56%), whereas for males, drug law violation cases were the most likely to be petitioned (65%).

Race

• Delinquency cases involving black juveniles were more likely to be petitioned than were cases involving white youth or youth of other races.

• In 1998, racial differences in the likelihood of petitioning were greatest for drug law violation cases: 81% of drug cases involving black juveniles were petitioned, compared with 55% for both white juveniles and juveniles of other races.

The likelihood of formal handling increased between 1989 and 1998 for all demographic categories

Waiver

The mechanisms used to transfer responsibility for a case to the criminal court vary by State

One of the first decisions made at intake is whether a case should be processed in the criminal (adult) justice system rather than in the juvenile court. Most States have more than one mechanism for transferring cases to criminal court. In some States, prosecutors may have the authority to file certain juvenile cases directly in criminal court. In an increasing number of States, cases that meet certain age and offense criteria are excluded by statute from juvenile court jurisdiction and are thus filed directly in criminal court. Most States also have statutory provisions for judicial waiver, whereby a juvenile court judge may waive juvenile court jurisdiction in certain juvenile cases, thus authorizing a transfer to criminal court. In most instances, when a waiver request is denied, the case is then scheduled for an adjudicatory hearing in juvenile court. This Report describes only those cases that were transferred to criminal court by judicial waiver.

Judicial waiver provisions vary from State to State. In some States, these provisions target youth charged with violent offenses and offenses involving firearms. Most State statutes also limit judicial waiver to juveniles who are “no longer amenable to treatment.” The factors that determine lack of amenability vary but typically include the juvenile’s offense history and previous dispositional outcomes. In addition, many State statutes instruct juvenile courts to consider other factors, such as the availability of dispositional alternatives for treatment, the time available for sanctions, public safety, and the best interests of the child. Although these factors play an important role in the likelihood of a case being judicially waived to criminal court, they are not controlled for in this Report because of the nature of the data collection.

About 1% of petitioned delinquency cases are waived, but trends in the use of waiver vary by offense

• Between 1989 and 1992, drug offense cases were the most likely to be waived to criminal court. Since 1993, however, person offense cases have been the most likely to be waived.

Juvenile courts waived 33% fewer delinquency cases to criminal court in 1998 than in 1994

• The number of delinquency cases judicially waived to criminal court in 1994 was 51% greater than the number waived in 1989. By 1998, the number of waived cases declined 33%, returning to the 1989 level.

Although the number of waived cases has dropped in recent years, the number was slightly higher in 1998 than in 1989 for all offenses except property

• The number of judicially waived person offense cases increased 133% from 1989 to 1994 and then declined 45%, for a net increase of 28% between 1989 and 1998.

• For drug offenses, the number of waived cases increased 40% from 1989 through 1991, declined 35% in 1992, and then rose 13% between 1992 and 1998. The net result was that the number of judicially waived drug offense cases increased 3% between 1989 and 1998.

• Waived property offense cases increased 18% between 1989 and 1991. After 1991, the number of waived property cases generally declined, so that the number in 1998 was 17% less than that in 1989.

• For public order offenses, the number of waived cases increased 75% between 1989 and 1994 and then declined 32% through 1998, for a net increase of 19% between 1989 and 1998.

The offense profile of cases judicially waived to criminal court changed considerably between 1989 and 1998

• The proportion of all waived delinquency cases that involved a property offense as the most serious charge declined from 49% in 1989 to 40% in 1998.

• The proportion of person offenses among judicially waived cases grew from 28% in 1989 to a peak of 47% in 1995 and then dropped to 36% in 1998.

The probability of waiver to criminal court is substantially greater for cases involving older juveniles than for cases involving younger juveniles

Age

• In 1998, 1.6% of all petitioned delinquency cases involving juveniles age 16 or older were waived to criminal court, compared with 0.2% of cases involving younger juveniles.

• For older juveniles, the probability of waiver peaked in 1991 at 3.2% and then declined through 1998. This pattern was most marked in waivers for older juveniles charged with drug offenses, which peaked at 6.5% in 1991 and then dropped to 1.6% by 1998.

• For younger juveniles, the overall use of waiver remained relatively unchanged, although there were some variations across offense categories.

Gender

• In 1998, delinquency cases involving males were three times more likely to be judicially waived to criminal court than were cases involving females: 0.9% of petitioned cases involving males were waived to criminal court, compared with 0.3% of cases involving females.

• For both males and females, the proportion of cases waived to criminal court was smaller in 1998 than in 1989.

• For males, judicial waivers for petitioned cases involving drug offenses showed a substantial increase between 1989 and 1991 (from 2.9% to 4.3%) and then declined considerably through 1998 (1.2%).

• Drug cases involving females followed the same pattern, increasing from 1.1% in 1989 to 2.2% in 1991 and then declining to 0.5% in 1998.

Race

• Among black juveniles, the use of waiver to criminal court for cases involving drug offenses peaked in 1991 (5.8%) and then declined through 1998.

• For person offense cases, youth of other races were more likely to be judicially waived than white or black youth.

Among both white juveniles and black juveniles, the number of person offense cases judicially waived to criminal court increased sharply between 1989 and 1994

• Among white juveniles, the number of property offense cases waived in 1998 exceeded the number of person offense cases waived, despite the 65% increase in waived person offense cases between 1989 and 1998.

• Among black juveniles, the number of person offense cases waived rose 109% between 1989 and 1994. This increase was followed by a 55% drop through 1998.

Between 1989 and 1998, the number of waived cases increased 12% for white youth and declined 13% for black youth

The offense profile of waived cases differed for whites and blacks

• From 1990 through 1998, person offense cases made up the largest share of the waived caseload for black youth.

• In comparison, property offense cases made up the largest share of the waived caseload for white youth each year from 1989 to 1998.

(To be continued)