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 1999 and also examines trends from 1990.

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 court referral 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 1990

Offense profile of detained delinquency cases:

• Compared with 1990, the 1999 detention caseload contained a greater proportion of person offense cases and a smaller share of property offense cases.

• In 1999, 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 1999, juveniles were detained between referral and disposition in 20% of all delinquency cases processed

• For all four general offense categories, the probability of detention was lower in 1999 than in 1990. 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 1990 and 1999, the number of such cases increased

• The number of delinquency cases involving detention increased 11% between 1990 and 1999. Drug cases had the greatest percent increase in the number of detained cases (62%), followed by public order cases (44%), and person cases (32%). In contrast, the number of detained property cases declined 22% during this period.

• Despite the decline in the number of detained property cases, these cases still accounted for the largest volume of cases involving detention in 1999.

In 1999, detention was used more frequently for older juveniles than for younger juveniles

Percentage of delinquency cases detained:

• 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 4% among males and 50% among females between 1990 and 1999

• 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 1999, males accounted for 80% of cases involving detention.

• Between 1990 and 1999, 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 102% for females and 20% for males.

Juveniles younger than 16 accounted for 53% of cases involving detention in 1999

Age profile of detained delinquency cases:

• The age profile for detention cases changed only slightly between 1990 and 1999.

In 1999, 21% of male delinquency cases and 16% of female cases involved detention

Percentage of delinquency cases detained:

• Regardless of offense, males were more likely to be detained than females.

• For both males and females, the greatest decline in the use of detention was for drug cases (16 and 8 percentage points, respectively).

• Males and females were least likely to be detained in cases involving property offenses.

Trends in the use of detention varied by race and offense

Percentage of delinquency cases detained:

• In 1999, youth were detained at some point between referral and disposition in 18% of delinquency cases involving white juveniles, 25% of cases involving blacks, and 23% of cases involving youth of other races.

• The largest racial variation in detention use in 1999 was for cases involving drug law violations. Detention was used in 17% of drug cases involving white juveniles, 38% of cases involving blacks, and 21% of cases involving youth of other races.

• The proportion of cases involving detention decreased for all racial groups between 1990 and 1999, but the decline was only 2 percentage points for white youth, compared with 4 percentage points for black youth and 6 percentage points for youth of other races.

• For all racial groups, the greatest decline in the use of detention between 1990 and 1999 was for drug cases (down 9 percentage points for white youth and 14 for black youth and youth of other races).

The number of cases involving detention increased 17% for white juveniles between 1990 and 1999

• Between 1990 and 1999, the relative increase in the number of cases involving detention was about the same for black juveniles (3%) and youth of other races (2%).

• Overall, the detention caseload increased by 33,400 cases between 1990 and 1999; cases involving white juveniles accounted for 89% of this increase.

For each racial group, the likelihood of detention was lower in 1999 than in 1990

• Throughout the 1990s, cases involving black juveniles and youth of other races were more likely to be detained than cases involving white juveniles.

Black juveniles accounted for a smaller share of delinquency cases involving detention in 1999 than in 1990

Data Table Year White Black Other races Total 1990    57%    38%    4%    100% 1991 56 40 4 100 1992 58 38 4 100 1993 58 38 4 100 1994 59 37 4 100 1995 57 39 5 100 1996 56 39 5 100 1997 58 38 4 100 1998 61 35 4 100 1999 61 36 4 100 Note: Detail may not total 100% because of rounding.

• In 1990, blacks accounted for 38% of the detention caseload; by 1999, their proportion had decreased to 36%. Juveniles of other races remained at 4% of the detention caseload throughout most of the 1990s.

  Black youth were overrepresented in detention caseloads in 1999

  Black youth were overrepresented in the detention caseload, compared with their proportions in the overall delinquency caseload. Although black youth made up 28% of all delinquency cases processed in 1999, they were involved in 36% of detained cases. This overrepresentation was greatest for drug offenses: blacks accounted for 27% of all drug cases processed but 45% of drug cases detained.

  Percentage of cases that involved black juveniles in 1999:

  	Most serious offense	All cases	Detained cases
  Delinquency		28%	36%
  	Person	34	38
  	Property	26	31
  	Drugs	27	45
  	Public order	28	34

  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 1999, 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.

  Percentage of delinquency cases petitioned:

  	Most serious offense	1990	1995	1999
  Delinquency		50%	54%	57%
  	Person	55	58	60
  	Property	47	50	54
  	Drugs	66	60	61
  	Public order	50	56	59

  • Between 1990 and 1999, the use of formal processing increased for three of the four general offense categories; drug offense cases were the exception.

  • In each year between 1990 and 1999, drug offense cases were more likely than other offense cases to be handled formally.

  Offense profile of delinquency cases, 1999:

  Most serious offense	Nonpetitioned	Petitioned
  Person	22%	24%
  Property	45	40
  Drugs	10	12
  Public order	23	24
  Total	100%	100%
  Number of cases	711,100	962,000
  Note: Detail may not total 100% because of rounding.

  • Compared with nonpetitioned cases, petitioned cases in 1999 involved higher proportions of person, drug, and public order offenses and a lower proportion of property offenses.

  The number of petitioned delinquency cases increased 47% between 1990 and 1999

  

  • Between 1990 and 1999, the number of nonpetitioned cases increased 8%, and the overall delinquency caseload increased 27%.

  • Since 1992, petitioned cases have outnumbered nonpetitioned cases. In 1999, there were 35% more petitioned than nonpetitioned delinquency cases.

  ---

  Between 1990 and 1999, the petitioned caseload increased for all offense categories

  

  • The number of petitioned drug offense cases increased 151% between 1990 and 1999—more than any other offense category.

  • Unlike the trends for other offense categories, the number of formally handled property offense cases peaked in 1996 and then declined through 1999.

  Age

  • In each year between 1990 and 1999, delinquency cases involving juveniles age 16 or older were more likely to be petitioned than were cases involving younger juveniles.

  • In 1999, 55% of delinquency cases involving youth age 15 or younger were petitioned, compared with 61% of cases involving older youth.

  • Between 1990 and 1999, the proportion of drug offense cases petitioned declined for both age groups.

  Gender

  • Regardless of offense, juvenile courts were more likely to petition cases involving males than females.

  • For both males and females, property offense cases were least likely to be petitioned than cases involving other offense categories.

  Race

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

  • In 1999, racial differences in the likelihood of petitioning were greatest for drug offense cases: 80% of drug cases involving black juveniles were petitioned, compared with 56% for juveniles of other races and 54% of white juveniles.

  The likelihood of formal handling increased between 1990 and 1999 for all demographic categories

  Percentage of delinquency cases petitioned:

  	Most serious offense	1990	1995	1999
  Age
  15 or younger		47%	51%	55%
  	Person	52	55	58
  	Property	44	47	52
  	Drugs	66	58	59
  	Public order	50	54	56
  16 or older		54%	59%	61%
  	Person	59	63	64
  	Property	52	56	58
  	Drugs	65	62	63
  	Public order	51	60	61
  Gender
  Male		52%	57%	60%
  	Person	58	61	63
  	Property	50	54	58
  	Drugs	68	62	63
  	Public order	51	58	60
  Female		38%	43%	49%
  	Person	43	49	53
  	Property	33	38	42
  	Drugs	52	48	52
  	Public order	46	51	54
  Race
  White		45%	51%	54%
  	Person	49	54	57
  	Property	44	48	53
  	Drugs	53	52	54
  	Public order	46	55	56
  Black		60%	61%	65%
  	Person	62	64	67
  	Property	54	55	60
  	Drugs	82	77	80
  	Public order	61	61	65
  Other races		51%	52%	53%
  	Person	60	59	58
  	Property	48	49	48
  	Drugs	43	48	56
  	Public order	53	51	58

  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 1990 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.

  ---

  The number of cases judicially waived to criminal court peaked in 1994 at 12,100 cases

  

  • The number of delinquency cases judicially waived to criminal court in 1994 was 45% greater than the number waived in 1990. This increase was followed by a 38% decline between 1994 and 1999. As a result, the number of cases waived in 1999 was 9% below the number waived in 1990.

  Although the number of waived cases has dropped in recent years, the number was slightly higher in 1999 than in 1990 for drug and public order offense cases

  

  • The number of judicially waived person offense cases doubled between 1990 and 1994 and then declined 52% through 1999. As a result, the number of person offense cases judicially waived in 1999 was 5% less than the number waived in 1990.

  • With the exception of 1991, the number of waived drug offense cases was relatively stable between 1990 and 1999, averaging about 1,300 cases per year.

  • The number of waived property offense cases declined 34% between 1994 and 1999. By 1999, the number of waived property offense cases was 21% less than the number waived in 1990.

  • For public order offenses, the number of cases waived in 1999 was 21% greater than the number waived in 1990.

  The offense profile of cases judicially waived to criminal court changed considerably between 1990 and 1999

  Offense profile of waived delinquency cases:

  Most serious offense	1990	1995	1999
  Person	32%	47%	34%
  Property	45	34	40
  Drugs	15	13	16
  Public order	8	7	11
  Total	100%	100%	100%
  Number of cases	8,300	10,400	7,500
  Note: Detail may not total 100% because of rounding.

  • The proportion of all waived delinquency cases that involved a property offense as the most serious charge declined from 45% in 1990 to 40% in 1999.

  • The proportion of person offenses among judicially waived cases grew from 32% in 1990 to a peak of 47% in 1995 and then dropped to 34% in 1999.

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

  Percentage of petitioned delinquency cases waived to criminal court:

  	Most serious offense	1990	1995	1999
  Age
  15 or younger		0.2%	0.3%	0.2%
  	Person	0.5	0.8	0.3
  	Property	0.1	0.2	0.1
  	Drugs	0.5	0.3	0.2
  	Public order	0.1	0.1	0.1
  16 or older		2.6%	2.1%	1.5%
  	Person	4.1	4.4	2.3
  	Property	2.4	1.7	1.6
  	Drugs	4.0	2.0	1.6
  	Public order	1.1	0.6	0.6
  Gender
  Male		1.4%	1.3%	0.9%
  	Person	2.2	2.7	1.3
  	Property	1.2	0.9	0.9
  	Drugs	2.8	1.5	1.1
  	Public order	0.7	0.5	0.4
  Female		0.4%	0.2%	0.2%
  	Person	0.3	0.4	0.3
  	Property	0.4	0.2	0.2
  	Drugs	1.3	0.3	0.5
  	Public order	0.1	0.1	0.1
  Race
  White		0.9%	0.8%	0.7%
  	Person	1.3	1.7	0.9
  	Property	1.0	0.7	0.7
  	Drugs	1.0	0.7	0.6
  	Public order	0.4	0.3	0.3
  Black		1.9%	1.6%	1.1%
  	Person	2.6	2.8	1.3
  	Property	1.2	1.0	0.9
  	Drugs	4.0	2.2	1.9
  	Public order	1.0	0.6	0.5
  Other races		0.9%	1.1%	0.5%
  	Person	2.5	3.0	1.5
  	Property	0.6	0.5	0.3
  	Drugs	0.2	0.4	0.2
  	Public order	0.2	0.3	0.0

  Age

  • In 1999, 1.5% 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 1999. 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 1999.

  • Regardless of offense, less than 1% of all petitioned delinquency cases involving juveniles age 15 or younger were waived to criminal court between 1990 and 1999.

  Gender

  • In 1999, delinquency cases involving males were 4 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 0.2% of cases involving females.

  • For both males and females, the proportion of cases waived to criminal court was smaller in 1999 than in 1990.

  • For males, judicial waivers for petitioned cases involving drug offenses showed a substantial decline between 1991 and 1999 (from 4.3% to 1.1%).

  • Drug cases involving females followed the same pattern, decreasing from 2.2% in 1991 to 0.5% in 1999.

  Race

  • Overall, black youth were more likely to be waived than were white youth or youth of other races each year between 1990 and 1999. This same pattern was true for property and drug offense cases.

  • Among black juveniles, the use of waiver to criminal court for cases involving drug offenses peaked in 1991 (5.8%) and then declined through 1999.

  • For person offense cases, youth of other races were more likely to be judicially waived than white or black youth in 1999.

  Among both white juveniles and black juveniles, the number of person offense cases judicially waived to criminal court increased sharply between 1990 and 1994

  

  • Among white juveniles, the number of property offense cases waived in 1999 exceeded the number of person offense cases waived, despite the 43% increase in waived person offense cases between 1990 and 1999.

  

  • Among black juveniles, the number of person offense cases waived rose 67% between 1990 and 1994. This increase was followed by a 58% drop through 1999.

  Between 1990 and 1999, the number of waived cases increased 9% for white youth and declined 24% for black youth

  		Percent change in waived cases 1990–99
  Most serious offense		White	Black
  Delinquency		9%	–24%
  	Person	43	–29
  	Property	–19	–24
  	Drugs	119	–25
  	Public order	57	–1

  The offense profile of waived cases differed for whites and blacks

  Offense profile of waived cases:

  Most serious offense	1990	1995	1999
  White
  Person	24%	42%	31%
  Property	64	44	48
  Drugs	6	8	11
  Public order	7	6	10
  Total	100%	100%	100%
  Black
  Person	38%	51%	35%
  Property	30	24	30
  Drugs	23	18	23
  Public order	9	8	11
  Total	100%	100%	100%
  Note: Detail may not total 100% because of rounding.

  • From 1990 through 1999, 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 1990 to 1999.

  • The 1999 waived caseload for white juveniles contained a greater proportion of person, drug, and public order offense cases than in 1990.

  Adjudication

  A youth may be adjudicated delinquent after admitting to the charges in a case or after the court finds sufficient evidence to judge the youth delinquent.

  In 1999, youth were adjudicated delinquent in two-thirds of all petitioned delinquency cases

  Percentage of petitioned delinquency cases adjudicated:

  Most serious offense		1990	1995	1999
  Delinquency		60%	58%	66%
  	Person	55	55	63
  	Property	62	59	68
  	Drug	59	58	67
  	Public order	62	60	67

  • Across offenses, youth were more likely to be adjudicated delinquent in 1999 than in 1990.

  • Between 1990 and 1999, the likelihood of adjudication increased more for person and drug offense cases than for property and public order offense cases.

  Following the increased use of formal processing, the proportion of delinquency cases that resulted in adjudication or waiver has grown since 1992

  

  Note: Detail may not total 100% because of rounding.

  • In 1990, 31% of all delinquency cases resulted in either adjudication of delinquency or waiver to criminal court. By 1999, this proportion had increased to 39%.

  Age

  • In each year from 1990 through 1999, juveniles age 15 or younger were more likely than older juveniles to be adjudicated delinquent, regardless of offense.

  • For both age groups, the likelihood of adjudication increased across all offense categories between 1990 and 1999.

  • For juveniles age 15 or younger, the likelihood of adjudication increased more for person offense cases than other offense categories and for juveniles age 16 and older, drug offense cases showed the largest increase.

  Gender

  • Petitioned cases involving male juveniles were more likely to be adjudicated than were those involving females.

  • For both males and females, the likelihood of adjudication increased across all offense categories between 1990 and 1999.

  • For females, drug offense cases showed the largest increase, from 56% in 1990 to 68% in 1999; for males, person offenses showed the largest increase, from 55% to 64%.

  Race

  • In 1999, petitioned cases involving black juveniles were less likely to be adjudicated than were cases involving white juveniles or juveniles of other races.

  • For both white juveniles and black juveniles, the likelihood of adjudication increased across all offense categories between 1990 and 1999. For youth of other races, the use of adjudication increased for person and drug offense cases.

  • Throughout the 1990s, petitioned person offense and drug offense cases involving youth of other races were more likely to result in adjudication than were cases involving white juveniles or black juveniles.

  The likelihood of adjudication varied by demographic group

  Percentage of petitioned delinquency cases adjudicated:

  Most serious offense		1990	1995	1999
  Age
  15 or younger		61%	59%	68%
  	Person	56	56	65
  	Property	62	60	69
  	Drugs	63	60	70
  	Public order	65	62	69
  16 or older		59%	57%	65%
  	Person	53	53	61
  	Property	61	58	66
  	Drugs	56	58	66
  	Public order	60	57	65
  Gender
  Male		61%	59%	67%
  	Person	55	55	64
  	Property	63	60	68
  	Drugs	59	59	67
  	Public order	62	60	67
  Female		57%	54%	64%
  	Person	52	51	61
  	Property	57	53	64
  	Drugs	56	56	68
  	Public order	61	58	67
  Race
  White		62%	60%	68%
  	Person	57	57	66
  	Property	63	61	68
  	Drugs	61	60	70
  	Public order	64	61	68
  Black		57%	54%	63%
  	Person	52	51	60
  	Property	59	54	65
  	Drugs	57	56	63
  	Public order	58	56	65
  Other races		70%	65%	69%
  	Person	64	63	69
  	Property	71	66	69
  	Drugs	69	68	75
  	Public order	73	63	69

  Dispositions: Out-of-Home Placement

  In dispositional hearings, juvenile court judges determine the most appropriate sanction for delinquent youth, generally after reviewing reports from the probation department. The range of disposition options may include commitment to an institution or other residential facility, probation supervision, or a variety of other sanctions, such as community service, restitution or fines, or referral to an outside agency or treatment program.

  This Report characterizes case disposition by the most severe or restrictive sanction. Although most youth in out-of-home placements are also technically on probation, in this Report cases resulting in placement are not included in the probation group.

  The court ordered out-of-home placement in 24% of all adjudicated delinquency cases in 1999

  Percentage of adjudicated delinquency cases that resulted in out-of-home placement:

  Most serious offense		1990	1995	1999
  Delinquency		32%	27%	24%
  	Person	35	29	26
  	Property	28	25	23
  	Drugs	36	24	22
  	Public order	38	30	27

  • The relatively high rate of placement in public order offense cases may be related to the fact that this offense category includes escapes from institutions, weapons offenses, and probation and parole violations.

  • Although the percentage of adjudicated delinquency cases resulting in out-of-home placement declined between 1990 and 1999 for all four of the major offense categories, the number of adjudicated delinquency cases resulting in outofhome placement increased 24%.

  Between 1990 and 1999, placements increased for person, drug, and public order offense cases and decreased for property offense cases

  

  • The number of adjudicated drug offense cases that resulted in out-of-home placement increased 73% between 1990 and 1999. During this period, the number of public order offense cases that resulted in out-of-home placement increased 56%, person offense cases increased 48%, and property offense cases declined 6%.

  ---

  The largest proportion of adjudicated cases resulting in out-of-home placement involve property offenses

  Most serious offense	1990	1995	1999
  Person	21%	24%	25%
  Property	50	44	38
  Drugs	8	9	11
  Public order	21	22	27
  Total	100%	100%	100%
  Cases resulting in out-of-home placement	124,900	146,900	155,200
  Note: Detail may not total 100% because of rounding.

  • The offense profile of cases resulting in out-of-home placement changed somewhat between 1990 and 1999. The proportion of out-of-home placement cases that involved person, drug, and public order offenses increased, while the proportion involving property offenses declined.

  Age

  • Adjudicated cases involving juveniles age 16 or older were more likely than those involving juveniles age 15 or younger to result in out-of-home placement. In 1999, placement was the most restrictive disposition in 26% of adjudicated cases involving youth ages 16 or older and in 23% of those involving youth ages 15 and younger.

  • For both age groups, the use of out-of-home placement in adjudicated drug offense cases decreased substantially between 1990 and 1999, declining more than 10 percentage points.

  Gender

  • Adjudicated cases involving male delinquents were more likely than those involving females to result in out-of-home placement. In 1999, placement was ordered in 26% of adjudicated cases involving males and in 19% of those involving females.

  • For both males and females, higher proportions of person and public order cases resulted in out-of-home placement in 1999 than did property or drug cases.

  Race

  • In 1999, adjudicated cases involving black youth were more likely to result in out-of-home placement than were cases involving white youth or youth of other races. These data, however, do not control for offense seriousness, offending history, or prior dispositions.

  • The proportion of adjudicated drug offense cases resulting in placement declined for all three racial groups between 1990 and 1999, but the decline was more pronounced for cases involving youth of other races than for cases involving white juveniles or black juveniles.

  The likelihood of out-of-home placement declined between 1990 and 1999 for all demographic groups and offenses

  Percentage of adjudicated delinquency cases that resulted in out-of-home placement:

  	Most serious offense	1990	1995	1999
  Age
  15 or younger		32%	26%	23%
  	Person	34	28	24
  	Property	28	24	21
  	Drugs	39	25	21
  	Public order	40	31	26
  16 or older		32%	27%	26%
  	Person	35	31	28
  	Property	29	26	25
  	Drugs	34	23	22
  	Public order	35	29	28
  Gender
  Male		33%	28%	26%
  	Person	36	31	28
  	Property	29	26	24
  	Drugs	37	24	23
  	Public order	38	31	28
  Female		26%	20%	19%
  	Person	24	21	19
  	Property	21	18	16
  	Drugs	33	16	15
  	Public order	37	26	23
  Race
  White		30%	24%	23%
  	Person	33	27	25
  	Property	26	23	21
  	Drugs	31	18	16
  	Public order	38	29	26
  Black		35%	31%	28%
  	Person	37	31	27
  	Property	32	30	26
  	Drugs	41	31	33
  	Public order	38	33	29
  Other races		32%	28%	24%
  	Person	34	32	28
  	Property	30	27	24
  	Drugs	37	23	15
  	Public order	38	30	24

  Dispositions: Probation

  Probation remains the most likely sanction imposed by juvenile courts

  Percentage of adjudicated delinquency cases that resulted in probation:

  Most serious offense		1990	1995	1999
  Delinquency		56%	54%	62%
  	Person	55	54	63
  	Property	58	56	64
  	Drugs	54	54	63
  	Public order	52	50	60

  • Probation was the most restrictive disposition used in 398,200 adjudicated delinquency cases in 1999— 62% of all such cases handled by juvenile courts.

  • The likelihood of probation for adjudicated delinquency cases increased for all offense categories between 1990 and 1999.

  The number of adjudicated cases resulting in a disposition of probation increased 80% between 1990 and 1999

  

  • Since 1990, the largest percent increase in the number of adjudicated cases receiving probation was for drug offense cases (230%), followed by public order offenses (152%), person offenses (127%), and property offenses (27%).

  ---

  Four of every ten adjudicated delinquency cases that resulted in probation in 1999 involved property offenses

  Most serious offense	1990	1995	1999
  Person	18%	22%	23%
  Property	59	49	41
  Drugs	7	11	12
  Public order	16	18	23
  Total	100%	100%	100%
  Cases resulting in formal probation	221,700	298,700	398,200
  Note: Detail may not total 100% because of rounding.

  • The offense characteristics of adjudicated delinquency cases resulting in probation changed somewhat between 1990 and 1999, with an increase in the proportion of cases involving person, drug, and public order offenses and a decrease in the proportion involving property offenses.

  Age

  • Once adjudicated, younger juveniles were more likely than older juveniles to be placed on probation. In 1999, 66% of adjudicated cases involving youth age 15 or younger resulted in probation, compared with 58% for youth age 16 or older.

  • For both age groups, cases involving property offenses and drug offenses were more likely to result in probation following adjudication than were cases involving person offenses or public order offenses.

  Gender

  • For all offenses, females were more likely to be placed on probation following adjudication than were males. In 1999, probation was ordered in 67% of adjudicated delinquency cases involving females and 61% of those involving males.

  Race

  • Overall, the use of probation in adjudicated delinquency cases was about the same for all racial groups in 1999. Probation was ordered in 63% of adjudicated cases involving white youth and youth of other races and 61% of cases involving black youth.

  Between 1990 and 1999, the likelihood of probation increased for all demographic groups

  Percentage of adjudicated delinquency cases that resulted in probation:

  Most serious offense		1990	1995	1999
  Age
  15 or younger		57%	57%	66%
  	Person	56	56	65
  	Property	60	58	66
  	Drugs	54	57	66
  	Public order	52	52	64
  16 or older		54%	51%	58%
  	Person	52	49	58
  	Property	56	53	60
  	Drugs	55	52	60
  	Public order	52	47	55
  Gender
  Male		55%	53%	61%
  	Person	53	52	61
  	Property	58	55	63
  	Drugs	54	53	62
  	Public order	51	49	59
  Female		60%	59%	67%
  	Person	63	60	68
  	Property	62	60	69
  	Drugs	59	59	68
  	Public order	53	54	63
  Race
  White		57%	55%	63%
  	Person	56	55	63
  	Property	58	57	64
  	Drugs	59	58	66
  	Public order	51	50	59
  Black		55%	52%	61%
  	Person	53	51	62
  	Property	58	55	64
  	Drugs	51	48	55
  	Public order	53	50	61
  Other races		55%	53%	63%
  	Person	54	53	61
  	Property	55	53	61
  	Drugs	57	56	73
  	Public order	57	52	62

  
  (To be continued)