This chapter quantifies the flow of delinquency cases through each of the following stages of the juvenile court system.

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

Intake: 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.

Waiver: 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: prosecutors may have the authority to file certain juvenile cases directly in criminal court; state statute may order cases meeting certain age and offense criteria be excluded from juvenile court jurisdiction and filed directly in criminal court; and a juvenile court judge may waive juvenile court jurisdiction in certain juvenile cases, thus authorizing a transfer to criminal court. This Report describes those cases that were transferred to criminal court by judicial waiver only.

Adjudication: At an adjudicatory hearing, a youth may be adjudicated (judged) a delinquent if the juvenile court determines that the youth did commit the offense(s) charged in the petition. If the youth is adjudicated, the case proceeds to a disposition hearing. Alternatively, a case can be dismissed or continued in contemplation of dismissal. In these cases where the youth is not adjudicated delinquent, the court can recommend that the youth take some actions prior to the final adjudication decision, such as paying restitution or voluntarily attending drug counseling.

Disposition: Disposition options 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. For example, 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.

This chapter describes case processing by offense and by demographics (age, gender, and race) of the juveniles involved, focusing on cases disposed in 2002 and examining trends from 1985 through 2002.

• The number of delinquency cases involving detention increased 42% between 1985 and 2002, from 231,400 to 329,800. The largest relative increase was for drug offense cases (140%), followed by person cases (122%) and public order cases (72%). In contrast, the number of detained property offense cases declined 12% during this period.

• Despite the growth in the volume of delinquency cases involving detention, the proportion of cases detained was the same in 2002 as in 1985 (20%).

• Although property offense cases were the least likely to involve detention, they still accounted for the largest volume of cases involving detention.

• For person and property offense cases, the proportion of cases involving detention changed very little between 1985 and 2002.

• The use of detention for public order offense cases decreased between 1985 and 2002.

Offense profile of detained delinquency cases:

• Compared with 1985, the offense characteristics of the 2002 detention caseload changed, involving greater proportions of person, drug, and public order offense cases and a smaller proportion of property offense cases.

The number of cases involving detention increased substantially between 1985 and 2002 for person, drug, and public order offenses but decreased for property offense cases.

The proportion of drug offense cases involving detention reached a peak of 37% in 1990 and declined to 20% in 2002

While black youth represented 29% of the overall delinquency caseload in 2002, they made up 36% of the detention caseload

• Between 1985 and 2002, the proportion of all delinquency cases that involved black youth averaged 29%, while that average was 37% of all detained cases.

• Historically, overrepresentation of black youth was greatest for drug offense cases. On average, between 1985 and 2002, black youth accounted for 33% of all cases involving drug offense violations but represented 50% of such cases detained.

• Between 1985 and 1991, the proportion of detained drug offense cases involving black youth increased substantially (from 30% to 65%). Since that time, the proportion of detained drug offense cases involving black youth has steadily decreased but remains above the 1985 level.

• Between 1988 and 1992, the proportion of detained drug offense cases involving black youth was more than 60%.

• In 2002, black youth accounted for 21% of all drug offense cases processed but were involved in 36% of the drug offenses that involved detention.

• Black youth accounted for 37% of the person offense cases processed in 2002 and 41% of those detained.

• The proportion of property offense cases involving black youth in 2002 was 28%, while the proportion of detained property offense cases involving black youth was 36%.

• Black juveniles made up 29% of public order offense cases processed in 2002 and 31% of those detained.

• Youth of other races made up 5% or less of the overall 2002 caseload for each offense category as well as the corresponding caseloads involving detention.

• In each year from 1985 through 2002, delinquency cases involving youth age 16 or older were more likely to be detained than were cases involving youth age 15 or younger.

• For both age groups, drug offense cases were more likely to involve detention than were other offense cases between 1987 and the mid 1990s. After that time, however, person offense and public order offense cases were more likely to involve detention than were drug offense cases.

• In 2002, 16-year-olds accounted for 25% of the cases that involved detention cases, a larger proportion of cases than any other single age group.

Gender

• Male juveniles charged with delinquency offenses were more likely than females to be held in secure facilities while awaiting court disposition. Overall in 2002, 22% of male delinquency cases involved detention, compared with 17% of female cases.

• In 2002, both males and females were least likely to be detained in cases involving property offenses (19% and 12%, respectively).

For all years between 1985 and 2002, detention was more likely for cases involving older youth than younger youth, males than females, and black youth than white youth

Percentage of delinquency cases detained by age group:

Percentage of delinquency cases detained by gender:

Percentage of delinquency cases detained by race:

Race

• Cases involving black youth were more likely to be detained than cases involving white youth in each year between 1985 and 2002 across offense categories.

• In 2002, person offense cases involving black youth and youth of other races were more likely to involve detention than those involving white youth (28%, 27%, and 23%, respectively).

• The likelihood of detention for property offenses in 2002 was higher for black youth than for white youth and youth of other races (22%, 15%, and 17%, respectively).

• In 2002, black youth were twice as likely as white youth and youth of other races to be detained for cases involving drug offenses (33%, 16%, and 17%, respectively).

• Between 1985 and 2002, the likelihood of detention for cases involving public order offenses decreased for youth of all races: from 25% to 21% for white youth, from 31% to 23% for black youth, and from 37% to 24% for youth of other races.

• Overall, between 1985 and 2002, the detention caseload increased from 151,600 to 199,700 for white youth (32%), from 72,500 to 118,600 for black youth (64%), and from 7,300 to 11,500 for youth of other races (57%).

• Among white youth and youth of other races, the largest increase between 1985 and 2002 in the number of cases involving detention was seen in juveniles charged with person offense violations (144% and 141%, respectively); among black youth, the largest increase in the number of cases detained involved drug offense violations (194%).

Intake Decision

• Between 1985 and 2002, the likelihood that a delinquency case would be handled informally (without filing a petition for adjudication) decreased. While the overall delinquency caseload increased 41% between 1985 and 2002, the number of nonpetitioned cases increased 9% and the number of petitioned cases increased 80%.

• Between 1992 and 2002, the number of cases handled with the filing of a petition requesting an adjudicatory hearing increased 27%, while the number of nonpetitioned cases declined 9%.

• The largest increase in the number of petitioned cases between 1985 and 2002 was seen in drug offense cases (265%), followed by public order offense cases (178%) and person offense cases (137%).

• Between 1985 and 2002, the number of formally handled property offense cases increased 13%. Unlike the trends for the other three offense categories, the number of formally handled property offense cases peaked in 1996 and then declined through 2002.

Offense profile of delinquency cases, 2002:

• In 2002, the offense profiles of nonpetitioned and petitioned delinquency cases were very similar.

Between 1985 and 1992, delinquency cases were more likely to be handled without the filing of a petition; beginning in 1993, the reverse was true

In contrast to the other general offense categories, the number of property offense cases decreased 25% between 1996 and 2002

In 2002, juvenile courts petitioned nearly 6 of 10 delinquency cases

Between 1985 and 2002, the use of formal processing increased in all general offense categories

• The overall likelihood of formal handling was greater for more serious offenses within the same general offense category. In 2002, for example, 69% of aggravated assault cases were handled formally, compared with 55% of simple assault cases. Similarly, 78% of burglary cases and 79% of motor vehicle theft cases were handled formally by juvenile courts, compared with 44% of larceny-theft and 52% of vandalism cases.

• Between 1985 and 2002, the likelihood of formal processing increased: from 43% to 61% for drug offense cases, from 54% to 60% for person offense cases, from 45% to 59% for public order cases, and from 44% to 55% for property offense cases.

• Between 1987 and 1996, drug offense cases were more likely than other cases to be handled formally.

• Since 1996, person offense cases have been as likely to be handled formally as cases involving drug offenses.

Age

• In each year between 1985 and 2002, delinquency cases involving juveniles age 16 or older were more likely to be petitioned than were cases involving younger juveniles.

• In 2002, 55% of delinquency cases involving youth age 15 or younger were petitioned, compared with 61% of cases involving older youth.

• Since 1991, the proportion of drug offense cases petitioned has declined for both age groups, while the proportion of petitioned cases for each of the other general offense categories has grown.

• Among youth age 15 or younger, drug offense cases were more likely to be handled formally than any other offense category between 1987 and 1998. Since 1999, person offense cases have been as likely as or more likely than drug offense cases to be petitioned for adjudication.

• Among youth age 16 or older, person offense cases were more likely to be handled formally than any other offense category between 1995 and 2002.

Gender

• Between 1985 and 2002, the proportion of delinquency cases petitioned increased for males from 48% to 61% and for females from 35% to 50%.

• Regardless of offense, for each year between 1985 and 2002, juvenile courts were more likely to petition cases involving males than females.

Between 1985 and 2002, the likelihood of formal handling increased more for younger than older youth and for females than males

Percentage of delinquency cases petitioned by age group: