The Teen Court Concept
Teen courts are generally used for younger juveniles (ages 10 to 15), those with no prior arrest records, and those charged with less serious law violations (e.g., shoplifting, vandalism, and disorderly conduct). Typically, young offenders are offered teen court as a voluntary alternative in lieu of more formal handling by the traditional juvenile justice system (see figure 1). Teen courts differ from other juvenile justice programs because young people rather than adults determine the disposition, given a broad array of sentencing options made available by adults overseeing the program. Teen court defendants may go through an intake process, a preliminary review of charges, a court hearing, and sentencing, as in a regular juvenile court. In a teen court, however, other young people are responsible for much of the process. Charges may be presented to the court by a 15-year-old "prosecutor." Defendants may be represented by a 16-year-old "defense attorney." Other youth may serve as jurors, court clerks, and bailiffs. In some teen courts, a youth "judge" (or panel of youth judges) may choose the best disposition or sanction for each case. In a few teen courts, youth even determine whether the facts in a case have been proven by the prosecutor (similar to a finding of guilt).
Adults are also involved in teen courts. They often administer the programs, and they are usually responsible for essential functions such as budgeting, planning, and personnel. In many programs, adults supervise the courtroom activities, and they often coordinate the community service placements where youth work to fulfill the terms of their dispositions. In some programs, adults act as the judges while teens serve as attorneys and jurors. The key to all teen court programs, however, is the significant role youth play in the deliberation of charges and the imposition of sanctions on young offenders.
Proponents of teen court argue that the process takes advantage of one of the most powerful forces in the life of an adolescent—the desire for peer approval and the reaction to peer pressure. According to this argument, youth respond better to prosocial peers than to adult authority figures. Thus, teen courts are seen as a potentially effective alternative to traditional juvenile courts staffed with paid professionals such as lawyers, judges, and probation officers. Teen court advocates also point out that the benefits extend beyond defendants. Teen courts may benefit the volunteer youth attorneys and judges, who probably learn more about the legal system than they ever could in a classroom. The presence of a teen court may also encourage the entire community to take a more active role in responding to juvenile crime. Teen courts offer at least four potential benefits:
- Accountability. Teen courts may help to ensure that young offenders are held accountable for their illegal behavior, even when their offenses are relatively minor and would not likely result in sanctions from the traditional juvenile justice system.
- Timeliness. An effective teen court can move young offenders from arrest to sanctions within a matter of days rather than the months that may pass with traditional juvenile courts. This rapid response may increase the positive impact of court sanctions, regardless of their severity.
- Cost savings. Teen courts usually depend heavily on youth and adult volunteers. If managed properly, they may handle a substantial number of offenders at relatively little cost to the community. The average annual cost for operating a teen court is $32,822 (National Youth Court Center, unpublished data).
- Community cohesion. A well-structured and expansive teen court program may affect the entire community by increasing public appreciation of the legal system, enhancing community-court relationships, encouraging greater respect for the law among youth, and promoting volunteerism among both adults and youth.
|
About the Evaluation of Teen Courts Project
The Urban Institute's Evaluation of Teen Courts (ETC) Project is studying four teen court programs: Anchorage Youth Court in Anchorage, AK; Teen Court of the Tempe Justice Court in Maricopa County, AZ; Montgomery County Teen Court in Rockville, MD; and Independence Youth Court in Independence, MO. These programs were selected to maximize (1) the number of courtroom models used by the programs involved in the study, (2) the mix of geographic locations, and (3) the overall quality and length of service of each program.
In each jurisdiction, youth whose cases are handled in teen court are being compared with those who enter the traditional juvenile justice system. The project is measuring the extent to which teen court outcomes differ from outcomes that might result if the cases of youth similar to those diverted to teen court were handled using normal procedures, including the dismissal of charges or informal adjustment. Outcomes include post-program recidivism and changes in the teen's perceptions of the justice system (e.g., respect for authority or trust in police).
The evaluation is investigating a variety of teen court models. Some of the courts in the study use adult judges, while others use only youth judges. Some are authorized to determine a youth's guilt, while others only impose dispositions on juveniles who have previously admitted their guilt. The purpose of the evaluation is not to select one model over another but to establish a baseline of outcome information for the range of teen court models now being used throughout the country. |
