MENU TITLE: Juvenile Court Statistics 1993: National Estimates of Delinquency Cases . Series: OJJDP Published: June 1996 18 pages 39,805 bytes ------------------------------ Note: This file does not contain tables and figures that appear in the print and Adobe Acrobat versions. The appendix was also omitted. To obtain a print copy of Juvenile Court Statistics 1993, call the Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse at 800-638-8736. ------------------------------ NATIONAL ESTIMATES OF DELINQUENCY CASES COUNTS AND TRENDS In 1993, courts with juvenile jurisdiction handled an estimated 1,489,700 delinquency cases, representing a 2% increase over the 1992 caseload and 23% more than in 1989. Delinquency offenses are acts committed by juveniles that could result in criminal prosecution when committed by an adult. Between 1989 and 1993, the number of person offense cases increased by 52%, property offense cases increased by 15%, drug offense cases increased by 14%, and public order offense cases grew by 24%. Compared with 1989, juvenile courts in 1993 handled 45% more criminal homicide cases, 48% more rape cases, 56% more robbery cases, 59% more aggravated assault cases, 51% more simple assault cases, 41% more vandalism cases, 49% more disorderly conduct cases, and 87% more weapons offense cases. During the same time period, juvenile courts handled 10% fewer motor vehicle theft cases and 16% fewer liquor law violation cases. Examining the caseloads of juvenile courts using the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) crime indexes indicates that juvenile courts handled substantially more Violent Crime Index offense cases in 1993 than in 1989 (57%), while cases involving Property Crime Index offenses increased by 9%.[1] The increases in juvenile court cases parallel the increases in arrests of persons under the age of 18 as reported by the FBI. Between 1989 and 1993, the number of arrests involving persons under the age of 18 charged with Violent Crime Index offenses increased by 36%, while arrests of youth for Property Crime Index offenses increased by 2%. (See Crime in the United States 1993.) According to the FBI, the number of juvenile arrests for homicide increased by 45% between 1989 and 1993 and 14% between 1992 and 1993, increases that closely correspond to the increases in juvenile court cases involving homicide charges. The offense profile of juvenile court caseloads changed slightly between 1989 and 1993. The relative proportion of person offenses increased, while property offenses declined slightly. A person offense such as robbery or assault was the most serious charge in 21% of delinquency cases in 1993 compared with 17% in 1989. A property offense such as shoplifting, burglary, or vandalism was the most serious charge in 54% of the delinquency cases handled by juvenile courts in 1993 versus 58% in 1989. A drug law violation such as possession or sale of controlled substances was the most serious charge in 6% of cases in 1993 as well as 1989. The proportion of public order offenses also remained unchanged (18%) from 1989 to 1993. Public order offenses include disorderly conduct, obstruction of justice, weapons possession, and other offenses. In 1993, juvenile courts processed 54.6 delinquency cases for every 1,000 juveniles who resided in the United States and were at risk of referral -- those age 10 or older who were under the jurisdiction of a juvenile court.[2] Analysis of this case rate permits comparisons of juvenile court activity over time while controlling for differences in the population at risk of referral to the juvenile court. The total delinquency case rate was 14% greater in 1993 than in 1989.[3] Case rates increased in all offense categories between 1989 and 1993. The case rate for person offenses increased by 42%, the property case rate climbed by 7%, the rate of drug cases grew by 6%, and the rate of public order offense cases increased by 15%. ------------------------------ SOURCE OF REFERRAL Delinquency cases can be referred to court intake by a number of sources, including law enforcement agencies, social service agencies, schools, parents, probation officers, and victims. Law enforcement agencies were the primary source of delinquency referrals in 1993. Overall, 86% of delinquency cases were referred to courts by law enforcement agencies, but variations existed across offense categories. A total of 94% of drug law violation cases were referred by law enforcement agencies, as were 91% of property cases and 86% of person offense cases. Only 70% of public order offense cases were referred by law enforcement sources, partially because this offense category contains probation violations and contempt of court cases that are referred most often by court personnel. ------------------------------ DETENTION 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 from a juvenile's behavior, to ensure a juvenile's appearance at subsequent court hearings, or to secure the juvenile's own safety. Juveniles were held in detention facilities at some point between referral to court intake and case disposition in 20% of all delinquency cases disposed in 1993. Cases involving property offenses were least likely to involve detention in 1993, while those involving drug offenses were most likely to involve detention. In 1993, 17% of property offense cases involved detention compared with 24% of person offense cases, 25% of public order offense cases, and 31% of drug cases. Between 1989 and 1993, the probability of detention was relatively unchanged across all offense categories. The number of delinquency cases in which juveniles were detained increased by 19% between 1989 and 1993, rising from 256,300 to 303,800. Increases in the number of cases involving detention occurred in three of the four general offense categories, with person offense cases showing the greatest increase. Between 1989 and 1993, the number of person offense cases in which the youth was detained increased by 42%. There was a 14% increase among property offense cases and a 17% increase in public order offense cases involving detention. The number of drug law violation cases that involved detention declined by 3% between 1989 and 1993. Although detention was least likely in property offense cases in 1993, they accounted for 44% of all delinquency cases involving detention because they represented the largest share of juvenile court caseloads. Person offense cases accounted for 25% of cases involving detention, public order offense cases accounted for 22%, and drug law violation cases accounted for 9%. Between 1989 and 1993, the offense characteristics of delinquency cases involving detention changed only slightly, with person offenses accounting for a larger proportion of detentions, while property offenses and drug violations represented smaller shares of the detention caseload in 1993. ------------------------------ INTAKE DECISION Slightly more than half (53%) of the delinquency cases disposed by juvenile courts in 1993 were processed formally and fewer than half (47%) were handled informally. Formal handling involves the filing of a petition requesting an adjudicatory or transfer hearing. Informal cases are handled without a petition. Among informally handled (nonpetitioned) delinquency cases, nearly half (49%) were dismissed by the court. The remainder resulted either in informal or voluntary probation (27%) or other dispositions (23%), while a small number (1%) resulted in voluntary out-of-home placement. Although juvenile courts handled half of all property offense cases formally in 1993, more than half of person offense cases (57%), drug law violation cases (62%), and public order offense cases (55%) were handled formally. As a result of this differential handling, formally processed cases in 1993 involved a higher proportion of person, drug, and public order offenses and a lower proportion of property offense cases when compared with the informally handled delinquency caseload. Intake decisions varied among each of the four major offense categories. A detailed analysis of referral offenses showed that the likelihood of formal handling was greater for more serious offenses within the same general offense category. For example, 70% of burglary cases in 1993 were handled formally by juvenile courts compared with 40% of larceny-theft cases. Similarly, 62% of aggravated assault cases were handled with the filing of a petition, but only 46% of simple assault cases were handled formally. In accordance with a trend seen in recent years, the likelihood of formal processing for delinquency referrals increased slightly between 1989 and 1993, rising from 50% to 53%. Increases were seen in the proportion of person offense cases handled formally (from 55% in 1989 to 57% in 1993), as well as in property offense cases (from 48% to 50%), drug law violation cases (from 61% to 62%), and public order offense cases (from 50% to 55%). As a result of the increase in the number of cases referred to juvenile court intake and the greater likelihood of petitioning, the number of formally processed delinquency cases increased by 29% between 1989 and 1993, rising from 610,600 to 789,300. The largest increase was in person offense cases, with juvenile courts formally processing 58% more person offense cases in 1993 than in 1989. During the same period, there was a 61% increase in the number of formally handled cases involving FBI Violent Crime Index offenses. The number of petitioned property offense cases also increased by 19% compared with a 15% increase in petitioned drug cases and a 37% increase in formally handled public order offense cases. ------------------------------ JUDICIAL DECISION AND DISPOSITION Transfer One of the first decisions made at intake is determining whether a case should be processed in the criminal (adult) justice system rather than in the juvenile court. The mechanisms used to transfer responsibility for a case to the criminal court vary by State. In some cases a prosecutor may have the authority to file juvenile cases directly in criminal court. In other cases, State law may require a judicial waiver, in which a juvenile court judge authorizes transfer requests. In most instances when a transfer request is denied, the case is then scheduled for an adjudicatory hearing in juvenile court. The data described in this report represent only cases that were transferred to criminal court by judicial waiver. Criminal court transfers represented 1.5% of all petitioned delinquency cases in 1993 compared with 1.4% in 1989. The cases most likely to be transferred in 1989 were those involving drug offenses (2.8%). In 1993, however, person offense cases were more likely to be transferred than drug cases (2.7% versus 2.2%). Just 1.1% of cases involving property offenses were transferred to criminal court in 1993. Compared with 1989, transfers increased by 41% in 1993. Between 1989 and 1993, the number of transferred person offense cases increased substantially more (115%) than transfers of any other type of case. Transfers of public order offense cases climbed by 75%, property offense transfers grew by 12%, and transfer of drug offense cases decreased by 11% between 1989 and 1993. As a result, for the first time in recent years the largest group of transferred cases involved person offenses. Offenses against persons accounted for more than 4 in 10 cases transferred in 1993. As a proportion of all transferred cases, person offense cases increased from 28% to 42%, while property offense cases declined from 49% to 38%. Drug cases also declined as a proportion of all transfers, falling from 16% in 1989 to 10% in 1993. Adjudication A youth may be adjudicated delinquent after admitting to charges in a case or after the court finds sufficient evidence to judge the youth a delinquent. Juveniles were adjudicated delinquent by the court in 58% of all formally processed delinquency cases in 1993. Person offense cases were the least likely cases to be adjudicated. Among formally handled delinquency cases in 1993, 54% of person offense cases were adjudicated, as were 58% of property offense cases, 59% of drug law violation cases, and 61% of public order offense cases. The number of adjudicated delinquency cases grew from 383,600 to 457,000 between 1989 and 1993. However, the likelihood of adjudication for petitioned delinquency cases decreased from 63% to 58% during the same period. The likelihood of adjudication decreased in all four general offense categories. The probability of adjudication decreased from 57% to 54% for person offense cases, from 64% to 58% for property offense cases, from 67% to 59% for drug cases, and from 65% to 61% for public order offense cases. Disposition In dispositional hearings, juvenile court judges must determine the most appropriate sanction for delinquent youth, generally after reviewing reports from the probation department. The range of dispositional options may include commitment to an institution or another residential facility, probation, or a variety of other dispositions, such as referral to an outside agency or treatment program, fines, community service, or restitution. In more than half (56%) of all adjudicated delinquency cases in 1993, the juvenile was placed on formal probation. More than one-quarter (28%) of adjudicated cases resulted in the youth being placed outside the home in a residential facility.[4] In 12% of adjudicated delinquency cases, the court ordered the juvenile to pay restitution or a fine, to participate in some form of community service, or to enter a treatment or counseling program -- dispositions with minimal continuing supervision by probation staff. In a relatively small number of cases (4%), the juvenile was adjudicated, but the case was then dismissed or the youth was otherwise released. In 41% of all petitioned delinquency cases in 1993, the youth was not subsequently adjudicated. Most of these cases (61%) were dismissed by the court. However, in 23% of nonadjudicated cases the youth agreed to some form of probation, and in 14% of the cases the youth were given other dispositions. Nearly 2% of all nonadjudicated delinquency cases resulted in voluntary out-of-home placement. Out-of-Home Placement. Adjudicated juveniles were ordered to out-of-home placements in 128,700 delinquency cases in 1993 -- 28% of all adjudicated cases. Once adjudicated, juveniles charged with property offenses were least likely to be placed outside the home in 1993 (25%). More frequent use of placement was seen in person offense cases (31%), drug law violation cases (30%), and public order offense cases (34%). The relatively high rate of placement among public order offense cases may be related to the fact that these cases often include escapes from institutions as well as probation and parole violations. The number of adjudicated delinquency cases resulting in out-of-home placement increased by 11% between 1989 and 1993, rising from 115,600 to 128,700. In accordance with a trend seen in recent years, increases in out-of-home placements were greatest for adjudicated person offense cases. Placements in person offense cases increased by 37% between 1989 and 1993. Property offense cases in which youth were adjudicated delinquent and placed outside the home increased by 5%, while the number of out-of-home placements increased by 15% in public order offense cases. Placements declined by 15% in cases involving drug law violations. In 1993, 45% of all adjudicated cases that resulted in out-of-home placement involved property offenses, 23% involved person offenses, 24% involved public order offenses, and 7% involved drug law violations. Between 1989 and 1993, the offense profile of the juveniles involved in out- of-home placement cases changed slightly. The proportion of out-of-home placement cases that involved person offenses increased from 19% to 23%, while the proportion that involved drug offenses declined from 10% to 7%. Formal Probation. Probation was the most restrictive disposition used in 254,800 adjudicated delinquency cases in 1993 -- 56% of all such cases handled by juvenile courts. Juvenile courts ordered formal probation in 58% of adjudicated cases involving property offenses, 55% of those involving person offenses, 54% involving drug law violations, and 51% involving public order offenses. Between 1989 and 1993, the likelihood of formal probation was relatively unchanged for adjudicated delinquency cases. The use of formal probation decreased from 56% to 55% for person offense cases, from 59% to 58% for property offense cases, and from 55% to 54% for drug law violation cases. The number of adjudicated cases that resulted in the most restrictive disposition of formal probation increased by 17% between 1989 and 1993. The number of person offense cases resulting in formal probation increased by 45%. Property offense cases resulting in probation increased by 8% between 1989 and 1993, while those involving public order offense cases increased by 30%. More than half (54%) of the delinquency cases that resulted in formal probation in 1993 involved property offenses, 21% involved person offenses, 18% involved public order offenses, and 7% involved drug law violations. The offense characteristics of cases resulting in formal probation changed slightly between 1989 and 1993, with an increase in the proportion of cases involving person offenses (from 17% to 21%) and a decline in the proportion of cases involving property offenses (from 58% to 54%). ------------------------------ AGE AT REFERRAL In 1993, 61% of juvenile delinquency cases involved youth who were age 15 or younger at the time of referral compared with 60% in 1989. In 1993, juveniles age 15 or younger were responsible for 64% of person offense cases, 64% of property offense cases, 42% of drug law violation cases, and 54% of public order offense cases. Compared with the delinquency caseload involving older juveniles, the caseload of youth age 15 or younger had larger proportions of person and property offense cases and a smaller proportion of drug and public order offense cases. Person offense cases accounted for 22% of the cases involving youth age 15 or younger compared with 20% of cases involving youth age 16 or older. On the other hand, drug law violations made up 4% of the cases of younger juveniles but 9% of cases involving youth age 16 or older. The rate of delinquency cases was associated with the age of juveniles. For example, the Nation's juvenile courts disposed 22.6 delinquency cases involving 12-year-olds for every 1,000 12-year-olds at risk of referral in 1993. Among 16-year-olds, however, there were 106.6 cases disposed for every 1,000 youth at risk. The case rate for 16-year-olds was 51% greater than the rate for 14-year-olds, while the rate for 14-year-olds was more than 3 times the rate for 12-year-olds. Between 1989 and 1993, delinquency case rates increased by 10% or more for every age group between 12 and 17. Within individual offense categories, variations occurred in the pattern of age-specific case rates. Case rates increased continuously with age for drug law violations and public order offenses, while person and property offense case rates peaked with the 16-year-old age group and then declined slightly. Drug law violation case rates showed the sharpest increase after age 14. For example, the case rate for drug offenses for 17-year-old juveniles (10.9 per 1,000) was 260% greater than the corresponding case rate for 14-year-olds (3.0 per 1,000). For person offenses, the 17-year-old case rate was 30% greater than the 14-year-old case rate. For property offense cases, the difference was 29%, while for public order offenses the case rate for 17-year-olds was nearly double that for 14-year- olds (83%). Detention Youth under the age of 16 accounted for 58% of the cases that involved detention in 1993, while those under the age of 14 accounted for 16%. The age profile of delinquency cases that involved detention changed only slightly between 1989 and 1993. The proportion of detention cases that involved youth under the age of 16 rose from 56% in 1989 to 58% in 1993. Detention was used more frequently for older juveniles in 1993. Detention was used in 14% of delinquency cases involving 12-year-olds, 21% of cases involving 14-year-olds, and 23% of those involving 16-year-olds. In general, the likelihood of detention increased for each successive age group through age 15. Across all offense categories, detention was less likely for cases involving 17-year-olds than for cases involving 16- year-olds. Intake Decision Delinquency cases involving juveniles age 16 and older were more likely to be handled formally than cases involving younger youth. Overall, 50% of delinquency cases involving youth age 15 and younger were processed with the filing of a petition compared with 58% of cases involving older youth. The likelihood of formal handling increased slightly between 1989 and 1993 for both younger and older youth in nearly all offense categories. Judicial Decision and Disposition The probability of transfer to criminal court was substantially greater for cases involving older juveniles. In 1993, 3.1% of all formally processed delinquency cases involving juveniles age 16 or older were transferred to criminal court compared with 0.3% of cases involving younger juveniles. The probability of transfer increased slightly between 1989 and 1993 for older juveniles. Most of the increase was due to the more frequent use of transfer for cases involving older juveniles charged with person offenses, which rose from 4.2% in 1989 to 6% in 1993. Once petitioned, juveniles age 15 and younger were slightly more likely to be adjudicated than were older youth (59% versus 56% in 1993). This trend was true across all four offense categories partly because cases involving older juveniles are more commonly transferred to criminal court. If transfers and adjudications are considered together, the experiences of older and younger juveniles were more comparable. In 1993, 59% of the petitioned cases of older youth resulted in either an adjudication or transfer compared with 60% of youth under age 16. The percentage of petitioned delinquency cases resulting in adjudication declined between 1989 and 1993 for both younger and older juveniles, falling from 64% to 59% among younger youth and from 62% to 56% among older youth. The likelihood of adjudication was at least slightly lower for both age groups within all offense categories. The proportion of adjudicated cases placed outside the home was just under 30% for both age groups. Compared with 1989, the use of placement for adjudicated delinquency cases was down in 1993 among all offense categories. The largest decreases in the proportion of cases resulting in placement were for drug cases and public order offense cases. For drug cases, the likelihood of placement declined from 38% to 33% among younger youth and from 34% to 27% among older youth. Once adjudicated, the likelihood that a juvenile court would place a delinquent youth on formal probation was slightly greater for younger youth. In 1993, 57% of adjudicated cases involving younger youth resulted in probation compared with 53% of cases involving older youth. Only minor changes in the use of probation occurred between 1989 and 1993. ------------------------------ SEX Males were involved in 80% of the delinquency cases handled by juvenile courts in 1993. Male juveniles were responsible for 78% of person offense cases, 80% of property offense cases, 88% of drug law violation cases, and 80% of public order offense cases. The offense characteristics of the male and female juvenile court caseloads were similar, although cases involving female juveniles were slightly less likely to involve drug law violations (4% compared with 7%) and more likely to involve person offenses (24% versus 21%). Between 1989 and 1993, the volume of delinquency cases involving males increased by 21%, while the number of cases involving females increased by 31%. Both males and females showed considerable growth in the number of person offense cases (49% and 68%, respectively) and property offense cases (12% and 25%, respectively). The number of cases involving drug offenses increased by 16% for males and only 1% for females between 1989 and 1993. In 1993, the delinquency case rate for males was nearly 4 times greater than the rate for females -- 85.2 compared with 22.4 cases per 1,000 youth at risk. Between 1989 and 1993, the relative change in delinquency case rates was greater for females than males. For example, the per capita rate of person offense cases involving females increased by 56% compared with a 38% increase in the rate for males. The rate of property offense cases increased by 16% for females while growing by 5% for males. On the other hand, drug offense cases fell by 6% among females while increasing by 8% among males. The total male delinquency case rate increased continuously through age 17, while the total female case rate increased through age 16, before declining among 17-year-olds. Male case rates increased continuously with age in two of the four delinquency offense categories -- drug law violations and public order offense cases. The drug offense case rate for females also increased continuously through age 17. The drug case rate for 17-year-old females was 33% higher than the rate for 16-year-olds (2.4 cases per 1,000 compared with 1.8 cases per 1,000). The drug offense case rate for 17-year-old males was 28% greater than the rate for 16-year-olds (18.8 cases per 1,000 versus 14.7 cases per 1,000). Detention Male juveniles charged with delinquency offenses were more likely than females to be held in secure facilities while awaiting court disposition. Overall, 22% of male delinquency cases involved detention in 1993 compared with 16% of cases involving females. Detention was used more often for cases involving male juveniles, regardless of the major offense category that was the most serious charge in the case. Males and females were least likely to be detained in cases involving property offenses (18% and 12%, respectively). Males were most likely to be detained in drug offense cases (32%), while the highest use of detention in cases involving females occurred in drug offense and public order offense cases (23% each). Between 1989 and 1993, the likelihood of detention remained relatively constant across all offense categories for both males and females. A possible exception was the declining use of detention for drug offense cases. The likelihood of detention for drug cases involving males decreased from 38% in 1989 to 32% in 1993. In drug cases involving females, detention fell from 27% to 23%. Intake Decision Cases involving females were less likely than those involving males to be formally processed with the filing of a delinquency petition. Between 1989 and 1993, the likelihood of formal handling increased slightly for both males and females in nearly all offense categories. Females were most likely to be petitioned for cases involving public order offenses in 1993, while cases involving males were petitioned most often for drug law violations. When informally handled (without a petition), the disposition of female delinquency cases was virtually identical to the disposition of cases involving males (i.e., 27% placed on probation and 49% dismissed). Judicial Decision and Disposition Delinquency cases involving males were more likely to be transferred to criminal court than were cases involving females. In 1993, 1.7% of formally processed cases involving males were transferred to criminal court compared with 0.3% of cases involving females. Both male and female cases were slightly more likely to be transferred to criminal court in 1993 than in 1989. For males, cases involving person offenses were substantially more likely to be transferred in 1993 than in 1989 (3.2% compared with 2.3%). The likelihood of transfer for male drug law violation cases declined during the same period. Cases involving male juveniles were more likely than cases involving females to be adjudicated once petitioned (59% compared with 53%). This trend was true regardless of the major offense involved in the case. For both males and females, the probability of adjudication was greatest in cases involving public order offenses (62% and 60%, respectively). The probability of adjudication decreased between 1989 and 1993 for formally handled cases involving males (from 64% to 59%) as well as females (from 58% to 53%). The use of adjudication decreased among all offense categories for both sexes. Once adjudicated, cases involving male delinquents were more likely than those involving females to result in out-of-home placement in 1993. Placement was the most restrictive disposition in 29% of adjudicated cases involving males and 23% of those involving females. The use of placement declined slightly between 1989 and 1993 for both males and females. The largest relative decreases occurred in cases involving drug law violations and public order offenses. The use of formal probation for adjudicated males and females did not change substantially between 1989 and 1993. The likelihood of probation decreased slightly for cases involving males (from 56% to 55%) and remained unchanged for females (60% in both years). Among cases involving females, the use of probation dropped slightly for person offense cases and increased slightly for public order offense cases. ------------------------------ RACE White youth accounted for 65% of the delinquency cases disposed by juvenile courts in 1993.[5] White youth were responsible for 57% of person offense cases, 69% of property offense cases, 57% of drug law violation cases, and 64% of public order cases. Black youth were responsible for 32% of all delinquency cases, 40% of person offense cases, 27% of property cases, 41% of drug cases, and 33% of public order cases. Juveniles of other races accounted for 4% of all delinquency cases in 1993 and comparable proportions of each of the four major offense categories. For all racial groups, a property offense was the most common charge involved in delinquency cases disposed in 1993. Property offenses accounted for 58% of all cases involving white youth, 46% of those involving black youth, and 63% of cases involving youth of other races. In more than one- quarter (27%) of cases involving blacks, the youth was charged with a person offense compared with 19% of cases involving white youth and 18% of cases involving youth of other races. Cases involving black youth contained a larger proportion of drug law violations (8%) than cases involving either white youth (5%) or those of other races (4%). The number of cases involving white youth increased by 18% between 1989 and 1993, while cases involving black youth increased by 34%, and the number of cases involving youth of other races increased by 32%. Trends differed within the four offense categories. The number of person offense cases increased markedly for all racial groups between 1989 and 1993. The number of property offense cases also rose between 1989 and 1993, although less among white youth than among black youth and youth of other races. The number of public order offense cases increased most among black youth, while the largest relative increase in drug law violations was seen in cases involving youth of other races. Delinquency case rates differed substantially by race. The total case rate for black juveniles in 1993 (115.4 cases disposed for every 1,000 youth at risk) was more than twice the rate for white juveniles (44.1) or youth of other races (39.9). The person offense and drug law violation case rates among black youth were at least three times greater than the corresponding rates for white youth and youth of other races. In all offense categories, the case rate for juveniles of other races was lower than the equivalent rate for either black or white juveniles. The delinquency case rates for all racial groups increased continuously with age from ages 10 to 17. In contrast to the relatively large increases among individual ages through age 16, the differences between the case rates of 16- and 17-year-olds in each racial group were relatively small. Age-related increases in delinquency case rates occurred within each of the four offense categories. For example, the person offense case rate for white juveniles increased from 7.1 cases per 1,000 13-year-olds at risk to 15.6 cases per 1,000 17-year-olds. For black juveniles, the person offense case rate grew from 28.4 at age 13 to 58.5 at age 16, before dropping slightly to 57.2 cases per 1,000 at age 17. The drug offense case rate increased continuously with age among all racial groups. Among white youth, the rate of drug offense cases climbed from 0.9 cases per 1,000 at age 13 to 7.9 cases per 1,000 at age 17. Among black youth, the drug case rate grew from 3.0 to 34.0 between the ages of 13 and 17. Beyond the age of 12, the rate at which drug cases were processed by juvenile courts was strikingly higher for black youth than for either white youth or youth of other races. Detention In 1993, 17% of delinquency cases involving white juveniles included detention at some point between referral and disposition. Among cases involving black juveniles and those of other races, the figures were 28% and 22%, respectively. The largest difference in detention use was found among cases involving drug law violations. Detention was used in 20% of drug cases involving white juveniles, 46% of cases involving blacks, and 20% of cases involving youth of other races. The likelihood of detention generally remained constant between 1989 and 1993 for cases involving white and black youth but declined slightly for youth of other races. Substantial changes occurred in the use of detention for cases involving drug law violations. Between 1989 and 1993, the use of detention decreased for drug cases involving white juveniles (from 22% to 20%), black juveniles (from 56% to 46%), and youth of other races (from 30% to 20%). Intake Decision Delinquency cases involving black juveniles were more likely to be handled formally in 1993 than were cases involving white youth or youth of other races. Formal handling was used in 61% of delinquency cases involving black juveniles, 49% of cases involving white juveniles, and 48% of cases involving juveniles of other races. Racial differences in the likelihood of formal handling were greatest in drug law violation cases. In 1993, 50% of drug cases involving white juveniles and 47% of those involving juveniles of other races were handled by formal petition compared with 79% of drug cases involving black youth. Between 1989 and 1993, the likelihood of formal petitioning increased slightly for cases involving white youth, grew only slightly for cases involving black youth, and declined slightly for youth of other races. Judicial Decision and Disposition Delinquency cases involving white juveniles and those of other races were less likely to be transferred to criminal court than were cases involving black youth. In 1993, 2.1% of formally processed cases involving black juveniles were transferred to criminal court compared with 1.1% of cases involving whites and 1.4% of those involving youth of other races. Among both whites and blacks, the use of criminal court transfer for cases involving person offenses increased substantially between 1989 and 1993. Among person offense cases involving white youth, the proportion of delinquency cases transferred to criminal court rose from 1.6% in 1989 to 2.0% in 1993. Among person offense cases involving black youth, transfers increased from 2.6% to 3.5%. The likelihood of transfer for drug offense cases decreased for both white and black juveniles. The likelihood of out-of-home placement in 1993 was greater for adjudicated cases involving black youth (33%) than for cases involving white youth (25%) or youth of other races (29%). However, the use of out-of-home placement decreased between 1989 and 1993 for adjudicated cases regardless of the race of the youth involved. Changes in the likelihood of out-of-home placement varied slightly across the four major offense categories. For example, the use of placement for cases involving black youth charged with property offenses increased from 29% in 1989 to 32% in 1993. Adjudicated delinquency cases involving white juveniles were slightly more likely than those involving either black juveniles or youth of other races to result in a disposition of formal probation. In 1993, 57% of adjudicated cases involving white youth were placed on formal probation compared with 54% of those involving black youth and 51% of cases involving youth of other races. The use of formal probation did not change substantially between 1989 and 1993. ------------------------------ NOTES 1. The annual series of reports from the FBI, Crime in the United States, provides information on arrests in offense categories that have become part of the common vocabulary of criminal justice statistics. The Crime in the United States series tracks changes in the general nature of arrests through the use of two indexes, the Violent Crime Index and the Property Crime Index. While not containing all violent or all property offenses, the indexes serve as a barometer of the changing nature of criminal activity in the United States. 2. The upper age of juvenile court jurisdiction is defined by statute in each State. See the Glossary of Terms for a more detailed discussion on upper age of juvenile court jurisdiction. The case rates presented in this report control for State variations in youth population at risk of referral to juvenile court. 3. Percentage changes in the number of cases disposed and changes in case rates are sometimes not equal to the changing size of the population at risk of referral to juvenile court. 4. Most youth in out-of-home placements are also technically on formal probation. For this report, however, case disposition is characterized by the most severe sanction. Consequently, cases resulting in an out-of-home placement are not included in the formal probation group. 5. In 1993, whites made up 80% of the national population of youth at risk of referral to a juvenile court. Nearly all youth of Hispanic ethnicity are included in the white racial category.