RESEARCH UP TO THIS POINT HAS BEEN INCONCLUSIVE ABOUT WHETHER THE OVERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY-GROUP MEMBERS IN OUR OFFICIAL CORRECTIONAL STATISTICS IS MOSTLY A FUNCTION OF ARTIFACTS OF DATA COLLECTION, THE NATURE AND VOLUME OF CRIMES COMMITTED BY PERSONS IN THESE CATEGORIES OR BIAS IN THE CORRECTIONAL PROCESS. THIS PAPER EXAMINES THE DATA FROM THE RECORDS OF A JUVENILE COURT IN A MIDDLE-SIZED CITY, LAKE CITY, FLORIDA. THE LIKELIHOOD THAT THE PROBATION OFFICERS WILL SUBMIT MORE CASES FROM MINORITY GROUPS THAN FROM ANGLOS FOR FORMAL COURT HEARINGS IS REDUCED BELOW LEVELS OF STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE WHEN APPROPRIATE CONSIDERATIONS ARE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT--EXCEPT FOR THOSE FOR WHOM EXTENSIVE HANDLING SEEMS MOST LOGICAL. THE LIKELIHOOD THAT THE JUDGE WILL SEND MORE MINORITY-GROUP MEMBERS THAN ANGLOS TO THE YOUTH AUTHORITY, HOWEVER, PERSISTS FOR MOST CATEGORIES OF OFFENDERS EVEN WHEN THESE CONSIDERATIONS ARE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT. THE BIASES APPEAR TO CONSIST LARGELY OF LETTING ANGLOS 'GET OFF EASY' RATHER THAN OF REQUIRING UNCALLED-FOR 'TREATMENT' FOR MINORITY-GROUP MEMBERS. OVERALL, THE FINDINGS SUGGEST THAT ABOUT TWO-THIRDS OF THE DIFFERENTIAL HANDLING IN THE COURT STUDIED IS NOT EXPLAINED BY APPROPRIATE CONSIDERATIONS.(AUTHOR ABSTRACT)....BDS