U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Assessing the Impact of Differing Models of Youth Crime Prosecution

NCJ Number
216718
Author(s)
Marian Gewirtz
Date Published
December 2005
Length
8 pages
Annotation
This study focused on comparing the impact of processing juveniles in the New York Supreme Court in Manhattan versus Queens, measured in terms of minimizing juvenile recidivism.
Abstract
Despite strong similarities between the boroughs in case and demographic characteristics, this report documented marked differences in case processing. Juvenile offender cases in Manhattan were characterized by significantly longer processing time, longer detention, and longer sentences than similar cases in Queens. However, the wide borough differences in court processing of juveniles in the Manhatten Supreme Court did not affect the proportion of juveniles who were rearrested, nor the proportion rearrested on a felony charge. The borough differences may account for the slightly longer average time to the first rearrest for juveniles processed in Manhattan. It seems likely that the long period that Manhattan juveniles spend under the supervision of a placement program prior to sentencing during the juveniles’ first months at risk for rearrest may serve to delay reoffending behaviors (recidivism). Findings from a New York City, Criminal Justice Agency (CJA) report monitoring court activity for juveniles prosecuted in the adult court, found substantial borough differences in the way cases were processed. One of the largest borough differences was in average length of case. Manhattan and Queens represent opposite ends of the continuum. The results described in this report focus on these two boroughs, examining these differing models. It examined the long-term impact of the different court-related experiences of juvenile offenders in adult court in Manhattan and Queens. Four measures of court processing were examined: processing time, detention, disposition, and sentence. Figures