Matza's principle of offense seriousness as a factor in just sentencing was reflected in the finding that with the exception of amenability to treatment, having been charged with homicide was the strongest predictor for sentencing as an adult. Matza's principle of age and maturity (awareness of and opportunity to learn from one's actions) as a factor in just sentencing was also evident in judge's sentencing decisions. This was evident in the reluctance of judges to sentence young juveniles/first offenders as adults. Matza's principle of judicial competence, i.e., a judge's experience on the bench, was also evident in sentencing decisions; judges who had more experience in handling juvenile transfer cases were less likely to sentence juvenile offenders as adults. Matza also emphasized the importance of resisting extralegal factors in sentencing considerations. The findings of the current study, however, showed that despite the importance of purely legal predictors, such as the nature of the offense, there were some extralegal factors that influenced sentencing decisions, such as the race of the judge and sex of the victim. All of the offenders involved in this study were waived to criminal court between 1988 and 1996 through the direct file mechanism provided by Michigan statutes. Under Michigan law, prosecutors can waive juvenile offenders to adult court when they are between 14 and 18 years old and have committed an offense that carries a life sentence if committed by an adult. Sentencing outcome was measured by whether the offender was sentenced as a juvenile ("reverse waiver") or an adult. 5 tables, 10 notes, and 85 references