skip navigation

LIBRARY

Abstract Database

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

To download this abstract, check the box next to the NCJ number then click the "Back To Search Results" link. Then, click the "Download" button on the Search Results page. Also see the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 198620 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: Decision Making in the Juvenile Justice System: A Comparative Study of Four States
Series: NIJ Research Report
Author(s): Rosemary Sarri Ph.D.; Jeffrey J. Shook J.D.; Geoffrey Ward M.A.; Mark Creekmore Ph.D.; Cheri Albertson M.S.W; Sara Goodkind M.S.W; Jo Chih Soh B.A.
Corporate Author: University of Michigan
Institute for Social Research
United States of America
Date Published: June 2001
Page Count: 363
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
Washington, DC 20531
NCJRS Photocopy Services
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, MI 48104
Grant Number: 98-JB-VX-0112
Sale Source: University of Michigan
Institute for Social Research
Ann Arbor, MI 48104
United States of America

NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Document: PDF
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Format: Document
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This document discusses how courts and State service agencies organize and structure the decisions that process juveniles in the juvenile justice system in four States.
Abstract: The States studied were Michigan, Ohio, Illinois, and Indiana. Processing decisions and the perceptions of court personnel were compared in 12 juvenile courts in the 4 States. Decisions about case processing were examined to determine whether they could be made more rational and fair through the development and application of structured decision making related to accountability-based sanctions. Analysis of the juvenile codes in the four States identified the following trends in juvenile code changes: shifting borders, decision making for transfer, prosecutors’ authority, increased tools for juvenile court, more punitive correctional programming, justice by geography, restrictions on judicial discretion, and availability of resources. The most significant finding was the variability within and among the States with regard to the numbers of juveniles processed and the patterns of processing from initial detention through placement. This includes the various programs available for juveniles and the extent of reintegration services when they returned from institutions. The four States had a long history of juvenile courts and juvenile justice systems, beginning in the early 20th century. They exhibited tremendous variation in legislation, court structures and administration, resource structures, and community and cultural contexts, which influenced case processing and outcomes both within and between States. It is recommended that the following areas be addressed: overprocessing, minority over-representation, increasing involvement of females in the juvenile justice system, information systems, role of prosecutors, defense counsel, increasingly punitive mandates of juvenile codes, structured decision making and the service continuum, accountability, community involvement, specialty courts, judicial leadership, and human rights. 67 tables, 13 figures, 4 appendices
Main Term(s): Juvenile justice research; State juvenile justice systems
Index Term(s): History of juvenile justice; Juvenile justice agencies; Juvenile probation agencies; Probation or parole decisionmaking; Prosecutorial discretion; Public agencies
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=198620

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.