skip navigation


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

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. 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: 119319 Find in a Library
Title: Juvenile Courts Vary Greatly in How They Handle Drug and Alcohol Cases
Corporate Author: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
US Dept of Justice
United States of America
Date Published: 1989
Page Count: 8
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice/
Rockville, MD 20849
NCJRS Photocopy Services
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
Washington, DC 20531
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
NCJRS paper reproduction
Box 6000, Dept F
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America

NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Document: PDF
Type: Research (Applied/Empirical)
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: Information from nearly 393,000 court records describing delinquency cases processed in 696 courts in 15 States in 1984 formed the basis of an analysis of the way that juvenile courts respond to drug and alcohol cases.
Abstract: The analysis showed that cases that had a drug or alcohol offense as the most serious charge made up 14 percent of the cases. Drug cases were more common in large counties, but alcohol cases were more common in small ones. In addition, juvenile courts responded formally to drug or alcohol cases much less often than to other delinquency cases. Moreover, courts were more likely to handle drug cases formally than alcohol cases. Drug possession cases and drug trafficking cases were equally likely to be processed formally, but cases of driving under the influence were more likely to be handled formally than other alcohol cases. Furthermore, courts varied considerably in their handling of substance abuse cases. Findings suggested that policymakers may want to examine the criteria for determining when to use formal processing or when to use an informal response such as diversion to voluntary services. Figures.
Main Term(s): Juvenile case management
Index Term(s): Juvenile court diversion; Juvenile court statistics; Juvenile drug use; Youthful DUI offenders
Note: Reprinted from NIJ Reports SNI 215, July/August 1989
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*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.