skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

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: 62632 Find in a Library
Title: JUVENILE COURT DISPOSITIONS - A COMPARISON OF STATUS AND NONSTATUS OFFENDERS
Journal: CRIMINOLOGY  Volume:17  Issue:3  Dated:(NOVEMBER 1979)  Pages:341-359
Author(s): T J CARTER
Corporate Author: Sage Publications, Inc
United States of America
Date Published: 1979
Page Count: 19
Sponsoring Agency: Sage Publications, Inc
Thousand Oaks, CA 91320
UMI Dissertation Services
Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346
Sale Source: UMI Dissertation Services
300 North Zeeb Road
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346
United States of America
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: IN VIEW OF PREVIOUS SANCTION DISPARITIES, THIS ARTICLE EXAMINES THE CRITERIA USED BY JUVENILE COURT DECISIONMAKERS TO DISPOSE OF STATUS OFFENDERS AS COMPARED WITH NONSTATUS OFFENDERS.
Abstract: PREVIOUS RESEARCH ON DISPOSITION DECISIONMAKING PRACTICES HAS BEEN MORE CONCERNED WITH TESTING THEORETICAL PROPOSITIONS THAN WITH ADDRESSING THE PROGRAM NEEDS OF JUVENILE JUSTICE ADMINISTRATION. RESEARCHERS HAVE LIMITED ANALYSIS TO THE POLICE LEVEL AND HAVE NOT DISTINGUISHED BETWEEN STATUS AND NONSTATUS OFFENDERS. TO DISCOVER WHETHER DIFFERENT CRITERIA ARE USED TO DISPOSE OF CASES FOR STATUS AND NONSTATUS OFFENSES, EIGHT INDEPENDENT VARIABLES WERE SELECTED: AGE, SEX, RACE, FAMILY STRUCTURE, SOCIAL CLASS, NUMBER OF PRIOR COURT REFERRALS, NUMBER OF PREVIOUS POLICE CONTRACTS, AND NUMBER OF PETITIONS FILED. THE DEPENDENT VARIABLE--DISPOSITION--WAS ANALYZED AT THREE DECISION LEVELS: INTAKE DISPOSITION, RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION, AND JUDICIAL DISPOSITION. OF THE CASES SAMPLED, 104 (29.7 PERCENT) WERE HANDLED UNOFFICIALLY; THE REMAINDER WERE SUBJECT TO DISPOSITIONAL REVIEW BY INDIVIDUAL CASEWORKERS, RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION, AND A FINAL JUDICIAL DISPOSITION. A TOTAL OF 350 JUVENILE OFFENDERS, OF WHICH 43 PERCENT WERE STATUS OFFENDERS, WERE RANDOMLY SELECTED FROM JUVENILE COURT RECORDS. FINDINGS INDICATE THAT AT ALL DISPOSITION LEVELS, THE NUMBER OF PREVIOUS COURT REFERRALS AND MULTIPLE PETITIONS INCREASED THE LIKELIHOOD OF A MORE SEVERE DISPOSITION FOR BOTH NONSTATUS AND STATUS OFFENDERS. SOCIAL CLASS BIAS WAS STRONGER FOR STATUS OFFENDERS AND BECAME MORE EVIDENT AT SUCCESSIVE DISPOSITION LEVELS. NEW DELINQUENCY PROGRAMS MUST BUILD ON THE FOUNDATION OF JUST SANCTIONS PRIOR TO THE RIGHT TO TREAT OFFENDERS. TABULAR DATA, NOTES, AND REFERENCES ARE INCLUDED. (WJR)
Index Term(s): Cultural influences; Decisionmaking; Discrimination; Dispositions; Judicial discretion; Juvenile court judicial discretion; Juvenile courts; Juvenile designated felonies; Juvenile sentencing; Juvenile status offenders; Social classes
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=62632

*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.