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: 76919 Find in a Library
Title: Intake and Diversion (From Juvenile Justice Standard Symposium, P 381-430, 1979 - See NCJ-76912)
Author(s): K M Siegel
Date Published: 1979
Page Count: 50
Type: Conference Material
Format: Document
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: A symposium presentation and subsequent discussion examine four questions regarding juvenile rights related to intake and diversion and compare three sets of proposed standards on the subject.
Abstract: The issues are treatment of cases lacking in legal sufficiency to support a petition, the criteria that should apply to intake decisions, whether intake should be a function of the judicial or executive branch, and whether prosecutors should monitor diversion programs. The proposed standards are those of the Joint Commission of the Institute for Judicial Administration/American Bar Association (IJA/ABA), the National Advisory Committee for Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (NAC), and the Task Force on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (Task Force). With respect to cases lacking in legal sufficiency, providing for an unwaivable right to counsel at intake is the most effective way to protect the juvenile rights involved. The IJA/ABA standards guarantee this right and also require that a case is to be dismissed, not diverted, if a legally sufficient case does not exist. The IJA/ABA standards also present more detailed and desirable guidelines regarding intake decisions than are provided by the other standards. Both the IJA/ABA and Task Force standards place intake in the executive branch, while the NAC standards take no position. Prosecutorial monitoring of the operation and effectiveness of diversion programs would be desirable, but is not covered in the standards. Nevertheless, it is consistent with the prosecutorial monitoring of postadjudication dispositional alternatives recommended by the IJA/ABA and Task Force standards. The subsequent discussion focuses on placement of the intake function in the executive branch and prohibiting a child from waiving counsel.
Index Term(s): Juvenile court diversion; Juvenile court intake; Juvenile justice standards; Right to counsel; Rights of minors
Note: This document is available on microfiche under NCJ 76912.
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=76919

*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.