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: 77329 Find in a Library
Title: Court-administered Youth Services - One-step-up for Due Process (From Major Issues in Juvenile Justice Information and Training - Readings in Public Policy, P 389-422, 1981, John C Hall et al, ed. - See NCJ-77318)
Author(s): H T Rubin
Date Published: 1981
Page Count: 34
Sponsoring Agency: Academy for Contemporary Problems
Sale Source: Academy for Contemporary Problems
United States of America
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: Following discussions of the role of the juvenile court in providing youth services and recent trends in the juvenile justice system, this article argues that judicial control over youth services provides better assurance of due process than would executive-administered services.
Abstract: The juvenile courts are inherently legal institutions and not social institutions. The courts have been increasingly transferred out of the social agency community into the justice community because of Gault and subsequent decisions. Indications of this trend include transfers of prosecutorial decisions to prosecutors, the rules and superintendency of higher courts in unified State court systems, and the constant monitoring of all judicial actions by opposing counsel in juvenile adjudicatory hearings. Juvenile courts' authority as employers of court services personnel provides a critical mechanism for successfully maintaining due process in the court services operations. Other factors promoting the courts' elimination of due process problems in their own service arms include their own rulemaking powers and their need to respond to public and appellate court demands for reform. All these factors produce a legal milieu that constrains arbitrary procedures and decisions and fosters accountability. Probation officers will better conform to legal constraints as employees of the court than as executive branch staff members. Departures from impartial decisionmaking at juvenile justice processing stages are best checked by active prosecutor and defense counsel representation. The emerging authority of the prosecutor at the intake stage is a desirable trend. Although abuses of due process occur in courts that both do and do not administer probation, the integration of the juvenile court into the judicial mainstream has promoted due process in the administration of probation services. Footnotes are provided. (Author abstract modified)
Index Term(s): Court management; Jurisdiction; Juvenile court intake; Juvenile courts; Juvenile detention; Juvenile probation; Juvenile shelter care; Right to Due Process; Social service agencies
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.