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: 93993 Find in a Library
Title: Youth Offender - Transfer to the Adult Court and Subsequent Sentencing
Journal: Criminal Justice Journal  Volume:6  Issue:2  Dated:(Spring 1983)  Pages:281-313
Author(s): J S Schwartz
Date Published: 1982
Page Count: 33
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This article examines the philosophy behind the juvenile court's treatment of juvenile offenders, the reasons and methods for transferring juveniles to adult courts for disposition, and the extent of punishment given juveniles tried in adult courts, with particular attention to the rehabilitative aspects of California Penal Code Sections 190-190.5.
Abstract: The juvenile court was initially intended to benefit both juveniles and the public by making provision for juveniles to receive treatment according to their needs, thus preventing their harsh and punitive treatment while correcting their behavior and steering them away from crimes against citizens in the future. This purpose of the juvenile courts was often abused as the courts adopted punitive dispositions with little regard for treatment, while also depriving juveniles of the due process rights afforded by adult courts. Juvenile courts now are required to practice due process procedures similar to those given adult defendants. Still, the juvenile court considers that some juveniles cannot benefit from the treatment, nonpunitive approach of the juvenile system. Such juveniles can be transferred to adult courts under a waiver, making them subject to the punitive sanctions applied to adult criminals. Judicial waiver is the most common method used, yet it is the procedure with the most ambiguity. Punishment of the juvenile in adult courts has also created many problems. Legislators usually draft laws specifying punishments that will fit the proscribed behavior; yet, there is a consensus among the States that capital punishment is too harsh a penalty for a juvenile. Conviction under a juvenile waiver almost always means prison for the offender. The duration and conditions of extended imprisonment for the juvenile offender are determined by each court's interpretation of statutes and circumstances. The appendixes present the various criteria used for waiver in various jurisdictions.
Index Term(s): California; Capital punishment; Incarceration; Juvenile court waiver; Juvenile delinquents; Punishment
Note: *This document is currently unavailable from NCJRS.
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.