Arizona Youth Assessment System Case Study

As with adults, many nonviolent, substance-abusing juvenile offenders repeatedly cycle through the system due to a lack of intervention measures that would provide sanctions and services necessary to change their deviant behavior. In an attempt to resolve this problem, many communities have established juvenile drug courts. Determining the target population and eligibility is centered on making use of limited available resources. Because of this, most juvenile drug courts focus on non-violent juveniles with moderate to heavy substance abuse problems. The offender must sign the drug court agreement and a release of information, which states they admit to committing the crime.

Transferring an adolescent offender to adult court is a tight decision. It has far-reaching implications for the adolescent involved and significant symbolic meaning for the justice system. For the adolescent, transferring to the adult system, it holds the possibility of harsher punishment (including physical, sexual, or psychological victimization by other inmates. Also the endurance of developmental costs (Chung, Little, and Steinberg, 2005; Mulvey and Schubert, 2012). For the system, transferring an adolescent to adult court is an unambiguous statement that the criminal justice system will no longer shelter the adolescent, by virtue of his or her acts, from harsh justice. Transfer to adult court indicates that the demand for proportional

Youth can also pay for their actions through restitution, compensation, community services and other sentences that provide for close supervision and support in the community. If the youth is found guilty, the court may place the youth on probation for up to 2 years. While on probation, the youth must have good behavior and will be required to follow curfew, report to a parole officer and remain within the area. While the youth is on parole, the courts may choose where and with whom the youth may live and may include other restrictions to prevent the youth from reoffending. The court may also impose a fine of up to 1000 dollars, which must be paid by a specific time. If the youth is unable to pay the fine, they may be forced to go through a “fine option program”. The chances of a youth committing another crime are much smaller after a youth has been fined because once their parents pay this charge; they will most likely put forth a greater effort in disciplining their child. Community service is also a disciplinary sentence that the courts may impose. The youth may be required to perform up to 240 hours of work in the community over a 12 month period with certain organization. These forms of sentencing

The purpose of sentencing is to ensure youth are held accountable for their actions focusing on a rehabilitation and re-integration approach, while ensuring youth are given an appropriate consequence. There are many differences to sentencing a youth than an adult. A young person lacks the maturity of an adult, and the youth justice system must reflect that fact. Some differences include accountability and level of maturity, rehabilitation and reintegration are strongly emphasized, increased protection on procedures, and the intervention is implemented in a timely

Juvenile institutions and programs have changed over time. There are also juvenile programs that necessarily do not punish juvenile’s delinquents but instead help modify their behavior to avoid recidivism. Certain treatments and methods regarding how to deal with these dangerous young offenders were fixed and improved to make these institutions and programs more effective in changing the lives of these young

Juvenile crime is a term around the world that is difficult to pinpoint and although there are several definitions many fail to be concrete. There are many factors that play into sentencing juveniles or minors upon a crime committed. How old are they? Can they mentally form criminal intent? Are they old enough to no longer be treated as children? Some people would argue that a criminal is just that, regardless of age. Research on the other hand shows that juveniles have underdeveloped brains who at times have difficulty rationalizing decisions and weighing out consequences. It is important that these issues are addressed because of the implications this has on not only the juveniles but the community around them. These

The criminal justice system approaches young offenders through unique policies to address the challenges of dealing with juvenile offending. They take special care when dealing with juveniles in order to stop them from repeat offending and stop any potential bad behaviour which could result in future. Juveniles have the highest tendency to rehabilitate and most adopt law-abiding lifestyles as they mature. There are several factors influencing juvenile crime including psychological and social pressures unique to juveniles, which may lead to an increase in juvenile’s risks of contact with the criminal justice system.

AZYAS is a risk assessment tool for the juvenile and for the protection of the community. It assists the Juvenile Probation Officer in making appropriate recommendations to the court and in deciding the correct path of supervision. The degree of negative history involved might show the necessity of a harsher sentence and/or more strict terms of probation. For example, if AZYAS shows that the youth in question has a history of violence, substance abuse, of associating with anti-social peers with substance abuse, I would conclude that there is a strong reason to recommend that the juvenile not be allowed to associate with those peers involved in anti-social behavior. Further recommendations to the court would reflect the need for more

place for someone not yet an adult; after all, prison is a place where many believe to be hell.Abolition of the juvenile court would not require that all young offenders be sent to adult prison. Many states already operate separate correctional facilities for young adults (under age 21, under 23, etc.). There is not enough reason to suggest that juvenile should not belongto the adult court system; after all, the division is just a waste of money and time on thestate’s part. The use of juvenile courts in Arizona was ended by the “Stop Juvenile CrimeInitiative” and was endorsed by 63% of Arizona voters. According to a NBC New-WallStreet Journal poll, two thirds of Americans think juveniles under the age of 13 who commitmurder should

Currently to deal with juvenile offenders involved in the youth crime, there are two options available. The first option that prevails to a larger extent is known to us as incarceration while the second option that is slowly gaining trends is known to us as rehabilitation programs. This paper focuses on thorough analysis of both these options and the impact that they have on the offenders as well as the society as a whole. The paper also assesses the viability of these options in order to determine which of these will prove to be more effective and beneficial.

There are a variety of different evaluations that may need to be performed on the juvenile that can only be implemented by somebody who has a strong knowledge base of child developmental psychology as well as legal proceedings particularly when it comes to juvenile court. Competency, adjudication, and treatment are all items that need to be assessed when it comes to a juvenile delinquent and all require separate evaluations to determine the best route for each individual. With these assessments completed and clear communication of results are demonstrated to the attorneys, judge, and/or jury, hopefully the best decisions can be made for each minor defendant and their

According to the social history investigation a Youth Assessment and Screening Instrument (YASI) was conducted, and Kuwan’s identified strength was his family. The areas contributing to his risk to reoffend were identified as legal history, school, community/peer associations, substance abuse, attitudes, and skill deficits. Based on Kuwan’s legal history, areas in need of intervention include awareness, accountability, self control, decision making and peer refusal skills. In the clinical assessment there were significant areas of concern such as history of aggressive outburst, history of refusal to comply with rules, and substance dependence. The clinical assessment also noted strengths such as Kuwan expressing a desire to manage his anger

In my opinion, I believe that the most effective treatment for delinquent juveniles is juvenile intensive probation supervision (JIPS), and the most ineffective are diversion programs. Juvenile intensive probation supervision or JIPS is very similar to regular probation, the main difference is that in JIPS the supervision and interaction between the probation officer and the juvenile is more interactive and closely monitored to ensure that the juvenile stays on the right path to successfully complete the treatment and exit the system (Arizona Judicial Branch). Besides that juveniles must agree to follow certain rules during JIPS, with that being said each state has different rules that juveniles must follow but these rules are very similar in all states, for the

As stated by Bartol and Bartol “Juvenile delinquency is an imprecise, nebulous, social, clinical, and legal label for a wide variety of law- and norm-violating behavior” (2011, Pg 139). The juvenile delinquency term has come to imply disgrace in today's correctional institution. Our government is up hold to procedures and expected to come with a solution to solving the delinquent problem. An underage offender can be labeled a delinquent for breaking any number of laws, ranging from robbery to running away from home, and especially being involved in school violence. The following situations faced by correction officials when dealing with juvenile delinquents will be examined. Three main areas (child development, punishments, and deterrence

On November 18, 1867, the first school district was established in Arizona Territory. It was located in Pima County, in the community of Tucson. This was an important step for the advancement of education in the region because the schools were considered “a free and tax supported” public school system. This evolution required the Territorial Governor of the times to propose and secure legislation creating the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction in 1871. This evolved in today’s current system consisting of the Arizona Department of Education and the Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction when President Taft approved Arizona's