Blended Sentencing In Juvenile Courts

One of the most debatable topics in today’s justice system is whether or not juveniles should receive waivers to adult court. There are three methods that are used to transfer a juvenile to adult court. Juvenile waiver, statutory exclusion, and Concurrent Jurisdiction are the three different methods used to transfer a juvenile to adult court. Statutory exclusion is when the juvenile is transferred immediately to the adult court. Concurrent Jurisdiction is when the juvenile may be tried as an adult and a juvenile at once. Throughout all three methods juvenile waiver is the most common one that is used throughout juvenile courts and used in mostly all states. The only states that do not provide judicial waivers are Nebraska, New York, and New Mexico. When a judge transfers a juvenile to adult court, he or she is denying the protections that the juveniles receive. The judge makes the decision of whether or not the juvenile is tried as an adult. Double Jeapordy laws protect the juvenile from being tried in juvenile court and then adult court because of the fact that a juvenile would be tried twice. Most times 17 or 18 year olds are the youngest age limits that can be waived to adult court, but in some states ages low as 13 or 14 can be waived. It depends on the crime that a juvenile commits on whether or not he or she is transferred to adult court. Once the juvenile is tried as an adult, he or she will be affect in the community for a lifetime versus having his or her records

Skip Hollandsworth candidly explores the subjects of juvenile crime and sentencing in the electronic long form newspaper article, “The Prisoner”. The purpose of the essay is to inform the reader about juvenile sentencing and to persuade the audience that there are clear problems with aspects of the U.S. prison system. The article is easily accessible to a large audience because it is online. Hollandsworth takes into account that his audience, mostly consisting of Texas Monthly readers, may already have pre-established notions about the topic, so he considers other sides while still supporting his argument. Edwin Debrow, a preteen member of the Crips, committed a murder when he was 12-years old and received a 27-year sentence through the

There are many similarities and differences between the adult and juvenile justice systems. Although juvenile crimes have increased in violence and intensity in the last decade, there is still enough difference between the two legal proceedings, and the behaviors themselves, to keep the systems separated. There is room for changes in each structure. However, we cannot treat/punish juvenile offenders the way we do adult offenders, and vice versa. This much we know. So we have to find a way to merge between the two. And, let’s face it; our juveniles are more important to us in the justice system. They are the group at they

Juvenile justice is the section of law that applies to persons under the age of 18 not capable of receiving sentencing in the adult court system or old enough to be responsible for criminal acts committed in society. In most states the age of criminal culpability is 18 however, the age requirement can be set lower in accordance to certain crimes and statutes set by the state the juvenile lives in. Juvenile law is primarily run by state law and most states enforce a specific juvenile code the system follows. The juvenile justice system primarily focuses on rehabilitation

Determinate sentencing is becoming more popular in juvenile courts. It is a special statute that allows for the possibility of a juvenile serving a sentence beyond the age of 21. It specifically covers certain violent offenses and drug cases, like murder, capital murder, sexual assault, and indecency with a child. Aggravated controlled substances cases are also covered (TYC website). The alternative to determinate sentencing is blended sentencing, which allows judges to issue delinquent offenders both juvenile and adult dispositions. Depending on the behavior of the delinquent while serving out their juvenile sentence, a fail-safe postadjudication stage occurs to determine whether or not their adult sentence

The dilemma of whether or not to transfer juveniles to adult court has been a major topic, for many years, in the United States. Since 1899, judges have had the option to transfer juveniles to adult court. The major factor for transferring juveniles to adult court since then has been the seriousness of the offense. That being said, juveniles only make up a small portion of violent crimes in the United States. Only 16 percent of juvenile offenders in 2008 were arrested for violent crimes (Champion,2008). The problem is the determination of whether the crime is serious enough to be waived and transferred to adult court. Almost every state has statutory judicial waiver provisions, which grant juvenile judges the authority to transfer

Juvenile courts have a wide range of sentencing options (usually called "disposition orders") that they can impose on juveniles or youth offenders who are found to be "delinquent" (that is, finding that the minor violated a criminal law). Typically, disposition options fall into two camps: incarceration and non-incarceration. One non-incarceration option in particular -- probation -- forms the backbone of the juvenile justice system. Read on to learn about the different kinds of sentencing options used in juvenile court, the ins and outs of probation, and whether a disposition order can be appealed or changed. (For more information on juvenile court cases, see Nolo's article Juvenile Court: An Overview.)

Today, the juvenile system primary goals are crime reduction and rehabilitation. The juvenile officials must assess whether youthful offenders are likely to commit crimes in the future and whether they can benefit from interventions. If these kids cannot benefit, then they will most like end up a delinquent. In most states delinquency is defined as the commission of a criminal act by a child who was under the age of 18 at that time (Virginia Rules). Most states allow youth to remain under the supervision of the juvenile court until the age of 21, but this depends on the type of crime that was committed. There has been many times where a juvenile case was transferred to an adult criminal court. This would have to be done thru a process called a waiver. A waiver is when a judge waives the protections that the juvenile court provides (Larry J. Siegel). Cases that

The recording is based on research founded by Nazgol Ghandnoosh, who is a research analyst for the sentencing project. The sentencing project is a non-profit group that advocates for the criminal justice reform. She also, is an author of a report called “Race and Punishment: Racial Perceptions of Crime and Support for Punitive Policies, which is about her study of police shootings disproportionately affecting African American and how media coverage shows racial bias against African American. In addition, a 2002 survey found that people made an estimate that 40 percent of those that committed violent crimes were African American, but the real percentage was only 29 percent. According to Nazgol Ghandnoosh (2015), a research

The juvenile justice system has gone through many transformations and changes in sentencing guidelines since its inception. These guidelines were put in place to establish a process through which juveniles are guaranteed resources for a chance at rehabilitation and integration back into society as a law-abiding citizen. Juvenile courts have a wide range of sentencing options which they can impose on juveniles or youth offenders found guilty of a criminal offense. The automatic transfer law is the policy that is used most commonly, in regards to transferring a juvenile to criminal (adult) court.

June 25th 2012, The Supreme Court ruled that juveniles who commit murder could not be sentenced to life in prison or in other words juveniles could not be sentenced as an adult would be. The Supreme Court brought forth that sentencing juveniles to life in prison transgresses the eighth amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. How is a 17 year old criminal different from an 18 year old criminal who both commit a murder crime? Apparently the age creates a significant difference according to the Supreme Court. Maturity and Development of people under 18 are clear incentives that support the decision made by the Supreme Court. A murder is a murder, it will always be the action of taking away someone's life. How is “The Criminal didn’t know

According to Caldwell (1961) the juvenile justice system is based on the principle that youth are developmentally and fundamentally different from adults. According to Mack (1909) the focus of the juvenile justice system has shifted from “was the crime committed” to “why did the child commit the crime”, “how can we help the child”. When performing as it is designed and up to the initial intentions, the juvenile court balances rehabilitation (treatment) of the offender with suitable sanctions when necessary such as incarceration. According to Griffin (2008) in some cases juveniles may be required to be “transferred” to adult court. In this paper I am going to discuss the three primary mechanisms of waiver to adult court: judicial waiver

“The juvenile justice system was first created in the late 1800s to reform United States policies on how to handle youth offenders. Since that time, a number of reforms - aimed at both protecting the "due process of law" rights of youth, and creating an aversion toward jail among the young - have made the juvenile justice system more comparable to the adult system, which is a shift from the United States’ original intent (2008,Lawyer Shop.com).” The

Some jurisdictions require the child to be over a certain age and charged with a felony, while others permit waiver if the child is over a certain age regardless of offense. Still yet, others have no conditions. Juveniles can be tried in all stated in one of three ways: 1. Concurrent Jurisdiction: the prosecutor has the discretion of filing charge offenses in either juvenile or criminal court. 2. Excluded offenses: the legislature excludes from juvenile court jurisdiction certain offenses that are either very minor, such as traffic or fishing violations, or very serious, such as murder or rape. 3. Judicial waiver: the juvenile court waives its jurisdiction and transfers the case to criminal court. Barry Feld, Juvenile Law Scholar, suggests that waivers to adult court be mandatory for serious crimes. Those espousing the crime control model believe that the overriding purpose is protection of the public, deterrence or violent juvenile behavior, and the incarceration of serious youthful offenders in the adult criminal justice system. The rehabilitative justice model view this as an attack on the juvenile justice system, but crime control advocates consider such steps a necessary response to a rising juvenile violence rate. Life in Adult Prison The Southwest Multi County Corrections Center, a two-story adult jail is the largest maximum-security program for juveniles under federal authority. The BOP pays

Juvenile justice has proved to be as imprudent as it is practical. Snyder and Sickmund (1999) found that as early as 1825, there was a significant push to establish a separate juvenile justice system focused on rehabilitation and treatment. The procedure continued to stay focused on the rehabilitation of a person, even though financial support and assets sustained to hold back its achievement. In reaction to rising juvenile crime rates in the 1980s’, more corrective laws were approved (Snyder and Sickmund 1999). In the 1990s, the United States legal system took further steps regarding transfer provisions that lowered the threshold at which juveniles could be tried in criminal court and sentenced to adult prison (Snyder and Sickmund 1999). Furthermore, laws were enacted that allowed prosecutors and judges more discretion in their sentencing options; and confidentiality standards, which made juvenile court proceedings and records more available to the public (Snyder and Sickmund 1999), were reduced.