NCJ Number
173908
Journal
Law and Policy Volume: 18 Issue: Dated: Pages: issue (January-April 1996)-15
Date Published
1996
Length
15 pages
Annotation
This article reviews the varying ways of bringing juveniles into the adult legal process and the justifications for juvenile court waiver.
Abstract
The particular legal rules and avenues leading to criminal responsibility for juveniles vary from State to State. These statutory strategies include judicial waiver, legislative offense exclusion, and prosecutors' choice among concurrent jurisdictions. Each type of statutory provision represents an approach to determining whether a youth is a delinquent or a criminal. Each jurisdictional waiver mechanism emphasizes different values, organizational actors, and administrative processes, as well as different information about offenders and offenses as to whether certain youths should be tried as juveniles or adults. Each system of waiver has its advantages and disadvantages. Waiver reforms assume that the transfer of juveniles to criminal court can work to make the administration of justice fairer and more effective in controlling and preventing serious juvenile crime. However, the cumulative evidence on waiver suggests that this goal is not being achieved. Waiver is a technique of managing delinquents rather than reducing rates of recidivism. Future research on merging and emerging systems of juvenile justice requires detailed study of the various types of waiver strategies, their justifications or rationale, and the operational meaning of effectiveness. Whether the emerging systems of juvenile justice are able to produce real, significant change in juvenile courts still remains to be seen. Case and law citations and 30 references