Prosecuting Youths as Adults - Reference to Criminal Court in Minnesota, 1978-1981 (From Changing Boundaries of the Juvenile Court, Appendix D, P 65-95, 1982, by Lee Ann Osbun et al - See NCJ-83621)

• NCJ Number: 83624
• Author(s): P A Rode; L A Osbun
• Date Published: 1982
• Length: 29 pages
• Corporate Author: Minnesota State Supreme Court
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: Revised March 1982.

Annotation

This Minnesota study describes the number and characteristics of juveniles referred to adult courts or who were involved in referral proceedings and assesses the impact of recent changes in the Juvenile Court Act, which established more objective standards for referral.

Abstract

Under Minnesota's revised Juvenile Court Act, the juvenile court judge retains authority for making the referral decision; however, a prima facie case that a juvenile is not suitable to treatment or is a threat to the public safety is established if the juvenile is at least 16 and meets certain conditions regarding current charge and past record. Where a prima facie case cannot be established, unsuitability for treatment or dangerousness may be demonstrated according to previously developed standards. Data were obtained in 10 counties on referral cases coming before juvenile courts from January 1, 1978, to June 30, 1981. A total of 407 separate referral cases were found, and in two-thirds of these cases, the court decided for adult prosecution. The adoption of prima facie criteria for referral appears to have had little effect on the number or kind of juveniles certified for criminal prosecution. Changes which have occurred have resulted from other factors; e.g., the decline in certification in outstate counties is primarily due to the granting of fining authority to the juvenile courts. Had the new referral criteria provided for 'automatic' certification, many juveniles thought by prosecutors and judges to be inappropriate candidates for referral would nonetheless have been tried as adults. The criteria established do not provide sufficient or useful guidelines for deciding which juveniles should be referred to adult courts. Other factors such as the particular circumstances of the crime and the juvenile's age, sophistication, past offense record, and previous treatment history -- continue to be salient in the referral decision. Tabular data from the survey are provided. (Author summary modified)