NCJ Number
186965
Journal
Criminology Volume: 38 Issue: 4 Dated: November 2000 Pages: 983-1019
Date Published
November 2000
Length
37 pages
Annotation
This study examined the potential usefulness of applying theories of adult sanctioning to criminalized juvenile courts and tested competing hypotheses about the effects of legal, extra-legal, and processing factors, as well as sentencing options, in a Texas juvenile court that had developed complex and criminal-like approaches.
Abstract
Recent juvenile justice reforms have made juvenile courts increasingly similar to adult courts. However, research to date has not examined the full range of newly available sentencing options and has not systematically drawn on theories of adult sentencing. This study focused on a court that automatically used determinate sentencing for all eligible cases and that had a highly efficient and proceduralized system for processing cases eligible for determinate sentencing. The court also purported to give primary emphasis to legal factors such as offense severity and type and was widely known for its tough approach to sanctioning. The study used quantitative and qualitative information from court data for 1996 and 1997 and from interviews with practitioners in the county studied and in other Texas counties. Results indicated that legal factors were the strongest determinants of sentencing, but they were not the only determinants. The effects of legal factors differed when juvenile court waiver was an option. In addition, extralegal and processing factors related to sanction severity, although not always in the same manner or to the same extent, depending on the specific options and outcomes. Findings did not support arguments that increased proceduralization and criminalization of juvenile courts will eliminate the consideration of age, gender, or race and ethnicity in sentencing decisions. Tables, footnotes, and 65 references (Author abstract modified)