National Center for State Courts DETENTION ASSESSMENT.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Callie Glanton Steele Supervising Deputy Federal Public Defender Central District of California.
Advertisements

Juvenile Justice 40+ Terms, Settings, and Definitions. Scott Scott Bernard Peterson CEO, Global Youth Justice Mobile:
Pretrial Release and Diversion
Pretrial Procedures Transfer hearings Detention Intake Diversion
LISA A. MINUTOLA CHIEF OF LEGAL SERVICES PUBLIC DEFENDER’S OFFICE.
PROCESSING OF YOUTHFUL AND JUVENILE OFFENDERS IN NORTH CAROLINA Youth Accountability Planning Task Force December 10, 2009.
Detention Hearings - Topics -Getting the Case -Seeking Release from Detention -The Pretrial Services Interview -The Pretrial Services Report -The Detention.
NORTH CAROLINA SENTENCING AND POLICY ADVISORY COMMISSION Report on Study of Youthful Offenders Pursuant to Session Law , Sections 34.1 and 34.2.
Delinquency Dispositions: Legal Overview Janet Mason Institute of Government UNC at Chapel Hill March, 2006.
Unit 8 – Judicial Branch in Georgia Lesson 6 – Juvenile Justice Study Presentation Georgia Studies.
The Juvenile Justice System
Reproduction of these materials only by author's explicit permission. Risk Assessment Instrument And the Development of Detention Alternatives Primary.
MILWAUKEE COUNTY’S PRETRIAL RELEASE DECISION PROCESS & PRETRIAL SERVICES RE-DESIGN PRESENTED TO THE MILWAUKEE COUNTY COMMUNITY JUSTICE COUNCIL JULY 24,
2005 Children’s Code Amendments: Delinquency Act.
Mandatory Transfer to Superior Court 13 through 15 years old Class A felony offense 2 juveniles in FY 2004/05.
Increasing Alternative Sentencing in the Juvenile Justice System Through a Partnership Between Public Defenders and Social Workers National Organization.
Strengthening Communities-Youth (SCY) Presented by Dr. David Hussey Institute for the Study and Prevention of Violence at Kent State University.
CRIM 309 Intake and Diversion. Intake Intake=Process of screening cases referred to the juvenile justice system Determines which cases will be formally.
Re-validation of the Nonviolent Offender Risk Assessment Instrument: Preliminary Findings.
Chapter 13 Parole Conditions and Revocation. Introduction Parole conditions determine the amount of freedom versus restriction a parolee has Accomplishment.
CRIMINAL LAW 2.5 INVESTIGATION & PRE-TRIAL PROCEEDINGS.
Evaluation of the Connecticut Judicial Branch’s Three Court-Mandated Family Violence Programs: FVEP, EXPLORE, and EVOLVE Stephen M. Cox, Ph.D, Professor.
DIVISION OF JUVENILE JUSTICE: WHAT WE DO AND HOW WE’RE DOING. March 10, 2014 Anchorage Youth Development Coalition JPO Lee Post.
Juvenile Justice History Review New York House of Refuge – First juvenile detention center – Became a place to put delinquent youth Included kids without.
Cuyahoga County Strengthening Communities – Youth (SCY) Project: Findings & Implications for Juvenile Justice David L. Hussey, Ph.D. Associate Professor.
Slide 1 Promoting and Supporting Status Offense System Reform Presentation to National Conference of State Legislators June 23, 2014 Allie Meyer Vera Institute.
Juvenile Justice System. The Juvenile Justice System, 6 th ed. Dean J. Champion Presented by: D. Romeo 2 The Juvenile Justice System CRCT pp 193 The Juvenile.
Juvenile Justice How and why juvenile justice differs from adult justice.
Chapter 16: Juvenile Justice
MIS REPORTING Make Your Numbers Count. Recidivism rates are of one the key goals that is reported to Congress regarding youth offender programs. Your.
LA County Cases: An Overview of Characteristics & Disposition Outcomes Denise C. Herz, Ph.D. California State University—Los Angeles School of Criminal.
The Juvenile Justice System
Young People and the Law Chapter 15, Section 4
Juvenile Justice.
Georgia and the American Experience
Steps in the Adult Criminal Justice Process
NC Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission RECIDIVISM OF 16 AND 17 YEAR OLD AND JUVENILE OFFENDERS: FINDINGS FROM TWO STUDIES Presented to Youth Accountability.
Purpose and Scope of Juvenile Court Act
Early Intervention Juvenile Justice Request for Responses.
PREPARING YOUR CASE- MEETING & DEALING WITH PROBATION Rachele M. Guerrero SAFE Unit Supervisor Bexar County Juvenile Probation Department.
Juvenile Delinquency Mrs. Lauterhahn. What is Juvenile Delinquency? An act by a juvenile under the age of 18 that if committed by an adult would constitute.
Disposition Hearing Juvenile Law Cle Oct 17, 2014.
Chapter 2 Pretrial Release and Diversion. Pretrial Services Pretrial Services is a department with two overlapping functions: Assisting the court with.
The Eckerd Family Foundation Florida’s Juvenile Justice System: An Overview DRAFT.
Understanding Disproportionate Minority Contact in Onondaga County A project to reduce racial disparities in Onondaga County’s Juvenile Justice System.
Week 28.  an act that would be considered a crime if committed by an adult.
Juvenile Corrections Population Forecasting Advisory Committee September 1, 2010 DAS Exec. Building 155 Cottage, BAM Conference Torri Lynn (Chair)Linn.
Georgia and the American Experience Chapter 15: Government of the Empire State Section 3 Judicial Branch ©2005 Clairmont Press.
Proposed Recommendations for Guidelines Revisions.
Youth Who Received Informal Handling/Supervision in 2006 DCJ Quality & Evaluation Services April 2009 Prepared by: Liang Wu, Sr. Research Analyst Charlene.
Representing Juveniles in Family Court Ashley Case, Esq. Heather Scalzo, Esq.
Procedures in Juvenile Court.  Delinquent or Status Offenses  Police have a broad authority to release or detain the juvenile Minor offense  Issue.
Steps of the Juvenile Justice Process March 15, 2016.
Criminal Justice BHS Law Related Education Chapter 4: A Separate System for Juveniles LESSON OBJECTIVES 4-1 Analyze and define the legal doctrine of parens.
Intro to Juvenile Justice in Virginia
Introduction to the Florida Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ)
Dependency Court Flowchart
Maryland Juvenile Services Long Term Trends FY 2007 – FY December 2016
LESSON OBJECTIVES Chapter 4: A Separate System for Juveniles
Metro Region Juvenile Services Long Term Trends: Counties of Montgomery and Prince George’s DJS Office of Research and Evaluation, January 2017.
Baltimore City Juvenile Services Long Term Trends
Evolution of Detention Screening & Pre-Adjudication Supervision
Assessment Tools, IIP, Programs/Services, Sentencing and Adult Waivers
Eastern Region Juvenile Services Long Term Trends: Counties of Caroline, Cecil, Dorchester, Kent, Queen Anne’s, Somerset, Talbot, Wicomico, and Worcester.
Central Region Juvenile Services Long Term Trends: Counties of Baltimore, Carroll, Harford, and Howard DJS Office of Research and Evaluation, January 2017.
Southern Region Juvenile Services Long Term Trends: Counties of Anne Arundel, Calvert, Charles, and St. Mary’s DJS Office of Research and Evaluation, January.
Western Region Juvenile Services Long Term Trends: Counties of Allegany, Frederick, Garrett and Washington DJS Office of Research and Evaluation, January.
Prince George’s County Juvenile Services Long Term Trends
Federal Pretrial Services
Presentation transcript:

National Center for State Courts DETENTION ASSESSMENT

National Center for State Courts Sample 1549 youth under 17 years old with at least one detention assessment completed between 6/1/2009 and 3/31/2010. For youth with multiple assessment records, the first assessment was used.

National Center for State Courts JDTA Factors Capias, Court Order or Warrant (25%) Most Serious Presenting Offense (Other misdemeanor, 21%; Other felony, 20%, A or B felony, felony sex offense, or unlawful felony possession or use of a firearm or explosive device, 17%) Additional Presenting Offenses (8%) Prior Referrals (59%) Current Legal Status (37%) Flight Risk (8%)

National Center for State Courts Scores and Indicated Decisions 1-9  release to a suitable custodian (25.3%)  detention alternative (16.3%) 15 or above  detention (56.4%)

National Center for State Courts Final Decisions Not at risk group (41.1%): 636 youth who were detained At risk group (58.9%): 913 youth who were assessed and released to suitable custodian (n=689) or to a detention alternative (n=224) within five days of assessment.

National Center for State Courts Overrides

National Center for State Courts Override to Detention & Reasons Override-to-detention rate drops to 12.1% from 33.4% in the first study. “No non-secure alternative available” “No suitable custodian to assume custody” “Serious or credible threat to witness, victim, or community”

National Center for State Courts Overrides

National Center for State Courts Less Restrictive Overrides from Detention Occurred to more than one third the youth (347) who were scored for detention.

National Center for State Courts Race

National Center for State Courts Age & Gender Average age 15 with a range of 6 to 16 Male (81%), female (19%)

National Center for State Courts JDTA instrument indicated decisions and the final decisions are proven Not Biased regarding any of the demographic variables after controlling for all the JDTA factors!!

National Center for State Courts At Risk Group Follow-up Recidivism was defined as any new referral for a law violation following the JDTA assessment occurring prior to adjudication, informal disposition, or dismissal of the case associated with the assessment. Failure to appear for the scheduled court hearing. 23.2% (212/913) failure rate When only consider legally sufficient law referrals as recidivism, the failure rate drops to 18.9% (173/913).

National Center for State Courts Juveniles with New Referrals/FTA

National Center for State Courts What will happen… If the 110 youth were excluded from the At Risk group as suggested by the JDTA The recidivism rate would decrease to 18.0% and 13.6% (only legally sufficient referrals).

National Center for State Courts Analysis of JDTA Factors Capias (any capias, court order, or DYS warrant for secure detention vs. none) Most serious presenting offense (Class A or B felony vs. Status) Current legal status (under formal or informal supervision for a law violation vs. no current legal condition)

National Center for State Courts Conclusions & Recommendations The JDTA instrument works. Recommend avoiding overrides to less restrictive decisions from detention. Especially for males and youth with capias, Class A or B felony, or under supervision for law violation. Recommend that detention alternative programs & current supervision programs be evaluated and recalibrated to improve their effectiveness

National Center for State Courts