Publication Type: Poster
Abstract: For the first time, data from OJJDP’s Performance-based Standards
(PbS) for Youth Correction and Detention Facilities project is available
for analysis. We use it to predict victimization and fear among individual
juvenile inmates. We estimate hierarchical linear models using both
facility and individual level factors. Our results depart from prior research
efforts, which have focused primarily on either an importation or a
deprivation model for explaining facility disorder. In contrast, we find
evidence of a third model that merges individual and facility level
variables to consider individual youths’ perceptions of facility rules and
practices. We find that the best predictors of victimization are youths’
understanding of facility rules, and their perceptions of how good the
school is and how helpful the staff are.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Over the last several decades, there has been a proliferation of U.S. legislation easing the process of treating children as adults in the justice system, leading to an increased number of youth transferred to the criminal court. This increase raises questions concerning the meaning of the “adult” label for juveniles tried in the criminal court, with regard both to processing and outcomes. Some scholars have suggested that the juvenile justice process is “reproduced” for juveniles in the criminal court setting (Singer et al., 2000). Kupchik (2003) provides a nuanced view of the reproduction of juvenile justice in the criminal court by arguing that the criminal court processing of juveniles is “bifurcated” – the adult model is followed up to sentencing, but sentencing resembles more of a juvenile model. Using both quantitative and qualitative data, this paper adds to this literature by focusing on the way that the “adult” label is negotiated by court actors in an urban court in Michigan. In part, the findings support the bifurcated model proposed by Kupchik with regard to the procedures applied by the court. The paper finds, however, that the “adult” label is contested throughout the criminal court process through negotiations over the “redeemability” or “salvageability” of juveniles that are manifest in plea negotiations and strategies. These negotiations are influenced by organizational contextual factors, including the power and role of specific actors and the loosely coupled nature of processing in the criminal court.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The past thirty years witnessed a relatively small Federal program having a profound influence on the prevention of delinquency and the treatment of troubled children by the juvenile justice system. These influences include: fostering the science of prevention; use of diversion of troubled children to services; development and implementation of balanced and restorative justice principles, demonstration, evaluation, and replication of innovative and effective programs; key reforms of deinstitutionalization of status and nonoffender juveniles, separation of juveniles from adult criminals in institutions, and removal of juveniles from adult jails and lockups; a focus on the disproportionate confinement of minority juveniles; and fostering the use of a comprehensive, strategic approach to dealing with serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders.

Publication Type: Poster
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Juvenile courts continue to handle more sexual offense cases which increase the demands for valid assessment. Cognitive distortions have shown promise in assessing treatment amenability, treatment response, and recidivism risk. The Bumby Scales (1996) were originally designed to assess sexual offending specific cognitive distortions. The Bumby Scales were adapted for juvenile sexual offenders. The present study was designed to assess whether the Adolescent Bumby Scales appropriately identified juvenile sexual offenders from non-offenders. Preliminary analyses suggests that juvenile sexual offenders report lower levels of cognitive distortions associated with rape and higher levels of distortions associated with molestation than non-offenders.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: The requirement that juveniles be competent to stand trial (CST) prior to adjudication in juvenile court has been solidified via case law and/or statutory law in 35 states and the District of Columbia (for a review see Redding & Frost, 2003). Some scholars argue (see Johnson, 2006) that it is problematic when states recognize the importance of the due process right of CST in juvenile court via case law, yet fail to enact specific juvenile statutes for CST determinations and procedures. However, it is currently unclear as to whether and how the presence of a specific juvenile CST statute affects how court actors use competency distinctions for subsequent case strategizing in a juvenile court context. Through interviews with 40 juvenile judicial officers, defense attorneys, and prosecutors across two different states, we find that the presence or absence of specific juvenile CST statutory provisions allows court actors to differentially prioritize legal and extra-legal characteristics of youth for subsequent case processing decisions, such as adjudication, disposition, and transfer to criminal court. In particular, the presence of specific juvenile CST guidelines permits court actors to use offense and offender-related factors for alterative case processing options in order to hold most youth who have their CST questioned accountable for their behavior.