CJ 461 Exam 3

Early seeds for juvenile institutions

separate institutions didn’t always exist, as responsibility was under the parents or church

through population growth, method of informal social control eroded and social disorder emerged as a major problem for delinquency

need for child-caring institutions → Almshouses and Orphanages

First juvenile institutions

House of Refuge → Child Savers concerned about morals; focus on juvenile lawbreakers, homeless vagrants, and disobedient kids; con → turned non delinquents into delinquents and deteriorated over time; no due process to get out

Reformatories → petty offenders, focused on education; con → more youth meant less benefit; no due process to get out

Training schools → classification and grading by gender, offense, age; learning a trade; cottage living system; family model (parental styles)

Juvenile Correctional Facility

emphasis on controlling most serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders; juvenile prison

strict environment, security intensive, an rehab not immediate goal

holds juveniles before and after adjudication

Types of juvenile placements

public → larger; house more males, minorities, serious offenses; likely overcrowded

private → more control over who’s admitted because privately funded; more highly specialized services; single-sex

general categorization → short-term v. long-term; secure (closed) v. non-secure (open); pre- v. post-adjudication (or both)

Pre-adjudication placements

adult jails

youth shelters

detention centers

Adult jails

short-term, secure

JJDPA restrictions, few juveniles

Youth shelters

short-term, non-secure

primarily hold → status offenders, temp. care, custody of dependent/neglected/abused kids

status offenders → used until parents are located/can take home; dependent/neglected → stay a bit longer because trying to find long-term placement

Detention centers

short-term, secure (county level)

primarily hold → 1) those awaiting adjudication hearing, 2) those awaiting transfer post-adjudication, 3) those awaiting disposition, post-adjudication, and 4) those who have violated aftercare

equivalent to the adult jail

Post-adjudication placements

diagnostic facilities

transfer facilities

stabilization facilities

state schools/juvenile correctional facilites

juvenile boot camps

ranches/forestry camps

transition facilities

adult prisons

Diagnostic facilites

short-term, secure

purpose → asses and classify youth for proper programming (or assigning suitable placement in state juvenile correctional system)

employs diverse staff and is 1st stop for adjudication delinquent lasting a few weeks then moved to permanent placement

not all states have

Transfer facilities

short-term, secure

purpose → to hold youth until a “bed” opens up at a long-term facility (holding tank)

most states do not have, many use county detention centers

Stabilization facilities

short-term, secure

purpose → to “stabilize;” then send back to state school

hold mentally ill or emotionally disturbed youth by referral from other secure institutions

county hospitals may serve

State Schools and Juvenile Correctional Facilites

long-term (relative), secure (most)

hold → person- and serious property offenders

disproportionate number of minorities

institutional programming → attempt to rehab. through diverse range of programs/services; cornerstone is education/rehab programs but not best quality

focus → rehab, BUT high goals include rank deterrence, incapacitation, and retribution

Juvenile boot camps

short/mid-term, secure

supervision intense environment for middle range offenders

became popular because it claimed to punish and rehabilitation at the same time; “get tough” atmosphere

Ranches and Forestry Camps

mid/long-term, secure/non-secure

around 50 kids, considered “non-institutional institutions”

specialized type of delinquents → “best risk”

benefit from challenging structure and learn survival skills, learning skills, trust, team collaboration

action = immediate consequences

Transition facilities

short-term, non-secure

ex. halfway houses, group homes, residence homes

usually for transition out of a state school → halfway out program

period of supervised release to ensure smooth transition to the streets

Adult prisons

long-term, secure

most severe institutional sanction for delinquent, waived juveniles (worst of the worst) → roughly 5,000

typical inmate → male, black, 17-18, person offense, 8 year avg. sentence

victimization and gang recruitment

straight adult incarceration, graduated incarceration, segregated incarceration

Straight adult incarceration

housing juveniles with adults; no effort to differentiate in housing/programming

Graduated incarceration

kids are housed in juvenile facility until 18, then transferred to adult prison

Segregated incarceration

housed in separate wing from adults until age of majority

Overcrowding

~35% of state schools are overcrowded, with ~20% over rated capacity

why problematic → increased stress, violence, victimization, spread of sickness, decreased security

Rhodes v. Chapman → overcrowding is not unconstitutional unless it interferes with sanitation, medical care, food, or increase in violence

measures to relieve → restrict incoming offenders, grant early release, build new facilities, divert into community programs, change revocation policies

Right of institutionalized delinquents

the right to treatment, but no absolute right to treatment

the right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment

The right to treatment

** if courts take away liberty, then kids are owed treatment to fix what courts are saying is wrong with them (White v. Reid, 1954) **

juveniles have a constitutional right to a minimally adequate level of programming designed to teach them the necessary principles to correct behavior

No absolute right to treatment

Santana v. Collazo → juveniles can be confined solely for protection of society; doing so does NOT violate rights

* Ralston v. Robinson → simply being a juvenile does not entitle them a complete right to treatment due to behavior not benefitting from it

Right to treatment should include

min. standards for youth assessment; medical and psychiatric care, adequate living conditions; proper lighting, bedding, clothes, daily showers; access to medical facilities

treatment is NOT (violates 8th amendment) → use of solitary confinement; unregulated use of antipsychotic drugs; withholding food, shelter, clothing; and use of corporal punishment

The right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment

punishment that is tortuous, degrading, inhuman, and grossly disproportionate to the crime in question or otherwise shocking to the moral sense

Morales v. Turman

Morales v. Turman

facts → attorney’s denied access, so they filed suit in federal district court; so, sent out questionnaires and found that many were not give counsel, mant were status offenses, and many abused

issue → did practices/policies of TYC violate 8th amendment? YES

court decision → TYC lost, guilty, decided to close multiple juvenile institutions; TYC appealed, was rules in favor; then appealed to Supreme Court who upheld original ruling

significance → pervasive violence existed in TYC

Morales v. Turman addressed:

1) right to treatment for juveniles

2) violations of 8th amendment (cruel/unusual punishment)

3) procedures which juveniles were admitted to TYC

States with punishment?

Aftercare

aka parole, is a component of reentry process

planned, supervised early release from institutionalization that is authorized by the correctional facility, second chance

conditional release

emphasis on rehabilitation and treatment than adult parole

Purpose of aftercare

1) method to extend punishment beyond incarceration

2) provide general protection of society

3) prevent future criminal/delinquent activity

4) provide treatment and supervision to reintegrate offenders back into the home and community

Probation v. Aftercare Similarities

1) community-based correction programs

2) offender has usually been convicted

3) privilege - not a constitutional right

4) offender is supervised

5) conditions imposed are usually similar

6) violation of conditions can result in loss of liberty

Probation v. Aftercare Differences

probation → offender HAS NOT been incarcerated; act of judicial department; supervised by probation officers

aftercare → offender HAS been incarcerated; act of executive department; supervised by parole officers

juvenile profiles are different, with different needs

Elements of aftercare

is meant to give high-risk youths the structure, supervision, and support needed

managed under → determinate or indeterminate structure

conditions → standard v. special

parole officers (youth service counselor) → supervision v. service broker

Determinate structure of aftercare

fixed length of time, typically the remainder of sentence

Indeterminate structure of aftercare

not set length of time; max term is based on rehabilitation goals

more common

Standard conditions of aftercare

all kids receive

ex. curfew, drug testing, home visits, fines

Special conditions of aftercare

individualized

ex. anger management, AA/NA, specific counseling, restitution

Parole officers in aftercare

similar to probation officers

supervision → monitoring; making sure they’re following conditions; assessments

service broker → bridge from court to community; making sure kid is receiving appropriate services

Barriers to reentry

lack of educational and housing options; limited skills and education; gang affiliations; substance use problems; mental health issues; family conditions; lack of community support/role models; institutional identity

Intensive Aftercare Program (IAP)

theory-drive continuum for serious offenders; supported by OJJDP

key component → effective case management; has to be a hub; need qualified, passionate, driven workers

five elements

Five elements of IAP

1) risk assessment

2) individualized case planning

3) mix of intensive supervision and services

4) graduated system of incentives

5) development of links with community resources

Special-needs populations in aftercare

have more difficulty adjusting to community supervision because they’ve already been locked up

dealing with an offense that needs more services

ex. sex offenders; drug addicts; mentally ill; gang-involved

Revocation in aftercare

Morrissey v. Brewer → due process rights given at parole revocation hearings; precedent of Gagnon

if conditions are violated, parole may be revoked

Blended sentencing

original purpose → give a child a more severe punishment than what can be given in juvenile court, but allows juvenile court to give them rehabilitative services past age of majority

types → juvenile exclusive/inclusive and criminal exclusive/inclusive

receive all due process rights as adult

Juvenile and Criminal EXCLUSIVE

OR

juvenile disposition OR an adult sentence

Juvenile and Criminal INCLUSIVE

AND

juvenile disposition AND adult sentence

consecutively/concurrently, and can be released early if deemed rehabilitated

Longer dispositions than adults for similar offenses?

YES, is constitutional

rationale → more time for rehabilitation rather than punishment (like adults)

Use of juvenile records as adult to increase adult sentences?

YES, only state-level

rationale → to remove the worse from society; protection of society as whole is more than confidentiality of kid; want complete picture as offender

used in 3 ways

3 ways to use past records for adult sentences

1) as criminal history points in sentencing guideline

2) as aggravating factors considered during sentencing

3) as “strikes” in jurisdictions with “3-strikes” legislation

Purpose of juvenile transfer to adult court

saves JJS resources, based on juvenile superpredator in the ‘90s

transfer criteria was expanded → greater flexibility; another option for chronic offenders; can purge JJS not benefiting from rehab.

Factor influencing juvenile transfer to adult court

offense-based or offense-history-based

other factors → protection of community; amount/quality of evidence; maturity of juvenile; victim input; etc.

Types of transfers waivers

choice depends on what state has and which one is easiest and most efficient

judicial → discretionary; mandatory; presumptive

prosecutorial → direct

legislative → statutory; reverse; once an adult, always an adult

Discretionary Waiver (judicial)

process: prosecutor files a waiver petition to JC judge → waiver hearing where prosecutor must prove → Judge makes final decision (has HIGH DISCRETION)

Kent v. US → transfer hearing is mandatory; due process rights (right to counsel, access records, hear statement of reasons in support of waiver)

Judge considers various factors

Factors judge considers in discretionary waiver

seriousness of offense; past offenses; type of crime (aggressive/premeditated/violent); personal v. property; sophistication/maturity; probability for treatment; probable cause

Mandatory Waiver (judicial)

LOW DISCRETION → judge only determines probable cause

automatically waived when certain age, offense, or other requirements are met according to state law

NO waiver petition or due process hearing required

Presumptive Waiver (judicial)

MEDIUM DISCRETION → age, offense, probable cause

juvenile must meet age/offense and prosecutor proves PC

juvenile must prove (clear and convincing burden of proof) they are suited to juvenile rehabilitation, failing to do so judge HAS TO waive case

Direct File (prosecutorial)

judge has NO authority, most common type of waiver because don’t have to do hearing (direct to adult court)

prosecutor has authority to choose where to file case; based on → offense, age, prior record (state laws)

types of offenders → less serious offense based on entire past record

DOES NOT need to be supported by hearing/PC

Statutory Exclusion (legislative)

written in statute what crimes are excluded from JJS

based on → 1) age (ex. anyone over 16); 2) offense, not based on age (does have minimum); 3) combination of age and offense (formula)

once juvenile is charged with an “excluded” crime, the case is automatically transferred

Reverse Waiver (legislative)

check and balances

adult judge “waives” back the case to juvenile court, prior to trial

Once and adult, always an adult (legislative)

focus on future offenses, not necessarily current ones

most states require to be found guilty of offense when waived to adult court

Impact of juvenile transfer

states have multiple forms → use whatever is quickest and easiest

removing serious offenders → less than ~40% waived for personal offenses; ~60% waives for property offenses, drug charges

longer sentences/harsher penalties → punishment gap (youth waived, compared to adults, thus less serious offense)

Life without parole for juveniles

Graham v. Florida

Miller v. Alabama

Montgomery v. Louisiana

Graham v. Florida (6-3 vote)

UNconstitutional to impose mandatory LWOP on juveniles who committed non-homicide crimes

can still be given LWOP, but now not only option

Miller v. Alabama (5-4 vote)

UNconstitutional to impose mandatory LWOP to juvenile for any (homicide) crimes

can still be given LWOP, but now not only option

Montgomery v. Louisiana (6-3)

Miller v. Alabama should be applied retroactively (any juvenile sentenced before 2010/12 can get resentencing hearing)