TY - JOUR
T1 - Violent Youth in Adult Court
T2 - Process and Punishment
AU - Rudman, Cary
AU - Hartstone, Eliot
AU - Fagan, Jeffrey
AU - Moore, Melinda
PY - 1986/1
Y1 - 1986/1
N2 - Despite the widespread transfer of violent youth from juvenile to criminal court, there is little empirical knowledge of the transfer process, rate oftransfer, or of case outcomes, sentences, and placements of transferred juveniles. This study examines these issues for 177 violent youths consideredfor transfer in four urban areas, comparing court outcomes for youths transferred to criminal court with those for youths retained in juvenile court. Varying procedures, criteria, and court rules result in case processing time averaging 2.5 times greater for transferred youth. Most spend this time in detention. Violent youth considered for transfer are adjudicated at a high rate for the offenses as charged in both juvenile and criminal court. Plea bargainingfor charges rarely occurred. Youth considered for transfer but retained by the juvenile court received maximumcommitments and placements within the jurisdictional limits of the juvenile justice system. Transferred youth convicted in criminal court received even more severe sanctions both in nature and length. Alternatives to incarceration were rarely used by either the juvenile or criminal court.
AB - Despite the widespread transfer of violent youth from juvenile to criminal court, there is little empirical knowledge of the transfer process, rate oftransfer, or of case outcomes, sentences, and placements of transferred juveniles. This study examines these issues for 177 violent youths consideredfor transfer in four urban areas, comparing court outcomes for youths transferred to criminal court with those for youths retained in juvenile court. Varying procedures, criteria, and court rules result in case processing time averaging 2.5 times greater for transferred youth. Most spend this time in detention. Violent youth considered for transfer are adjudicated at a high rate for the offenses as charged in both juvenile and criminal court. Plea bargainingfor charges rarely occurred. Youth considered for transfer but retained by the juvenile court received maximumcommitments and placements within the jurisdictional limits of the juvenile justice system. Transferred youth convicted in criminal court received even more severe sanctions both in nature and length. Alternatives to incarceration were rarely used by either the juvenile or criminal court.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84977052478&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84977052478&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/0011128786032001005
DO - 10.1177/0011128786032001005
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84977052478
SN - 0011-1287
VL - 32
SP - 75
EP - 96
JO - Crime and Delinquency
JF - Crime and Delinquency
IS - 1
ER -