"Our Juvenile Court Has Become More like a Criminal Court": A Century of Reform at the Cook County (Chicago) Juvenile Court

2000 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 51
Author(s):  
L. Mara Dodge
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Cook County

A Parens Patriae Figure or Impartial Fact Finder: Policy Questions and Conflicts for the Juvenile Court Judge

2001 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 311-332 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph B. Sanborn
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Probation Officers ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Juvenile Courts ◽  
Defense Attorneys ◽  
Court Judge ◽  
Proper Role ◽  
Adult Court ◽  
Parens Patriae

For several decades, juvenile courts functioned like clinics. Judges assigned there were instructed to assume a variety of roles: jurist, psychologist, counselor, sociologist, and parent. The In re Gault decision in 1967 granted juvenile defendants several constitutional rights that transformed juvenile courts into criminal court-like operations. Juvenile court judges have not been told whether they should continue to be paternal or emulate their counterparts in adult court; research has not addressed this subject. In this study, 100 juvenile court workers (judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, probation officers) from three juvenile courts (urban, suburban, rural) were interviewed to ascertain how judges operate in juvenile court and what these workers perceive to be the proper role for the judge. The data show that most workers believe that the role of the juvenile court judge is and should be unique.

Sentencing Juveniles to Life in Prison

2011 ◽  
Vol 57 (6) ◽  
pp. 969-986 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon I. Singer
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Justice ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Constitutional Amendment ◽  
Life Without Parole ◽  
Initial Charge ◽  
Substantive Justice ◽  
Capital Crimes ◽  
The U.S

In Roper v. Simmons, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that the sentencing of juveniles to death violated the constitutional amendment against cruel and unusual punishment. Similarly, the Court most recently decided that life without parole for nonhomicide offenses is also unconstitutional ( Graham v. Florida, 2010). Part of the reason for the Court’s decisions is the lack of consensus as to the appropriateness of punishing juveniles as if they were adults. To examine the extent to which there is consensus as to the capital penalties for capital crimes, this article examines a population of young juveniles who were initially charged with murder, and then subsequently convicted in criminal court and sentenced to life in prison. As is the case with adults, not all juveniles were convicted in criminal court for their initial charge of murder. But unlike for adults, a proportion of eligible juveniles were adjudicated delinquent in juvenile court or received youthful offender in criminal court, resulting in a less severe sentence than a maximum of life in prison. The author suggests that this reduced set of sanctions, which a segment of juveniles receive, is substantive justice and the reproduction of juvenile justice. He found significant differences in the reproduction of juvenile justice by place and prior offense.

Deferring felony prosecution: a process evaluation of an innovative Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office program

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 261-273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Cossyleon ◽  
John Orwat ◽  
Christine George ◽  
Don Stemen ◽  
Whitney Key
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Cook County ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Felony Conviction ◽  
Content Type ◽  
First Time

Purpose The Cook County State Attorneys’ Deferred Prosecution Program (DPP) is a pre-trial diversionary program that accepts first-time, non-violent defendants charged with a felony crime. The purpose of this paper is to document the development, implementation, and program patterns of the DPP to better understand the program’s scope and reach in diverting defendants from traditional criminal prosecution. Design/methodology/approach The approach to evaluating Cook County’s DPP is primarily qualitative. Through interviews with program administrators and current and former participants, the authors document the process of creating and implementing such DPP that aims to avoid a felony conviction altogether. The authors provide program participant patterns to shed light on the program’s scope and reach in diverting defendants from traditional felony prosecution. Findings Using data from staff, administrators, and program participants, the authors found that the DPP was developed and implemented through supportive leadership who instilled a culture of collaboration and buy-in. Expanding the program could include increasing the capacity of DPP to include additional participants or having a DPP incorporated into each branch court, instead of the centralized system under which it currently operates. Increasing the capacity and scope of the program could both further decrease criminal court caseloads and most importantly avoid a higher number of stigmatizing felony convictions for first-time non-violent defendants. Practical implications DPPs are cost effective and can be easily implemented within existing systems. Collaboration and buy-in from all stakeholders are crucial to the program’s success. DPP offers opportunities for expansion. Increasing the capacity and scope of the program could both further decrease criminal court caseloads and most importantly avoid a higher number of stigmatizing felony convictions for first-time non-violent felony defendants. Originality/value The main goals of DPP were two-fold. The first was to minimize the level of resources allocated for non-violent offenders in the criminal justice system by diverting such defendants out of the criminal justice system early in the process and reducing the recidivism rates of program participants. The second aimed to provide an option for eligible defendants to avoid a felony conviction, thereby avoiding the collateral consequences associating with a felony conviction.

scholarly journals Psychiatric Disorders Among Detained Youths: A Comparison of Youths Processed in Juvenile Court and Adult Criminal Court

2008 ◽  
Vol 59 (9) ◽  
pp. 965-973 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason J. Washburn ◽  
Linda A. Teplin ◽  
Laurie S. Voss ◽  
Clarissa D. Simon ◽  
Karen M. Abram ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psychiatric Disorders ◽  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Adult Criminal Court

Juvenile (In)Justice and the Criminal Court Alternative

1993 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 403-424 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barry C. Feld
Keyword(s):  
Procedural Justice ◽  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
Juvenile Courts ◽  
Therapeutic Purpose ◽  
Status Offenders ◽  
Policy Responses ◽  
Serious Offenders ◽  
Formal Procedures

The juvenile court has been transformed from an informal, welfare agency into a scaled-down, second-class criminal court as a result of a series of reforms that divert status offenders, waive serious offenders to adult criminal courts, punish delinquent offenders, and provide more formal procedures. There are three plausible policy responses to juvenile courts that punish in the name of treatment and deny elementary procedural justice: (a) restructure juvenile courts to fit their original therapeutic purpose; (b) accept punishment as the purpose of delinquency proceedings, but coupled with criminal procedural safeguards; or (c) abolish juvenile courts and try young offenders in criminal courts with certain substantive and procedural modifications.

Juvenile Decertification

2005 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 278-301 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geoffrey R. Marczyk ◽  
Kirk Heilbrun ◽  
Tammy Lander ◽  
David Dematteo
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Level Of Service ◽  
Psychopathy Checklist ◽  
And Behavior ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Total Charges

This study considers the impact of data from the Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV), the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument (MAYSI), and the Youth Level of Service Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI) on the court’s decision whether to decertify an adolescent defendant back to juvenile court or keep the defendant in criminal court. There are significant positive relationships between certification status and age; number of violent charges; total charges; PCL:YV, YLS/CMI, and MAYSI total scores; and select subscales of the MAYSI and the YLS/CMI. Significant differences are found between those who remained in the adult criminal justice system and those who were decertified to the juvenile justice system for age, YLS/CMI total score, and the Prior and Current Offenses and Dispositions and Personality and Behavior subscales of the YLS/CMI. The combination of PCL:YV total score and select subscales from the MAYSI and YLS/CMI provided the most accurate model for predicting certification status.

Violent Youth in Adult Court: Process and Punishment

1986 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cary Rudman ◽  
Eliot Hartstone ◽  
Jeffrey Fagan ◽  
Melinda Moore
Keyword(s):  
Urban Areas ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Plea Bargaining ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
High Rate ◽  
Time Averaging ◽  
Case Processing ◽  
Violent Youth ◽  
Alternatives To Incarceration

Despite the widespread transfer of violent youth from juvenile to criminal court, there is little empirical knowledge of the transfer process, rate of transfer, or of case outcomes, sentences, and placements of transferred juveniles. This study examines these issues for 177 violent youths considered for 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 bargaining for charges rarely occurred. Youth considered for transfer but retained by the juvenile court received maximum commitments 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.

scholarly journals Due Process & the Theater of Racial Degradation: The Evolving Notion of Pretrial Punishment in the Criminal Courts

Daedalus ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 151 (1) ◽  
pp. 135-152
Author(s):  
Nicole Gonzalez Van Cleve
Keyword(s):  
Due Process ◽  
Mass Incarceration ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Cook County ◽  
Cultural Norms ◽  
Court System ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
Court Records ◽  
Legal Professionals

Abstract Most theorists assume that the criminal courts are neutral arbiters of justice, protected by the Constitution, the rule of law, and court records. This essay challenges those assumptions and examines the courts as a place of punitive excess and the normalization of racial abuse and punishment. The essay explains the historic origins of these trends and examines how the categories of “hardened” and “marginal” defendants began to assume racialized meanings with the emergence of mass incarceration. This transformed the criminal courts into a type of public theater for racial degradation. These public performances or “racial degradation ceremonies” occur within the discretionary practices and cultural norms of mostly White courtroom professionals as they efficiently manage the disposition of cases in the everyday practice of law. I link these historical findings to a recent study of the largest unified criminal court system in the United States–Cook County, Chicago–and discuss court watching programs as an intervention for accountability and oversight of our courts and its legal professionals.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document