No abstract

Drawing on Feld’s (1991) “justice by geography” thesis, we examined whether juvenile court outcomes and case-level influences on those outcomes varied across urban and rural courts. Using a sample of 60,068 juvenile referrals across 66 counties in one state, we estimated direct effects of urbanism on detention, petition, adjudication, and judicial placement, as well as cross-level interactions between urbanism and several case-level factors for each outcome. We found limited support for the hypotheses. First, findings indicated that odds of detention were significantly greater in more urban courts, but indicated no differences in other outcomes. Second, findings also indicated greater extralegal differences (race, sex, and age) in more urban courts—contrary to hypotheses. Taken together, findings highlight the localized yet complex nature of juvenile justice processing and emphasize the need for additional multilevel research assessing the role of other contextual factors as potential sources of variation across macrosocial units.

No abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the predictive strength of a previously validated risk score across seven different operationalizations of juvenile recidivism. Drawing on data from the Florida portion of the Measuring Juvenile Reoffending Study, the study examines two research questions. First, do recidivism risk scores significantly predict a variety of measures of juvenile recidivism? And second, do risk scores exert statistically different effects on different measures of juvenile recidivism? The findings revealed that risk score significantly predicted all seven measures of juvenile recidivism. In addition, the only evidence of statistically different associations across measures of recidivism came from marker event (i.e., types of system contact) comparisons. Total risk score was a significantly stronger predictor of referral/arrest than of adjudication/conviction and a stronger predictor of adjudication/conviction than of commitment/incarceration. Altogether, our results highlight the importance of validating risk assessment scores on multiple different operationalizations of juvenile recidivism.

Objectives We examine the relationship between political and religious context and juvenile court dispositions, including whether case-level indicators of focal concerns are moderated by community politics and religion. Methods Using a sample of 55,328 juvenile defendants across 175 counties in three states, we first employ multilevel modeling to estimate the direct effects of political and religious context on odds of placement. Second, we examine cross-level interactions between political and religious context, on the one hand, and major case-level predictors of placement, on the other. Results We found mixed support for the hypotheses. While neither political nor religious context were directly associated with odds of placement, religious context moderated several case-level effects. Specifically, findings indicated that violent offenders were punished more harshly in more religious and more religiously homogeneous counties, defendants with a prior record were punished less harshly in more religious and more religiously homogenous counties, Hispanic defendants were punished less harshly in more evangelical counties, and male defendants were punished less harshly in more religiously homogeneous counties. Conclusion Juvenile punishment varies across different courts and systems, yet major contextual hypotheses for this variation (e.g., minority threat) have received limited empirical support. Our findings indicate that other aspects of community context, most notably religiosity, may moderate the relationship between case-level factors and juvenile court punishment.