Delays in Juvenile Justice: Findings from a National Survey

Butts, Jeffrey A.; Halemba, Gregory J.

doi:10.1111/j.1755-6988.1994.tb00811.x

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The 282 counties that formed the study's final sample encompassed 45 states plus the District of Columbia and consisted of areas that collectively are home to approximately two thirds of the U.S. population. The final sample included 534 juvenile justice professionals, and the response rate was 52%, which approximates that of other national surveys of practitioners (see, e.g., Butts & Halemba, 1994). 2 As we emphasize in the Conclusion, the study sample is designed to capture the views of senior court practitioners in the largest counties in the country; as such, it may not reflect the perspectives of less senior practitioners or personnel from rural areas.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Instead, they focus on offender outcomes or state-level variations along a few delimited dimensions, such as how the juvenile justice process is structured in each state (Dedel, 1998). Certainly, many studies focus on practitioner views about particular practices in particular jurisdictions (e.g., Bishop et al, 1989;Butts & Halemba, 1994;Moak & Wallace, 2000;Sanborn, 1993), but few examine a wide range of policies across multiple jurisdictions and states.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One solution, common in evaluation research efforts that face similar constraints, is to draw on the insights and perspectives of knowledgeable "insiders" (Rossi, Lipsey, & Freeman, 2004). That approach has been taken in a number of studies of juvenile justice policies (e.g., Bishop, Frazier, & Henretta, 1989;Butts & Halemba, 1994;Kupchik, 2006;Mears, 2000;Sanborn, 1993). The risk, of course, is that insiders may be wrong in their assessments; thus, caution must be taken in interpreting their views.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Practitioner Views of Priorities, Policies, and Practices in Juvenile Justice

Mears

Shollenberger

Willison

et al. 2008

Crime & Delinquency

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dramatic changes in juvenile justice have occurred in recent decades. One result has been the emergence of new policies and practices, many of which remain largely unexamined. One avenue for gaining insight into whether such policies and practices are needed or effective, as well as into how the juvenile justice system might be improved, is to tap into the perceptions of people who work within this system. Drawing on a national survey of juvenile court practitioners, the authors investigate key questions about the effectiveness of juvenile justice and discuss the implications of the study's findings for research, policy, and practice.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Practitioner Views of Priorities, Policies, and Practices in Juvenile Justice

Mears

Shollenberger

Willison

et al. 2008

Crime & Delinquency

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some studies have focused on juvenile justice policies but have not assessed practitioners' responses to these policies. For example, Butts and Halemba (1994) surveyed juvenile court professionals (judges, administrators or docket managers, prosecutors, and defense counsel) in 127 counties to determine the extent to which juvenile court cases were delayed due to organizational problems, and how those delays affected the handling of juvenile cases. The authors found that delinquency cases may be delayed due to a multitude of factors, such as heavy workloads, limited resources, staff attitudes, and administrative organization.…”

Section: Research Gaps In Assessing Juvenile Justice Policies and Pramentioning

confidence: 99%

Past, Present, and Future of Juvenile Justice: Assessing the Policy Options (APO)

Buck-Willison¹,

Mears²,

Shollenberger³

et al. 2009

PsycEXTRA Dataset

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders. research for safer communities We wish to thank Katherine Browning, Senior Social Science Analyst, at the National Institute of Justice, for her support and guidance throughout the study, and we gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Janet Chiancone, Research Coordinator, in the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention in advancing the study's objectives, as well as the continuous support, feedback, and guidance of researchers and staff within the National Institute of Justice and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Several current and former employees of the Urban Institute played critical roles in the APO project. Dr. Christy Visher, Principal Research Associate, provided invaluable guidance throughout the project and important criticisms of the survey instrument as it was being developed. Shannon Courtney constructed the web-interface for the online survey and assisted in managing key aspects of online data collection. David D'Oro provided critical technology support, and Benjamin Clark, Elizabeth Davies, and Sara Debus played other key roles. Many scholars also were consulted for the study. The project is especially indebted to the practitioners, researchers, and advocates who generously gave of their time and shared their insights regarding the policies and practices governing juvenile justice-involved youth. Although we appreciate the contribution of those noted above, and any others inadvertently omitted, the authors acknowledge their responsibility for any errors herein.

show abstract

“…Few researchers have explored the causes and consequences of delayed delinquency cases, and virtually no studies exist on the relative effectiveness of delay-reduction techniques in the juvenile justice system. Only a handful of studies on juvenile court delay have been published (Mahoney, 1985;Feld, 1993;Butts and Halemba, 1994;Butts, 1996). These studies suggest that the timing of delinquency case processing will be an increasingly important issue for juvenile courts as they are asked to manage the growing tension between their quasi-civil orientation and the societal expectation that they hold juvenile offenders accountable by imposing effective sanctions.…”

Section: Reductions In Delinquency Case Processing Timementioning

confidence: 99%

Enhancing Prosecutors' Ability To Combat and Prevent Juvenile Crime in Their Jurisdictions

Gramckow¹,

Tompkins²

1999

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This Bulletin is part of OJJDP's Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grants (JAIBG) Best Practices Series. The basic premise underlying the JAIBG program, initially funded in fiscal year 1998, is that young people who violate the law need to be held accountable for their offenses if society is to improve the quality of life in the Nation's communities. Holding a juvenile offender "accountable" in the juvenile justice system means that once the juvenile is determined to have committed law-violating behavior, by admission or adjudication, he or she is held responsible for the act through consequences or sanctions, imposed pursuant to law, that are proportionate to the offense. Consequences or sanctions that are applied swiftly, surely, and consistently, and are graduated to provide appropriate and effective responses to varying levels of offense seriousness and offender chronicity, work best in preventing, controlling, and reducing further law violations. To combat and prevent juvenile crime, prosecutors require information that offers a range of responses. This Bulletin and its JAIBG companion, Enabling Prosecutors To Address Drug, Gang, and Youth Violence, provide some of that crucial information.

show abstract

Delays in Juvenile Justice: Findings from a National Survey

Cited by 6 publications

References 4 publications

Practitioner Views of Priorities, Policies, and Practices in Juvenile Justice

Practitioner Views of Priorities, Policies, and Practices in Juvenile Justice

Past, Present, and Future of Juvenile Justice: Assessing the Policy Options (APO)

Enhancing Prosecutors' Ability To Combat and Prevent Juvenile Crime in Their Jurisdictions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About