Disposition Decisions by Juvenile Court Probation Officers and Judges: A Multivariate Analysis

Sieverdes, Christopher M.; Shoemaker, Donald J.; Cunningham, Orville R.

doi:10.1177/073401687900400212

Cited by 7 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to previous literature, these two other factors significantly affect to the calculation of formal disposition. Potter and Kakar (2002) and Sieverdes et al (1979) found that judges and prosecutors have a tendency to focus more on legal factors associated with the referral, while they are uninfluenced by extra-legal factors such as demographics, courtroom presence, or dress. By contrast, intake caseworkers consider a wide range of contributing factors (Potter & Kakar, 2002) and probation officers’ decisions were influenced by race and age, along with offense severity and length of delinquent career (Sieverdes et al, 1979).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In an experiment, researchers found that judges, like prosecutors, focused on legal factors associated with the referral. For judges, the most influential factors were offense severity, number of prior offenses, and number of delinquent years (Sieverdes et al, 1979). Additionally, qualitative observation lends support to this perspective, with judges uninfluenced by demographics, courtroom presence, or dress (Mann, 1980).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Intake caseworkers reported a wider range of contributing factors, with severity and prior record reported as the most important factors in diversion decision making (Potter & Kakar, 2002). Although intake caseworkers reported legal characteristics as the most prevalent factors associated with diversion, Sieverdes, Shoemaker, and Cunningham (1979) found discrepancies in this position. According to their research, probation officers’ decisions were influenced by race and age, along with offense severity and length of delinquent career.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Petitions for juvenile court action increased the most for drug offense cases, followed by public order and person offense cases from 1985 to 2009 (Puzzanchera et al, 2012). This increased reliance on formal disposition suggests legal factors have been instrumental in the decision to involve youth in the formal court process, yet scholars have suggested that extra-legal factors also influence formal case disposition (for example, see Leiber & Peck, 2012; Ray & Alarid, 2004; Sieverdes, Shoemaker, & Cunningham, 1979). This represents conflicting perspectives of the juvenile justice system and, thus, is an opportunity to further explore the influence of legal and extra-legal determinants of formal case disposition.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Pathways Through the Juvenile Justice System

Caudill

Morris

Sayed

et al. 2013

Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous scholarship on juvenile case dispositions has suggested a complex relationship between legal and extra-legal factors. Previous studies, however, have suffered from methodological limitations of cross-sectional data that potentially overstated the salience of extra-legal factors. This study addressed that limitation using longitudinal case-management system data from a large southern state. The findings suggested a distinction between the first referral and subsequent referrals. Extra-legal factors, such as age, gender, and race contributed to formal case disposition in the first referral, but waned in referrals two through six. Legal factors significantly and robustly predicted formal case disposition in the first and subsequent referrals. Felony offense significantly increased the likelihood of a formal disposition across all referrals and previous case disposition significantly increased the likelihood of formal disposition in subsequent referrals. Concluding remarks focus on implications and future research.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Pathways Through the Juvenile Justice System

Caudill

Morris

Sayed

et al. 2013

Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, research on the role of extralegal factors in processing decisions is less clear-cut than research on legal factors (Caudill et al, 2013). Furthermore, studies that have tried to compare the impact of legal and extralegal factors have obtained mixed results (Applegate et al, 2000;Caudill et al, 2013;Sieverdes et al, 1979;Smith & Rosier, 2015). This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.…”

Section: Extralegal Factors In Processing Decisionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

And justice for all: Determinants and effects of probation officers’ processing decisions regarding first-time juvenile offenders.

Fine

Donley

Cavanagh

et al. 2017

Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When a youth is accused of committing a crime, juvenile justice system arbiters, such as probation officers, interview both the youth and the youth's guardian to gather information before deciding to either process the youth formally or informally. Factors about a youth that are unrelated to the criminal charge may contribute to arbiters' processing decisions. Such extralegal factors include demographic characteristics and characteristics of the youth's context (e.g., home environment, peer delinquency). Little is known about how extralegal factors other than age and race affect youth processing. The present study draws on data from probation officer assessment interviews with 359 male, first-time, low-level juvenile offenders, as well as longitudinal self-report and official records of a youth's reoffending after his first arrest, to determine how extralegal factors affect probation processing decisions, and whether processing is associated with youth reoffending and rearrest. The results indicate that even after taking into account legal factors and demographic characteristics, youth are more likely to be processed formally if they refuse to comment on the charge, if their probation officers believe their guardians to be relatively more disapproving of their friends, and if their probation officers perceive their home environments to be more problematic. Although youth who are processed formally self-report reoffending at the same rate as youth who are processed informally, youth who are processed formally are more likely to be rearrested in the subsequent 6 months. Implications for how processing decisions may promote sustained involvement in the juvenile justice system are discussed.

show abstract