Juvenile Transfer in the United States

Bishop, Donna M.

doi:10.1007/978-0-387-89295-5_6

Cited by 11 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In this volatile political context, juvenile waivers to adult court were expanded dramatically and additional transfer procedures were enacted (Fagan and Zimring, 2000; Redding, 2003). Although no exact national figures are available on the numbers of juveniles tried in adult courts, Bishop (2009: 90) estimated that as a result of these changes, “approximately 200,000 offenders under 18 are tried in American criminal courts annually,” and Austin, Johnson, and Gregoriou (2000) surmised that the number of juveniles in adult prisons rose 218 percent between 1983 and 1998.…”

Section: Juvenile Transfer and Adult Court Punishmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transferred Juveniles in the Era of Sentencing Guidelines: Examining Judicial Departures for Juvenile Offenders in Adult Criminal Court*

Johnson

Kurlychek²

2012

Criminology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study contributes to contemporary research on the punishment of juvenile offenders in adult court by analyzing the use of guidelines departures for transferred juveniles in two states, one with presumptive sentencing guidelines (Pennsylvania) and one with voluntary guidelines (Maryland). Propensity score matching is first used to create more comparable samples of juvenile and young adult offenders, and then Tobit regressions are employed to estimate the effect of juvenile status on the likelihood and length of departures. Our findings indicate that juvenile status significantly affects the use of upward departures in Pennsylvania, and the use of both downward and upward departures in Maryland. Judicial reasons for departure are examined to provide additional insight into the complex dynamics surrounding exceptional sentences for juvenile offenders sentenced in adult court.

show abstract

Section: Juvenile Transfer and Adult Court Punishmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transferred Juveniles in the Era of Sentencing Guidelines: Examining Judicial Departures for Juvenile Offenders in Adult Criminal Court*

Johnson

Kurlychek²

2012

Criminology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Currently, no research has experimentally explored the effects of SES on perceptions of juvenile offenders tried in adult court. Yet, more and more juveniles are being transferred to adult court (Bishop, 2010) and economically disadvantaged youth are significantly more likely to be transferred to adult court than economically advantaged youth (Tapia, 2010). Thus, it is particularly important to examine the potential for bias against economically disadvantaged juvenile offenders in adult criminal court where the stakes are the highest: Youth risk the possibility of much more severe sentences in adult court than in juvenile court.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Economically disadvantaged juvenile offenders tried in adult court are perceived as less able to understand their actions, but more guilty

Farnum

Stevenson

2013

Psychology, Crime & Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigated the influence of a juvenile defendant's socioeconomic status (SES) on mock jurors' perceptions of a juvenile tried in adult court. As predicted, participants convicted the low SES juvenile defendant of felony murder significantly more than the middle or high SES juvenile defendant. Yet, participants also rated the low SES juvenile as less mature than the middle or high SES juvenile Á a belief that past research shows predicts leniency in verdicts (i.e., not guilty judgments). Finally, stereotypes about the criminality of low SES juvenile defendants, not a lack of perceived similarity, partially mediated the effect of SES on guilt.

show abstract

“…National Research Council of the National Academies) ataskaitoje, kurioje pasisakoma už klasikinę (auklėjamojo pobūdžio arba atsižvelgiančią į asmens raidą) jaunimo baudžiamąją atsakomybę ir jaunimo baudžiamąją procesinę teiseną 16 , galinčią išnykti dėl plečiamų galimybių perkelti ją į suaugusiesiems skirtus teismus (apibendrintai žr. : Stump 2003;Bishop 2009). Svarbu tai, kad nepilnamečiai bet kuriuo atveju, o pagal galimybes -ir jauni suaugusieji iki maždaug 24 metų, būtų teisiami jaunimo teismuose (Bishop 2009, p. 101;Loeber et al 2012, p. 368 ir toliau, p. 394 ir toliau).…”

Section: Implikacijos Jaunimo Baudžiamajai Atsakomybeiunclassified

Neuroscience findings on brain maturation – arguments for the exclusive criminal liability of young people

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Taking together all the evidence on the aetiology, development and differential processes of delinquent behaviour from childhood to adulthood, we dispose of important new evidence from the neurosciences, which, compared to traditional criminological, developmental, psychological and sociological evidence, increases our capacity to explain the age-crime curve. In particular, the right-hand side of the curve, indicating desistance from crime in young adulthood between the ages of 18 and 25, can be based on new insights from neuroscientific research on brain maturation and the development of self-control mechanisms. As a result, new questions about judicial reactions and interventions must be raised. If an individual’s brain is fully matured only in the mid-twenties, general criminal law is possibly inappropriate, and a specific youth or young-adult criminal law reflecting the transitional processes and the diminished culpability of young-adult offenders should rather be applied. In many European jurisdictions, the scope of youth justice has been extended upwards to 18–20 year-old adults, in the Netherlands even up to 22 years of age, a political decision affecting criminality and based on new neuroscientific evidence.

show abstract

Juvenile Transfer in the United States

Cited by 11 publications

References 20 publications

Transferred Juveniles in the Era of Sentencing Guidelines: Examining Judicial Departures for Juvenile Offenders in Adult Criminal Court*

Transferred Juveniles in the Era of Sentencing Guidelines: Examining Judicial Departures for Juvenile Offenders in Adult Criminal Court*

Economically disadvantaged juvenile offenders tried in adult court are perceived as less able to understand their actions, but more guilty

Neuroscience findings on brain maturation – arguments for the exclusive criminal liability of young people

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About