Race, Legal Representation, and Juvenile Justice: Issues and Concerns

Guevara, Lori; Spohn, Cassia; Herz, Denise C.

doi:10.1177/0011128704264514

Cited by 37 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Juveniles with prior adjudications and prior arrests were more likely to have their cases petitioned. Similar to prior research (e.g., Frazier & Bishop, 1985;Guevara et al, 2004;Wordes et al, 1994), being detained after arrest resulted in an increased likelihood of petition.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 76%

A Multilevel Analysis of Race on the Decision to Petition a Case in the Juvenile Court

Freiburger

Jordan

2011

Race and Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a large body of research examining the impact of race on juvenile court outcomes. Fewer studies have specifically examined the decision by prosecutors to formally petition a case to the juvenile court. A much smaller body of literature statistically controls for structural level variables (e.g., population density and racial composition), while examining the impact of race. Using the symbolic threat hypothesis, the current study examines the effect of race on the decision to petition a case to the juvenile court among youths in West Virginia's juvenile court, while controlling for both individual and structural factors. The results show that race at the individual level did not have a significant impact on odds of petition; although, percentage in poverty significantly interacted with race to increase the odds of Black youths being petitioned in areas of increased poverty. Implications of the results are further discussed.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 76%

A Multilevel Analysis of Race on the Decision to Petition a Case in the Juvenile Court

Freiburger

Jordan

2011

Race and Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Even the landmark case extending criminal due process into juvenile cases, In re Gault (1967), identified only certain rights, requiring judges only to advise on the right to counsel in proceedings that might result in incarceration. Appointment of counsel is not required, and therefore states and localities demonstrate considerable variation in appointing lawyers to juvenile offenders (Guevara et al, 2004;US General Accounting Office, 1995).…”

Section: Non-punishment By Venuementioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping the shadow carceral state: Toward an institutionally capacious approach to punishment

Beckett

Murakawa

2012

Theoretical Criminology

258

215

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The expansion of the US carceral state has been accompanied by the emergence of what we call the 'shadow carceral state'. Operating beyond the confines of criminal law and justice institutions, the shadow carceral state expands penal power through institutional annexation and legal hybridity, including: (1) increased civil and administrative pathways to incarceration; (2) the creation of civil 'alternatives' to invalidated criminal statutes; and (3) the incorporation of criminal law into administrative legal processes in ways that enhance state carceral power. Although legal doctrine deems civil and administration sanctions to be 'not-punishment', we call for a broad understanding of penal power and the carceral state.

show abstract

“…In some research, the influence of extralegal factors dissolves after legal factors are controlled (Belknap, 2001;Carter, 1979;Clarke & Koch, 1980;Dannefer & Schutt, 1982;Fenwick, 1982;Kempf-Leonard & Sontheimer, 1995;Phillips & Dinitz, 1982;Teilmann & Landry, 1981). However, other research has revealed that extralegal factors continue to influence juvenile court outcomes even when legal factors are included (Bishop, 2005;Bishop & Frazier, 1996;Bray, Sample, & Kempf-Leonard, 2005;Conley, 1994;Frazier & Bishop, 1995;Guevara, Herz, & Spohn, 2006;Guevara, Spohn, & Herz, 2004;Leiber, 1994;Thornberry & Christensen, 1984;Wordes & Bynum, 1995;Wordes et al, 1994). Pope and Feyerherm's (1990) review of 46 studies on juvenile court outcomes emphasized the need to take extralegal factors such as race into consideration.…”

Section: Research On Racial Disparities In Juvenile Court Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Racial Disparities in Juvenile Court Outcomes: A Test of the Liberation Hypothesis

Guevara

Boyd

Taylor

et al. 2011

Journal of Ethnicity in Criminal Justice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After decades of research, the exact impact of race on juvenile court outcomes is still a complex matter. The focus of this study is to address the liberation hypothesis as a potential explanation for racial disparities in juvenile court outcomes. This perspective has not previously been applied to juvenile court outcomes. Results from the analyses demonstrate the differential effect of legal and extralegal factors on serious and less serious cases. The results of this study indicate that legal factors such as crime seriousness or prior criminal record and extralegal factors such as race have a varying influence on juvenile court outcomes, and this influence varies depending on the outcome examined and the race of the youth.

show abstract

Race, Legal Representation, and Juvenile Justice: Issues and Concerns

Cited by 37 publications

References 56 publications

A Multilevel Analysis of Race on the Decision to Petition a Case in the Juvenile Court

A Multilevel Analysis of Race on the Decision to Petition a Case in the Juvenile Court

Mapping the shadow carceral state: Toward an institutionally capacious approach to punishment

Racial Disparities in Juvenile Court Outcomes: A Test of the Liberation Hypothesis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About