Juvei Final CJA3395-01
Popular in Delinquency and the Juvenile Justice System
verified elite notetaker
Popular in Criminal Justice
This 0 page Study Guide was uploaded by Peter Wright on Friday December 4, 2015. The Study Guide belongs to CJA3395-01 at Mansfield University of Pennsylvania taught by Dr. Justin Crowl in Summer 2015. Since its upload, it has received 29 views. For similar materials see Delinquency and the Juvenile Justice System in Criminal Justice at Mansfield University of Pennsylvania.
Reviews for Juvei Final
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 12/04/15
Adjudicatory process quotWe assess risk because it is contingent on how we classify on how we classify a juvenHequot Considered Factors Age and time of offence Prior record Family relationships Alcohol and drug dependence Type of crime committed Function of classi cation Segregate prisoner types Identify need and placeprovide effective services Determining custody level Offender management Policy decision making and administrative planning Enable parole boards to make better decisions more juveniles are usually released early Determines what supervision is needed Determining quali cation for community connections Determine nature of punishment it ought to be tailored to the individual Determine if selective incapacitation is desirable Aggravating circumstances A factor of the crime committed that works against the defendant corpse desecration extreme violence etc Mitigating circumstances A factor of the casecrime that works in favor of the defendant self defense provoked accidental Predisposition reports 0 Juvenile equivalent of a PSI a background investigation of help a judge make a decision complied by a probation of cer for both adult and juvenile cases 0 judges rely on this to make charging decisions 0 Use by parole boards for early release decision making quotWith 315 million people in the USA 5 of the world39s population and 7 billion worldwide we still have 25 of the world39s population incarcerated behind our bars not even including community based sanctionsquot quotVlS s can be attached to predisposition reports victim impact statementquot Nominal sanctions quotLenient sanctions imposed on those delinquentcriminal who present the least risk of violence and who show willingness to accept help quot Juvenile diversion An intervention strategy that redirects juveniles away from the jjS while still holding them accountable for their actions Teen courts Teens replace all court room of cials Informal with minor cases Focus on therapeutic jurisprudence Focus on rehabilitation and to teach empathy Restoration attempts to make the victim and offender whole again corresponds with restorative justice This is because it makes every effort to bring together the victim and the offender quotThis also gives the offender an opportunity to appreciate the wrongness of their ac onsquot quotTeen courts have increased big time over 20 years only 100 nationwide in 1997 in early 20005 that number went up to over 1000 Today there are 2000quot quotSeattle and Denver were the rst states to use teen courtsquot quotWe think these courts are effective not fully studied but it seems like recidivism is lower when teen courts are utilizedquot ADR alterative dispute resolutions Designed to resolve address and mediate School problems Third party neutrals mediator Allow person to resolve con ict in a constructive way Save a lot of time and money and reputations quotStandard probation is not very effective recidivism is 4075quot Probation A suspended sentence a conditional criminal sanction and alternative to incarceration in a community based sanction It is the most used sanction and CAN be revoked I can be unconditional meaning the parolee does not have to adhere to any of the bellow listed Probation conditions Parole Early release contingent on good behaviora continuation of punishment Shock Probation Lock up an individual before quickly removing them and forcing them into probation Standard probation a conditional or unconditional disposition for a speci c period following adjudication Probation conditions 0 Submit to random piss tests 0 Maintain employment 0 Keep away from felons No re arms or drugs Frequent contact with P0 Cannot leave court ordered area Pay fees Court ordered treatment programs are sometimes given No new crimes Electronic monitoring Outcomes of revocation hearings Incarceration Lengthened time o Added conditions quotProbation should always be indeterminate a range of time exible concentrated on rehab when sentencingquot quotProbation work should be done by full time well trained of cersquot quotIndeterminate vs Determinant sentencing Indeterminate is exible and has a max and a minimum time period established Determinant is rigid and more severequot ex 510 years of prison with parole being a possibility is Intermediate 20 years with no parole is Determinant Intermediate punishments Community based sanctions More intensive monitoring ofjuveniles behavior than regular probation Between standard probation and incarceration more serious than the former but less serious than the latter Goals of indeterminate sanctions Reintegration Minimizing labeling Improve educational and vocational skills Lower recidivism JISP program Strengths and weaknesses Strengths less expensive than incarceration Lowers rates of recidivism than standard probation Reduces prison overcrowding Weaknesses No standardized de nition of intensive supervised probation Electronic monitoring 0 Used in home con nement 24 hours a day 0 Use to keep knowledge of inmates whereabouts electronic ankle bracelet People in house arrestE monitored have a low likelihood of recidivating and committed less serious crimes 0 This is being used more and more for violent juvenile offenders Criticisms of this 0 Initially expensive Requires training to use 0 Some say it is a violation of the 4th amendment Home con nement goals Continued punishment at home Enable offenders to perform jobs Reduce overcrowding and maximizes public safety Reduces supervision costs Remotes rehab and reintegration Goals of juvenile correction Deterence discouraging offenders away from crime Rehabilitation a planned correctional intervention and Reintegration Prevention a pro active approach Punishment and Retribution Revenge lex taionis eye for an eye Isolation and control Alternatives to this 0 Secure Counter part to adult incarceration Nonsecure Free movement in community Boot camps 1983 in GA and OK rst establishment Targets young non violent rst time offenders Very appealing for C practitioners Short term military like correctional program Research shows that it is effective but only if it is designed properly Rational behind boot camps Youthful people are responses and bene ts from military atmosphere 0 Cost less than traditional CJ sanctions Exposed to education vocational training drug treatment counseling etc Goals of boot camp Provide rehabilitation and reintegration Provide discipline Promote deterrence Alleviate overcrowded facilities Concerns with boot camps Abuse of power Effectiveness in question Psychological effects Age ofjuveniles Juveniles parole conditional supervised release to those who have served a portion of their original sentence It is NOT an alternative to incarceration it is a continuation of punishment Purposes Reward good behavior Alleviate overcrowding Permit reintegration O Deter further delinquency through supervision 5 million on probationparole over half of those are behind bars A parolee is always entitled to an parole revocation hearing Parole hearings Offender present their story Board then makes recommendation Victims may testify 30 days to appeal Privatization of juvenile corrections Privately owned correctional facilities Created in 1983 because the government could no longer fund to detain the vast amount of prisoners the US had CCA is the largest of these companies having over 60 prisonsjails Relieves overcrowding and tight budgets Utilizes drug rehab vocational training and job provision These companies operate in over half of US states and makes 3 billion a year They are often corrupt though they are pro t driven and have lock up quotas Kids for Cash Scandal Affect 3k kids over a period of multiple years luzerne county 2008 Corrupt judges Mark Clavarella and Michal Conahan were accepting kickbacks in return for sending children off to a privatized juvenile detention facility They made about 3 million Both judges were found guilty and sentenced to prison 20 years for Clavarella in an Illinois prison while Conahan was sentenced to 17 years in PA The children39s cases were dismissed and their records were expunged
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'