Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 1:59 am
Time: 1:59 am
Results for juvenile defendants
4 results foundAuthor: Jacobson, Jessica Title: Vulnerable Defendants in the Criminal Courts: A Review of Provision for Adults and Children Summary: This report examines the treatment of vulnerable defendants within the criminal courts of England and Wales. It is presented in two parts: Part I is concerned with vulnerable adult defendants, particularly those with learning disabilites; Part II is about child defendants -- that is, defendants aged between 10 and 17. The report assesses existing provision for these two groups of vulnerable defendants, and identifies gaps in provision. In addition, the report presents a number of far reaching recommendations. Details: London: Prison Reform Trust, 2009. 68p. Source: Year: 2009 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 117812 Keywords: CourtsDefendantsJuvenile DefendantsLearning Disabilities |
Author: Depew, Briggs Title: Judges, Juveniles and In-Group Bias Summary: We investigate the existence of in-group bias (preferential treatment of one's own group) in court decisions. Using the universe of juvenile court cases in a U.S. state between 1996 and 2012 and exploiting random assignment of juvenile defendants to judges, we find evidence for negative racial in-group bias in judicial decisions. All else the same, black (white) juveniles who are randomly assigned to black (white) judges are more likely to get incarcerated (as opposed to being placed on probation), and they receive longer sentences. Although observed in experimental settings, this is the first empirical evidence of negative in-group bias, based on a randomization design outside of the lab. Explanations for this finding are provided. Details: Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2016. 38p. Source: Internet Resource: NBER Working Paper 22003: Accessed February 24, 2016 at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w22003.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w22003.pdf Shelf Number: 137952 Keywords: JudgesJudicial Decision-MakingJuvenile CourtJuvenile DefendantsJuvenile OffendersRacial BiasRacial Discrimination |
Author: Kruh, Ivan Title: Developing Service Delivery Systems for Evaluations of Juveniles' Competence to Stand Trial: A Guide for States and Counties Summary: The purpose of this Guide is to help states or counties develop a "forensic evaluation system" (FES) for providing courts evaluations of juveniles' competence to stand trial (JCST). An FES for JCST evaluations has three components that are described in the three modules in this Guide: Module 1: Developing a JCST Evaluation Service Delivery System (SDS)-An organizational structure and procedures within which JCST evaluations are provided to the courts Module 2: Creating Evaluation Standards-Criteria that JCST examiners should meet when performing JCST evaluations and writing reports Module 3: Quality Control: Developing a Process to Apply the Standards-Ways to ensure that the evaluation standards for examinations are actually implemented properly by examiners Why the Guide Is Needed The requirement that juvenile court defendants must be competent to stand trial is fairly new, not being in evidence much before the 1990s. When attorneys and juvenile advocates began to claim that competence to stand trial (CST) should apply to delinquency proceedings, there was some doubt about the need for it, as the juvenile court had existed for almost 100 years without the requirement. But in the past fifteen years, appellate courts examining the issue decided that CST was a fundamental due process right in juvenile delinquency cases. This created new demands and challenges for juvenile courts. What exactly was required to be a competent juvenile defendant? How would evaluations be done, and who would do them? What should the evaluations look like? Some states simply tried to use their definitions of CST and process for getting CST evaluations that had been in place for adult criminal defendants. But other states recognized that CST in juvenile court required its own definitions and procedures. As a consequence, many states began developing new, specialized statutes for the application of CST in juvenile court, 20 of them by 2010. In 2011, the need for guidance in development of JCST legislation prompted the publication of a guide for lawmakers. Between 2010 and 2015, eleven more states passed specialized JCST statutes, bringing the current total to 31 states with juvenile-specific statutes that guide JCST. The remaining 19 states and the District of Columbia recognize CST in juvenile court, and it is likely that many of them will develop legislation to codify its application before long. Once juvenile-specific statutes are passed and enacted, the job is far from done. States must then tackle the complex task of implementation - that is, putting the new laws into practice. How will the new laws be applied? How will the legal and mental health systems manage the new demands for obtaining JCST evaluations? This Guide, then, aims to assist states in one part of this implementation phase assuring that courts and attorneys can obtain reliable forensic evaluations to assist the juvenile court in reaching decisions about CST in juvenile cases. JCST evaluations require a specialized process that is similar to such evaluations in criminal court in some ways yet dissimilar in others. On average, children and adolescents do not have adult capacities. The complex contours of child development, developmental psychopathology and the juvenile court system call for different rules, examiners with different skills, and different considerations in JCST cases than in adult CST cases. Those differences were outlined in an earlier clinical guide devoted to conducting JCST evaluations. In addition, Kruh and Grisso offered a best-practices manual for conducting JCST evaluations that was published soon after. Those documents offer a background for the present Guide, in that they describe the task of the examiner in JCST evaluations. Details: Delmar, NY: National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice, 2017. 91p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 27, 2017 at: https://www.ncmhjj.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Juvenile_Competency_to_Stand_Trial_FINAL_508.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncmhjj.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Juvenile_Competency_to_Stand_Trial_FINAL_508.pdf Shelf Number: 145825 Keywords: Competence to Stand TrialForensic EvaluationJuvenile CourtJuvenile DefendantsJuvenile OffendersMental Health |
Author: Kelbakiani, Anton Title: Rights of Juvenile Defendants in Criminal Proceedings: Report of the study Summary: After the Juvenile Justice Code entered into force (on 1 January 2016, partially on 1 March 2016), various entities were imposed an obligation to draft normative acts detailing procedures and practice to be applied to children in conflict with the penal law during administering criminal justice, starting from the first contact of a child with law enforcement agencies and all the way to a court trial (including the execution of sentence). The abovementioned normative acts must regulate the process of effective implementation of the juvenile justice. The Beijing Rules specify: “Efforts shall be made to establish a regular evaluative research mechanism built into the system of juvenile justice administration and to collect and analyse relevant data and information for appropriate assessment and future improvement and reform of the administration.” 1 Moreover, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child emphasizes: “In order to ensure the full implementation of the principles and rights …, it is necessary to establish an effective organization for the administration of juvenile justice, and a comprehensive juvenile justice system.” 2 In its narrowest sense, a legislative reform implies only the amendment of an existing law or the adoption of a new law. In practice, however, the process is way more comprehensive and goes beyond a mere review and amendment of a legal framework. A legislative reform involves: consideration of policy as well as budgetary and human resources; evaluation of institutional capacity and of the system of communication among institutions; professional training and practice; planning of the process of implementation of the law; transitional arrangements;3 monitoring in the process of implementation and a quality control system. The adoption of the new Code has been repeatedly commended as an important and progressive step; however, no thorough analysis has been carried out to see whether the entities involved in the administration of justice interpret it in a uniform way. Nor has the enforcement of the Code in practice or in the light of effective quality control system been studied either. The mentioned shortcomings create a risk that the juvenile delinquency reform (its practical implementation) will go into a wrong direction and a non-uniform practice will be established among participants in criminal proceedings. At meetings dedicated to the Juvenile Justice Code, representatives of various entities and international organizations have repeatedly emphasized the importance of quality control and spoken about a number of practical issues that are interpreted in various ways or remain ambiguous and require further clarification and detailed regulation in the process of implementation. Aim of the study The study aims at assisting the government, after the entry into force of Juvenile Justice Code, to assess the situation with the protection of rights of juvenile defendants during criminal proceedings, identify shortcomings in this process and analyze them; also, to ensure a uniform interpretation and implementation of the existing legislation on juvenile defendants both by government entities and all other subjects involved in administering juvenile justice. Structure of the study Within the scope of this study we scrutinized the realization of the rights of juvenile defendants during criminal proceedings after the entry into force of Juvenile Justice Code (since 1 January 2016); analyzed shortcomings of the legislation, the existing practice and the state policy in the area of juvenile justice reform. The study covers the entire process - from the initial contact of a juvenile with law enforcement agencies up to a decision delivered by a court. Details: Tbilisi, Georgia: Open Society Georgia Foundation, 2017. 55p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 6, 2018 at: https://www.crin.org/sites/default/files/research_on_implementation_of_jj_code_and_reform.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Georgia URL: https://www.crin.org/sites/default/files/research_on_implementation_of_jj_code_and_reform.pdf Shelf Number: 1497909 Keywords: Juvenile Courts Juvenile DefendantsJuvenile Justice Reform Juvenile Justice Systems Juvenile Offenders |