Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 11:54 pm
Time: 11:54 pm
Results for youth courts
5 results foundAuthor: Schneider, Jeffrey Title: Youth Courts: An Empirical Update and Analysis of Future Organizational and Research Needs Summary: This report discusses youth courts in the United States and addresses specific program outcomes and operational and administrative issues. Details: Washington, DC: Hamilton Fish Institute on School and Community Violence, The George Washington University, 2008 Source: Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 116480 Keywords: Youth Courts |
Author: Kemp, Vicky Title: A Scoping Study Adopting a 'Whole-Systems' Approach to the Processing of Cases in the Youth Courts Summary: Little is known about the impact of recent changes in the UK youth justice system on the processing of cases at court, or about the causes of delay and cost increase in the Youth Court. To investigate these issues, the Legal Services Research Centre (LSRC) collaborated with the University of Cambridge Institute of Criminology in a scoping study of Youth Court cases dealt with in a county in England and Wales, referred to as ‘the County’. The purpose of the study was to provide a ‘whole-systems’ overview of the operation and efficiency of the County’s Youth Courts and to report back to the county’s agencies. The study also enabled researchers to consider the feasibility of a comprehensive, multi-agency follow-up of the processing of Youth Court cases. It is important to note that the findings in this report are based on empirical research which was undertaken some time ago. The sample of 166 Youth Court cases, for instance, involved cases completed at court during October and November 2005. The county’s Youth Courts were observed with the final observations taking place in December 2006. It is recognised that there have been a number of developments since this research was undertaken, particularly implementation of arrangements under the Criminal Justice – ‘Simple, Speedy, Summary’ initiative. While these new arrangements are to be implemented across all Youth Courts by December 2008, it is nevertheless considered important to publish these findings, not least because of the dearth of research presently available about this key element of the criminal justice process. This research study also raises a number of issues having implications for inefficiency and delay at a local level. A number of these issues have subsequently been addressed and reference to such changes is made in this report. While this report is critical of some of the processes involved in managing Youth Court cases, it is important to emphasise that practitioners in the Youth Court were seen to be hardworking in what was a particularly challenging environment. The intention of this report is not to criticise those individual efforts but to examine the problems which can arise within the multi-agency processing of cases, which was seen to be exacerbated through the unintended consequences of some national performance targets. Reform of the youth justice system in England and Wales has been a Government priority. Delays at court have been reduced, and the Government has succeeded in meeting its pledge to halve the time taken from arrest to sentence for persistent young offenders (PYOs), from 142 to 71 days.1 This is a national average and a number of areas still take 71 days or longer. More general concerns have been raised about the extent to which minor offences are brought unnecessarily to court. Professor Rod Morgan, the former Chairman of the Youth Justice Board, for example, has been critical of the fact that too many minor offences, which would previously have been dealt with informally or out of court, have instead been, ‘pushed into an overstretched criminal justice system’. A number of issues arose following the reforms, apart from the speed of processing cases, and these include: the role of the prosecution, the involvement of defence solicitors, the causes of delay, the nature of adjournments, the type of case brought to court and the impact of the reforms on charging practices and managing cases at court. A ‘whole-systems’ approach was adopted in order to investigate inter-agency interactions. At first a sample of 166 cases concluded in the County’s Youth Courts during late 2005 were systematically analysed using multilevel modelling. The study also included observations in two Youth Courts, an analysis of Youth Offending Team files relating to 120 observed cases, and a series of 16 in-depth interviews with court clerks, Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) staff, and defence solicitors. In addition, we convened two focus groups, each involving three magistrates. These data were analysed using a specialist computer software programme. The report sets out the main quantitative findings arising out of the 2005 sample of cases. The main causes of inefficiencies and delays are then highlighted. Finally, the implications for policy-makers are explored. Details: London: Legal Services Research Centre, 2008. 81p. Source: Internet Resource: http://www.lsrc.org.uk/publications/YouthCourtReport.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.lsrc.org.uk/publications/YouthCourtReport.pdf Shelf Number: 119985 Keywords: Juvenile CourtsJuvenile OffendersYouth Courts |
Author: Flowers, Angelyn S. Title: Time Dollar Youth Court: 2010 Evaluation Final Report Summary: The Time Dollar Youth Court (TDYC) is a juvenile diversion program in the District of Columbia designed for first-time non-violent offenders. The central component of its intervention strategy is its peer jury process. TDYC envisions itself, not simply as a peer jury program, but as a peer jury where the jurors are offenders performing jury service as part of their sanction. This evaluation examined the effectiveness of service as peer jurors. Data on 882 TDYC participants who were in the program between July 1, 2009, and June 30, 2010 was analyzed. A mixture of methods was utilized in this evaluation design including qualitative, quantitative, and linguistic and sentiment analysis. A multi-stage process with a convenience sample was used. This included self-administered surveys and interviews. Relationships between participation in TDYC jury duty service with self-efficacy and civic engagement were examined using life-skills, community involvement, future aspirations, and participant perception of jury duty service. The strongest relationships were found in the life-skills category. Very strong direct relationships were found between the TDYC peer juror experience and the following variables: - Goal Setting and goal achievement (Pearson r = .98) - Problem solving (Pearson r = .95) - Decision making (Pearson r =.95) - Academics and learning (Pearson r = .88) Strong direct relationships were found between the TDYC peer juror experience and four variables, three of which were in the community involvement category: - Been mentored (Pearson r = .81) - Gained new friends from community involvement (Pearson r = .79) - Mentored someone (Pearson r = .76) - Communications skills (Pearson r = .71) The lowest life-skills category variables were: self-esteem which was moderately strong (Pearson r = .56) and social competencies which was only weakly related (Pearson r = .25). The lowest variables in the community involvement category were: having a leadership role in a community organization which was weak (Pearson r = .34) and belief that their community was important, which had a negative inverse relationship (Pearson r = -.04). In the life skills area the categories of goal setting and achievement, problem-solving, and decision-making were statistically significant at p = < .05 with a greater than 95% probability that the differences found between those participants at the beginning of their TDYC peer jury duty service and those who had completed their jury duty service were not due to chance and could therefore be inferred to apply to the entire 2009 - 2010 TDYC participant cohort. The categories of academics and learning, communications, and social competency were statistically significant at p = < .01 with a greater than 99% probability that any differences found could be inferred to apply to the larger population. The self-esteem category was not found to be statistically significant. With the exception of belief in the importance of their community and having a leadership role in a community organization, all of the other variables in community involvement were statistically significant at p = < .05. The excepted variables were not found to be statistically significant. The correlation with goal setting and goal achievement and TDYC peer jury experience was also demonstrated by the reduction in the disparity between aspirations and identification of a strategy for achieving those aspirations for those participants who were farthest along in their peer juror service experience. A sentiment analysis of TDYC participant comments on their service as peer jurors revealed feelings that were primarily positive with some neutral feelings, but no negative feelings. Details: Washington, DC: Angelyn S. Flowers, 2010. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 20, 2015 at: http://www.globalyouthjustice.org/uploads/Washington_DC_s_Time_Dollar_Youth_Court.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.globalyouthjustice.org/uploads/Washington_DC_s_Time_Dollar_Youth_Court.pdf Shelf Number: 135277 Keywords: Juvenile Courts (U.S.)Juvenile DiversionPeer JuriesPeer JurorsYouth Courts |
Author: Mullins, Tracy Title: Selected Topics on Youth Courts: A Monograph Summary: Table of Contents -- Addressing Truancy in Youth Court Programs Ramona Gonzales and Tracy Godwin Mullins.................................................. Underage Drinking and Other Substance Abuse: Opportunities for Prevention and Intervention by Youth Courts Tracy Godwin Mullins ..................................................................................... An Overview of School-Based Youth Court Program Design Options Mistene M. Vickers........................................................................................... Building Culturally Relevant Youth Courts in Tribal Communities Ada Pecos Melton ............................................................................................ A Comparison of Statewide Youth Court Associations and Networking Groups Tracy Godwin Mullins and Karen L. Dunlap .................................................. Media Access Guidelines for Youth Courts Michelle E. Heward .. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention,k 2004. 118p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 11, 2019 at: http://www.aidainc.net/Publications/monograph.pdf Year: 2004 Country: United States URL: http://www.aidainc.net/Publications/monograph.pdf Shelf Number: 94537 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationIndigenous PeoplesSubstance AbuseTribal CommunitiesTruancy CourtsUnderage DrinkingYouth Courts |
Author: Moyer, Sharon Title: A Comparison of Case Processing under the Young Offenders Act and the First Six Months of the Youth Criminal Justice Act Summary: This report was prepared in response to questions on the differences in youth court processing before and after the Youth Criminal Justice Act that were raised by officials of the Youth Justice Policy Section, Department of Justice Canada. Two surveys in five major centres collected quantitative data from justice system files for cases dealt with under the Young Offenders Act and under the YCJA. The random sample of YOA data was collected in 2002 but involved cases processed in fiscal year 1999-2000. The YCJA cases were dealt with by youth courts from April to September-November 2003 in the first six months of the new law. The urban courts studied were Halifax, Toronto and Scarborough, Winnipeg, Edmonton, and Vancouver and Surrey. The analysis describes case processing in terms of the percentages of cases being dealt with by the youth courts. These data can be used to analyze changes in relative case characteristics and outcomes, but not changes in the volume of cases. Details: Ottawa, Canada: Department of Justice Canada, 2005. 50p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 14, 2019 at: https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/cj-jp/yj-jj/pdf/compar.pdf Year: 2005 Country: Canada URL: https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/cj-jp/yj-jj/moyer/index.html Shelf Number: 156987 Keywords: Case Processing Court Processing Juvenile Courts Juvenile Delinquency Surveys Youth Courts |