BEYOND "CHILDREN ARE DIFFERENT": THE REVOLUTION IN JUVENILE INTAKE AND SENTENCING

For more than 120 years, juvenile justice law has not substantively defined the core questions in most delinquency cases--when should the state prosecute children rather than divert them from the court system (the intake decision), and what should the state do with children once they are convicted (...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Washington law review 2021-06, Vol.96 (2), p.425-492
Main Author: Gupta-Kagan, Josh
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Child custody
Crime
Criminal investigations
Criminal sentences
Demographic aspects
Domestication
History
Imprisonment
Judicial discretion
Juvenile courts
Juvenile courts, Waiver of jurisdiction of
Juvenile delinquency
Juvenile justice
Juvenile offenders
Law
Laws, regulations and rules
Legal reform
Parole & probation
Plea bargaining
Probation
Race discrimination
Recidivism
Reforms
Rehabilitation of criminals
Remedies
Social sciences
Trends
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:For more than 120 years, juvenile justice law has not substantively defined the core questions in most delinquency cases--when should the state prosecute children rather than divert them from the court system (the intake decision), and what should the state do with children once they are convicted (the sentencing decision)? Instead, the law has granted certain legal actors wide discretion over these decisions, namely prosecutors at intake and judges at sentencing. This Article identifies and analyzes an essential reform trend changing that reality: legislation, enacted in at least eight states in the 2010s, to limit when children can be prosecuted rather than diverted, and when and for how long they may be incarcerated or kept on probation based on the specific offense alleged or adjudicated.
ISSN:0043-0617