The Impact of Juvenile Transfer on Adult Court Process

A number of legal and extralegal factors have combined to play a significant role in the decision to transfer a serious juvenile offender to criminal court jurisdiction (Poulos & Orchowsky, 1994). In the view of Kurlychek and Johnson (2004), some 49 states and the District of Columbia expanded the provisions by which juveniles could be transferred to adult court during the 1990s. The effect of these laws has been to facilitate the transfer of broad classes of juveniles from juvenile courts to adult courts based upon the consideration of such factors as current offenses and prior criminal histories without giving similar concern to individual characteristics or circumstances (Kurlychek & Johnson, 2004).

The result of this trend has been what Kurlychek and Johnson (2004) characterize as a dramatic increase in the population of juveniles who are processed and sentenced in adult court. Between 1996 and 1999, these researchers noted that reports found that the use of expanded statutory exclusion provisions alone moved 218,000 juveniles into adult courts between 1996 and 1999. This not only places new burdens on an already overburdened adult court system, it also places juveniles at risk for receipt of punishments that are potentially more harsh and punitive than those they might receive from a juvenile court proceeding.

Klein (1998) said that this trend may be the result of a growing lack of tole

. . .
adult criminal court is not an invention of the large twentieth century. Klein (1998) has noted that from the creation of the juvenile court, judges retained the discretion to waive jurisdiction over serious young offenders and allow them to be prosecuted in criminal court. The first court established for juveniles only, by the Illinois legislature in 1899, sat in Cook County, Illinois. This juvenile court waived about 15 boys each year, typically older boys who were arrested for deeds of violence, gun crimes, thefts of considerable amounts, and rape (Klein, 1998). Today, McCormick (2002) stated that legislatures have begun to respond in nearly every state to a spike in juvenile crime rates by making it easier to put more and younger adolescents on trial as adults and to send them to adult jails. State and federal lawmakers expanded judicial waivers to allow judges to transfer younger and less serious offenders to adult court, gave prosecutors new or expanded authority to file charges against minors in criminal court, passed legislation excluding certain types of offenses from juvenile courts, and in some states, even lowered the age at which all juveniles must be sent to adult court. Legislators also introduced blended
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Kurlychek Johnson, Amnesty International, Jersey York, Recently Connecticut, County Illinois, Lanza-Kaduce Winner, Frazier Bishop, North Carolina, Supreme Court, Juries Klein, adult courts, adult court, klein 1998, criminal court, juvenile offenders, juvenile crime, juveniles adult, juvenile courts, kurlychek johnson 2004, north carolina, kurlychek johnson, juveniles transferred adult, adult courts sentenced, juveniles adult courts, tried adult courts,
Approximate Word count = 3106
Approximate Pages = 12 (250 words per page)

More Essays on The Impact of Juvenile Transfer on Adult Court Process