Skip to main content

The Juvenile Court Process

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Juvenile Delinquency

Abstract

Youths are referred to the juvenile court for offenses that are violations of the criminal law if committed by an adult or for behavior that is unlawful only for juveniles (status offenses).

The court process begins when the agency or person making the referral files a petition (complaint) that specifies the law or ordinance that the youth has violated.

The youth’s due process rights are applicable for all phases of the formal juvenile court process.

The intake officer who reviews the complaint and conducts an initial interview of the alleged offender and parent/s is generally authorized to make decisions, except when there are serious charges. The intake officer can detain the youth, release him or her to the custody of a parent or caretakers, dismiss the case, or partially divert the case.

Those youths who are placed on the docket for official (judicial) processing will be given an arraignment hearing (initial hearing). If the youth states that the charges are not true, a hearing to determine if detention is necessary, a pretrial conference and an adjudication hearing follow. If the charges are found to be true, a disposition (sentencing) hearing follows. The standard of proof required for adjudication of delinquency is “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Balint, E. (2019). Second teen charged in death of 14-year-old. Akron Beacon Journal, 27, B4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breed V. Jones. (1975). 421 U.S. 519.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feld, B. (1987). The juvenile court meets the principle of the offense: Legislative changes in juvenile waiver statutes. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 78(3), 49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feld, B. (1988). In re Gault revisited: A cross state comparison of the right to counsel in juvenile court. Crime & delinquency 34 4, Oct. 1988: 394widening. Journal of Crime and Justice, 16(1), 30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hockenberry, S., & Puzzanchera, C. (2018). Juvenile Court Statistics 2016. Pittsburgh, PA: National Center for Juvenile Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • In re Gault. (1967). 376, U.S. 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • In re Winship. (1970). 397, U.S. 358.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kratcoski, P. (2012). Juvenile justice administration. Boca Raton: CRC Press/Taylor &Francis Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kratcoski, P. (2019, July 25). Interview with Judge Linda Tucci Teodosio. Akron, OH: Summit County Juvenile Court.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kratcoski, P., & Kratcoski, P. (2019a, February 6). Interview with Judge Robert Berger. Portage County, OH: Juvenile Court Judge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kratcoski, P. & Kratcoski, P. (2019c, June 11). Interview with Defense Attorney Troy Reeves.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mc Clory, E. (2019, January 26). Streetsboro boy, 13, won’t face adult prison time. Akron Beacon Journal, B1, B4.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKeiver v Pennsylvania. (1971). 403 U.S. 528.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miranda v Arizona. (1966). 358 U.S. 436, 448.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Advisory Committee for Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. (1980). Standards for the administration of juvenile justice. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roper v. Simmons. (2005). 543 U.S. 551.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sickmund, M., & Puzzanchera, C. (Eds.). (2014). Juvenile offenders & victims: 2014 National report. Pittsburgh, PA: National Center for Juvenile Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, H., Sickmund, M., & Poe-Yamagata, E. (2000). Juvenile transfer to criminal court in the 1990s: Lessons learned from four studies. Pittsburgh, PA: National Center for Juvenile Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strieb, V. L. (2003, January l5). The juvenile death penalty today: Death sentences and executions for juvenile crimes. January 1973–June 30, 2002. Retrieved from www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/juvchair.html

  • Task Force on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. National Advisory Committee on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals. (1977). Juvenile justice and delinquency prevention. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Kratcoski, P.C., Dunn Kratcoski, L., Kratcoski, P.C. (2020). The Juvenile Court Process. In: Juvenile Delinquency. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31452-1_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31452-1_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-31451-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-31452-1

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics