Legal professionals’ perceptions of juvenile engagement in the plea process.

Woestehoff, Skye A.; Redlich, Allison D.; Cathcart, Elizabeth J.; Quas, Jodi A.

doi:10.1037/tps0000195

Cited by 6 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our findings here, along with those from prior studies (e.g., Redlich & Summers, 2012; Woestehoff et al, 2019; Zottoli & Daftary-Kapur, 2019), raise important questions about defendants’ participation and engagement in the plea process. Our descriptive data on the flow and characteristics of, and defendant participation in, guilty plea hearings for juvenile and adult court defendants paint a less than rosy picture.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

Guilty plea hearings in juvenile and criminal court.

Redlich¹,

Domagalski²,

Woestehoff³

et al. 2022

Law and Human Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: In guilty plea hearings, judges must determine whether defendants' plea decisions were made knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily. Little is known, however, about how plea hearings unfold, especially in juvenile court, where hearings are generally closed to the public. In this study, we had the unique opportunity to systematically observe plea hearings in juvenile and criminal court. Hypotheses: We predicted that plea hearings would be brief and that defendant participation, especially among juveniles, would be minimal. We also explored how often judges addressed the plea validity components of knowingness, intelligence, and voluntariness and whether addressing these components differed by the type of court (juvenile, criminal), pretrial custody status, and pled-to charge severity. Method: Trained coders in California (n = 104, juvenile court) and Virginia (n = 140, juvenile court; n = 593, criminal court) systematically observed more than 800 guilty plea hearings. Coders reliably documented hearing length, whether the defendant was in pretrial custody, whether the evidence was reviewed, details on defendant participation, and judicial attention to plea validity. Results: On average, juvenile plea hearings lasted about 7 min and criminal plea hearings lasted 13 min. Prosecutors rarely reviewed evidence against the defendants in the juvenile courts, and in one juvenile court, judges paid virtually no attention to plea validity. In the other two courts, certain waived rights (e.g., to trial, to silence) were reviewed consistently. Depending on the court, hearing length and plea validity elements addressed varied by defendants' prehearing custody status and the pled-to charge severity. Conclusions: These findings provide novel insight into how components necessary for plea admissibility-knowingness, voluntariness, and intelligence-are discussed with defendants and, in doing so, raise concerns about the degree to which plea validity is actively assessed in plea hearings. Plea hearings are formal, minutes-long events in which defendant engagement is low. Public Significance StatementBy law, judges must assess whether defendants make valid guilty plea decisions (i.e., knowing, intelligent, and voluntary) at plea hearings, a crucial task given that almost all convictions in juvenile and criminal court occur through guilty pleas. Our work reveals that there is a need to standardize current methods of plea validity assessment to ensure that all defendants, regardless of age, court, and pled-to charge severity, receive the same amount of information and general content at their plea hearings.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

Guilty plea hearings in juvenile and criminal court.

Redlich¹,

Domagalski²,

Woestehoff³

et al. 2022

Law and Human Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Age was proposed to shape participation in that it influences capacity for choice. Contextual antecedents of participation included initiatives that influence the physical, attitudinal, and relational environment [ 33 , 42 , 43 ]; information provided [ 66 ]; and peer modelling, family processes, socioeconomic factors, cultural practices, and governance structures [ 67 , 68 ]. These broad-ranging antecedents provide information about how contexts might be shaped or influenced to support participation.…”

Section: Core Difficulties With the Definition And Operationalizatmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Consequences of a lack of participation were reported to include deprivation, social injustice, limited wellbeing, lack of dignity, loss of rights [ 47 , 66 ], and a lack of involvement leading to lack of attendance at work or low productivity [ 33 ]. A lack of participation can lead to a lack of contribution to building social capital by particular groups in society.…”

Section: Core Difficulties With the Definition And Operationalizatmentioning

confidence: 99%

Definitions and Operationalization of Mental Health Problems, Wellbeing and Participation Constructs in Children with NDD: Distinctions and Clarifications

Granlund

Imms

King

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Children with impairments are known to experience more restricted participation than other children. It also appears that low levels of participation are related to a higher prevalence of mental health problems in children with neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD). The purpose of this conceptual paper is to describe and define the constructs mental health problems, mental health, and participation to ensure that future research investigating participation as a means to mental health in children and adolescents with NDD is founded on conceptual clarity. We first discuss the difference between two aspects of mental health problems, namely mental disorder and mental illness. This discussion serves to highlight three areas of conceptual difficulty and their consequences for understanding the mental health of children with NDD that we then consider in the article: (1) how to define mental health problems, (2) how to define and assess mental health problems and mental health, i.e., wellbeing as separate constructs, and (3) how to describe the relationship between participation and wellbeing. We then discuss the implications of our propositions for measurement and the use of participation interventions as a means to enhance mental health (defined as wellbeing). Conclusions: Mental disorders include both diagnoses related to impairments in the developmental period, i.e., NDD and diagnoses related to mental illness. These two types of mental disorders must be separated. Children with NDD, just like other people, may exhibit aspects of both mental health problems and wellbeing simultaneously. Measures of wellbeing defined as a continuum from flourishing to languishing for children with NDD need to be designed and evaluated. Wellbeing can lead to further participation and act to protect from mental health problems.

show abstract

“…As discussed earlier it is not uncommon for conflicts of interest to arise; future research should explore how attorneys navigate these conflicts with parents while prioritizing their client's expressed interests. Additionally, recent work has shown that legal actors' perspectives of juvenile engagement within the plea bargain process vary (Woestehoff et al, 2019). They found that defense attorneys often evaluated juvenile clients as less engaged than prosecutors and judges did.…”

Section: Implications For Research and Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Negotiating with parents: Attorney practices in the juvenile plea bargain process.

Fountain¹,

Woolard²

2021

Law and Human Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Research on plea bargaining is increasing, yet much of this work examines how the process unfolds in adult court. Plea bargaining in juvenile court has several notable differences such as parental involvement. Including parents throughout the adjudicatory process is encouraged but ultimately left up to the attorney. Research has not explored whether attorneys include parents in plea bargain discussions with their clients. The present study examined parental involvement in the juvenile plea bargain process. Hypotheses: We did not have any formal a priori hypotheses for this exploratory study. Method: The first author conducted qualitative interviews with eighteen defense attorneys from the juvenile division of a public defender's office on the East Coast where we discussed their most recent case that resulted in a plea bargain. Results: Parents were included in plea negotiations and hearings. Attorneys described seeking parental input because parents may be impacted by the terms of the plea and because the court often seeks parental approval. During hearings, parents offered input regarding their child's ability to plea, the disposition plan, and whether they support their child's decision to plead guilty. Conclusions: Pleas might impact parents, so it may be impractical to overlook their interests. However, parent and child interests may conflict, and parents often lack understanding of their children's rights and pleading generally. Therefore, attorneys must not only advocate for their clients, but also educate and manage parents' interests both inside and outside the courtroom. Public Significance StatementInviting parents to offer input on their child's legal decisions and disposition in court was associated with attorneys also considering parents' interests during plea discussions and negotiations. Because youth have a legal right to decide how to plead on their own, future research should consider how parent interests and involvement in plea discussions impacts the knowing, intelligent, and voluntary nature of juvenile plea bargain decisions.

show abstract

Legal professionals’ perceptions of juvenile engagement in the plea process.

Cited by 6 publications

References 24 publications

Guilty plea hearings in juvenile and criminal court.

Guilty plea hearings in juvenile and criminal court.

Definitions and Operationalization of Mental Health Problems, Wellbeing and Participation Constructs in Children with NDD: Distinctions and Clarifications

Negotiating with parents: Attorney practices in the juvenile plea bargain process.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About