Reforming Juvenile Sentencing

Demleitner, Nora V.

doi:10.2307/20640178

Cited by 7 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While some variation in outcome depends on context, the results add to the growing literature documenting the benefits of restorative approaches. Keywords: restorative justice; group conferencing; diversion; youth; comparative The belief that harms committed by young people are an increasing threat to public safety dominates public perception about youthful misbehavior in North America and parts of the European Union (Denov, 2004;Demleitner, 1999;Roberts, 2003;Varma, 2006). Statistics confirm that harmful misbehavior by youth in schools and communities is a serious and intransigent problem (Joong & Ridler, 2005;Guerino, Hurwitz, Noonan, & Kaffenberger, 2006;Williams, Rivera, Neighbours, & Reznik, 2007;World Health Organization, 2002).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the United States, data from a variety of sources including the National Center for Juvenile Justice (Puzzanchera, Adams, & Sickmund, 2010) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Thornton, Craft, Dahlberg, Lynch, & Baer, 2002), indicate decreasing frequency of youthful harms in schools and the community since about the early 1990s. Nonetheless, during similar time periods, policy makers in many jurisdictions have enacted tougher legislation and regulations designed to "crack down" on the "growing" youth violence problem (Skiba & Peterson, 2000;Demleitner, 1999;Sprott, 2003;Zimring, 1999). *Corresponding author: Email: pelech@ucalgary.ca average victim" (Hudson, 1998, p. 241) and that the harm caused by the wrongdoing can be generally known.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Responding to young people responsible for harm: a comparative study of restorative and conventional approaches

Calhoun

Pelech

2010

Contemporary Justice Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Responding to young people responsible for harm: a comparative study of restorative and conventional approaches

Calhoun

Pelech

2010

Contemporary Justice Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Although the Guidelines are voluntary, Texas documents the extent to which county-level sanctioning deviates from the recommendations of the Guidelines (Texas Criminal Justice Policy Council, 2001). Similar approaches have been implemented in other states, including Illinois, Kansas, Nebraska, New York, Utah, Virginia, and Washington (Corriero, 1999;Demleitner, 1999;Fagan & Zimring, 2000;Lieb & Brown, 1999;National Criminal Justice Association, 1997;Torbet et al, 1996).…”

Section: Juvenile Sentencing Guidelines: An Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sentencing Guidelines and the Transformation of Juvenile Justice in the 21st Century

Mears

2002

Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As we enter the 21st century, many states have introduced fundamental changes to their juvenile justice systems. The changes focus on jurisdictional authority, especially transfer to adult court; sentencing guidelines and options; correctional programming; interagency information sharing; offender confidentiality; and victim involvement. At the same time, attention has turned increasingly to prevention, early intervention, rehabilitation, and the use of specialized courts. Because of their special significance in the historical context of the juvenile court, this article focuses on the emergence of sentencing guidelines to identify underlying trends and issues in the transformation of juvenile justice. In so doing, the article argues that the considerable attention given by policy makers and researchers to transfer rather than other changes provides a distorted picture of current juvenile justice practice.

show abstract

“…Their claim is that the main criticism of deterrence generally applies with particular cogency to collateral consequences -most offenders don't carefully weigh the costs and benefits prior to offending. 195 Even more axiomatically, most collateral consequences must fail as deterrents because of their low visibility. 196 These consequences are not at all well known -and it is difficult to imagine that offenders, being undeterred by prison, would instead be deterred by the knowledge of additional civil consequences arising from criminal conduct.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…195 Even more axiomatically, most collateral consequences must fail as deterrents because of their low visibility. 196 These consequences are not at all well known -and it is difficult to imagine that offenders, being undeterred by prison, would instead be deterred by the knowledge of additional civil consequences arising from criminal conduct. 197 The same arguments could be directed against claims that collateral consequences serve a denunciation purpose.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Criminals and (Second-Class) Citizenship

Edgely¹

2010

Griffith Law Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article considers whether criminal offenders in Australia are second-class citizens. Using TH Marshallʼs seminal conception of citizenship, the article discusses various ways in which offendersʼ civil, political and social rights are delimited in Australia. While acknowledging that the liberty of prisoners is curtailed -which is the defining and necessarily punitive feature of imprisonment -the article argues that the legal system goes further, imposing a range of collateral consequences on offenders that seriously infringe other fundamental rights. Using penological and liberal theories, consideration is given to the question of whether the impairment of offendersʼ fundamental citizenship rights can be justified. It is argued that the impairment of rights discussed is not theoretically justifiable, and is arguably best explained as an anachronistic remnant of attainder.Conviction of felony renders a man for ever infamous in England,infamous in law, -and attaches to him for life certain disabilities, which incapacitate him for exercising some of the rights and duties of citizenship. It is not enough that the felon pay the immediate penalty which the law awards to his crime. Other consequences, both legal and moral, flow from the fact of the conviction. So accordant is all this with the spirit and feeling of the British people, as well as with the genius of British institutions, that there is not, perhaps, in all England, a public body of any description, -not even a single benefit society, -or even a convivial club, -in which the conviction of a member for felony is not instantly followed by the expulsion of the member so convicted from the society to which he belongs … thereby declaring the universal feeling of the entire British people, that a convicted felon is unworthy both of future trust and of mingling with and participating in the provident arrangements or the social enjoyments of his former associates and fellow subjects. 1

show abstract

Reforming Juvenile Sentencing

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

Responding to young people responsible for harm: a comparative study of restorative and conventional approaches

Responding to young people responsible for harm: a comparative study of restorative and conventional approaches

Sentencing Guidelines and the Transformation of Juvenile Justice in the 21st Century

Criminals and (Second-Class) Citizenship

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About