A Study on the Discretion of Juvenile Waiver in the US and its Implications
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Discretion has proven to be a substantial component of the criminal justice system. Therefore, there is a general understanding that discretion cannot be prevented. Consequently, discretion should be monitored as to allow for the best benefit to society, especially within the area of juvenile waiver into the adult criminal justice system. This study will be to examine how the U.S. system applies discretion in juvenile cases and how that can be applied to a South Korean context. With the use of prior literature research concerning juvenile waiver, this study aims to examine the current juvenile waiver system in the United States through the discussion of early intentions of juvenile waiver, current types presented in the U.S., and influencing factors that increase the likelihood of transfer. Upon review, future suggestions for improvement will be determined with a rehabilitative approach. First, solid data collection is integral in the understanding and prevention of discretionary abuse. Most importantly, clear and consistent sampling procedures are needed. Second, a functional application of discretion should be established, integrating the findings from various disciplines to reduce errors. Then this knowledge should be circulated for the criminal justice practitioners. Third, prior stagnant or detrimental statutes or policies should be re-visited and revised based on a new understanding of data. Fourth, more discretion should be established through the implementation of reverse waiver provisions, serving to minimize error and ensure that offender's rights are maintained during sanctioning. As improvements are made, a secondary objective of this study will be to implement these paradigms into a South Korean context, where discretion currently falls into the hands of judges and prosecutors, primarily. Utilization in such a society will ultimately increase the level of functional discretion. Implications are discussed.
Abstract
Discretion has proven to be a substantial component of the criminal justice system. Therefore, there is a general understanding that discretion cannot be prevented. Consequently, discretion should be monitored as to allow for the best benefit to society, especially within the area of juvenile waiver into the adult criminal justice system. This study will be to examine how the U.S. system applies discretion in juvenile cases and how that can be applied to a South Korean context. With the use of prior literature research concerning juvenile waiver, this study aims to examine the current juvenile waiver system in the United States through the discussion of early intentions of juvenile waiver, current types presented in the U.S., and influencing factors that increase the likelihood of transfer. Upon review, future suggestions for improvement will be determined with a rehabilitative approach. First, solid data collection is integral in the understanding and prevention of discretionary abuse. Most importantly, clear and consistent sampling procedures are needed. Second, a functional application of discretion should be established, integrating the findings from various disciplines to reduce errors. Then this knowledge should be circulated for the criminal justice practitioners. Third, prior stagnant or detrimental statutes or policies should be re-visited and revised based on a new understanding of data. Fourth, more discretion should be established through the implementation of reverse waiver provisions, serving to minimize error and ensure that offender's rights are maintained during sanctioning. As improvements are made, a secondary objective of this study will be to implement these paradigms into a South Korean context, where discretion currently falls into the hands of judges and prosecutors, primarily. Utilization in such a society will ultimately increase the level of functional discretion. Implications are discussed.
참고문헌 (36)
- Albonetti, C. A., "An integration of theories to explain judicial discretion", Social Problems, 38 (1991)
- Barnes, C. W., "Questionably adult : Determinants and effects of the juvenile waiver decision", Justice Quarterly, 6 (1989)
- Berger, R. J., "The sociology of juvenile delinquency" (1999), Nelson-Hall Inc
- Benekos, P. J., "Juvenile justice : The legacy of punitive policy", Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 6(1) (2008)
- Bilchik, S, "Juvenile justice: A century of change", Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, ~ (1999)
- Bishop, D. M., "Juvenile offenders and the adult criminal justice system", Crime and Justice, 27 (2000)
- Bishop, D. M., "Gender bias in juvenile justice processing : Implications for the JJDP Act", Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 82 (1992)
- Juvenile transfers to criminal court study: Phase I final report, "Bishop, D. M.", U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, ~ (1998)
- Reforming juvenile justice: A developmental approach, "Bonnie, R.", National Research Council, ~ (2013)
- Bortner, M., "The changing borders of juvenile justice: Transfer of adolescents to the criminal court" (2000), University of Chicago Press
- Brannen, D., "Transfer to adult court-A national study of how juvenile court judges weigh pertinent Kent criteria", Psychology Public Policy and Law, 12(3) (2006)
- Choe, D. H., "Discretion at the pre-trial stage : A comparative study", European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 20(1) (2014)
- Dawson, R. O., "The Changing Borders of Juvenile Justice:Transfer of Adolescents to the Criminal Court" (2000), University of Chicago Press
- Fagan, J., "Juvenile crime and criminal justice : Resolving border disputes", The Future of Children, 18(2) (2008)
- Feld, B. C., "Juvenile court meets the principle of offense : Legislative change in judicial waiver statutes", Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 78 (1987)
- Feld, B. C., "Juvenile and criminal justice systems’ responses to youth violence", Crime and Justice, 24 (1998)
- Feld, B. C., "The Changing Borders of Juvenile Justice: Transfer of Adolescents to the Criminal Court" (2000), University of Chicago Press
- Fritsch, E., "Juvenile waiver in the U. S., 1979-1995 : A comparison and analysis of state waiver statutes", Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 46(3) (1995)
- Griffin, P, "Trying and sentencing juveniles as adults: Analysis of state transfer and blended sentencing laws" (2003), National Center for Juvenile Justice and Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
- Grisso, T., "Clinicians' transfer evaluations : How well can they assist judicial discretion?", Louisiana Law Review, 71(1) (2010)
- Hoge, R. D., "Standardized instruments for assessing risk and need in youthful offenders", Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29 (2002)
- Lee, L., "Factors determining waiver in a juvenile court", Journal of Criminal Justice, 22(4) (1994)
- Lipton, D., "The Effectiveness of correctional intervention: A survey of treatment evaluation studies" (1975), Praeger
- McNulty, E., "The transfer of juvenile offenders to adult court : Panacea of problem?", Law and Policy, 18(1-2) (1996)
- Park, M., "Deterrence effect of juvenile transfer in the US", The Journal of New Trends in the Criminal Law, 45 (2014)
- Park, M. Y., "A study on juvenile justice system in the US", The Journal of Comparative Law, 11(2) (2011)
- Rodriguez, N., "Youth is enmeshed in a highly dysfunctional family system : Exploring the relationship among dysfunctional families, parental incarceration, and juvenile court decision making", Criminology, 47(1) (2009)
- Schlesinger, T., "Racial and ethnic disparity in pretrial criminal processing", Justice Quarterly, 22 (2005)
- Scott, E. S., "Social welfare and fairness in juvenile crime regulation", Louisiana Law Review, 71(1) (2010)
- Singer, S., "The automatic waiver of juveniles and substantive justice", Crime and Delinquency, 39(2) (1993)
- Singer, S, "Recriminalizing delinquency: Violent juvenile crime and juvenile justice reform" (1996), Cambridge University Press
- Juvenile of fenders and victims: 2006National Report, "Snyder, H. N", Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, ~ (2006)
- Soler, M., "Missed opportunity : Waiver, race, data, and policy reform", Louisiana Law Review, 71(1) (2010)
- Torbet, P., "State responses to serious and violent juvenile crime", National Center for Juvenile Justice, ~ (1996)
- Wagman, M. T., "Innocence lost in the wake of green : The trend is clear : If you are old enough to do the crime, then you are old enough to do the time", Catholic University Law Review, 49(2) (2000)
- Walker, S, "Taming the system: The control of discretion in criminal justice, 1950-1990" (1993), Oxford University Press Inc