Juvenile Delinquents in Federal Criminal Justice System

U.S. Department of Justice Revised cover 2/19/97 Office of Justice Programs Revised page 2: 12/15/97

Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report

February 1997, NCJ-163066 Juvenile Delinquents in the Federal Criminal Justice System

John Scalia BJS Statistician Highlights During 1995, 468 juveniles were acts of delinquency were referred for During 1995, U.S. attorneys filed cases referred to Federal prosecutors for prosecution as an adult by a U.S. against 240 persons for alleged acts of investigation  49% of these cases attorney. juvenile delinquency. Of these, 122 cases were adjudicated in Federal were declined for further action. 37% of juveniles adjudicated delin- court, representing 0.2% of the 56,243 quent were committed to a correc- cases (both adult and juvenile) adjudi- During 1995, 122 juveniles were tional facility. The average length cated during 1995. Almost half of adjudicated as delinquent in the Fed-  of commitment was 34 months. juvenile delinquency cases involved a eral courts 47% for either a violent violent offense (32%) or a drug offense or drug offense. 61% of juvenile delinquents (15%). Federal prosecutors declined confined by the Federal Bureau of further action against 228 other juve- During the 12 months ending Prisons were Native Americans. niles referred to them. September 1994, an additional 65 persons who allegedly committed Many of the juveniles adjudicated in the Federal system are Native Ameri- Federal Juvenile Delinquency Act there is a substantial Federal interest  cans. When Native American tribal in the case and jurisdictions lack resources or jurisdic- An act of juvenile delinquency is a vio- the State does not have jurisdiction tion or when there is a substantial Fed- lation of Federal law committed by a or refuses to assume jurisdiction; eral interest, a U.S. attorney may person prior to age 18 which would the State with jurisdiction does not initiate juvenile delinquency proceed- have been a crime if committed by an have adequate programs or services ings. Further, the Federal Government adult (18 U.S.C. § 5031). Under Fed- for juvenile offenders; or has jurisdiction over certain offenses eral law, a person accused of an act the offense charged is a violent committed in Indian country (18 U.S.C. of juvenile delinquency may be proc- felony, a drug trafficking or importation essed as a juvenile provided the § 1152 and 1153). offense, or a firearms offense (18 person has not attained age 21. U.S.C. § 5032). In Federal courts, juveniles adjudicated delinquent were about half as likely Federal juvenile delinquency Unlike State-level criminal justice sys- as convicted adults to receive a sen- proceedings tems, the Federal system does not tence of confinement (Federal Criminal have a separate juvenile justice com- Case Processing, 1982-93, NCJ- Adjudication of juveniles in the Federal ponent. Juveniles are adjudicated by 160088, May 1996). The average system is limited. Federal law requires a U.S. district court judge or magistrate length of confinement ordered was 34 that prosecutors restrict proceedings in a closed hearing without a jury. months. During 1995 the majority against juveniles to those cases in After a juvenile has been adjudicated which they certify to the court that (59%) of juveniles adjudicated delin- delinquent, a hearing concerning the quent were placed on probation. disposition of the juvenile is held. Revised page 2 on 12/15/97

During the disposition hearing, a juve- describing Federal juvenile transfers, tigation and prosecution. The U.S. at- nile may be ordered to pay restitution, it estimates that during the 12 months torneys declined to proceed against be placed on probation, or be commit- ending September 30, 1994, 65 per- 49% of those juveniles referred to ted to a correctional facility. sons accused of delinquency were them  two-thirds of that number referred to the Attorney General for immediately and the remainder Juveniles under age 18 may be placed transfer to adult status. It is not known subsequently. on probation or committed until they how many were charged directly as reach age 21. Juveniles between ages adults based on their prior criminal Juveniles adjudicated 18 and 21 may be placed on probation records. in U.S. district courts for up to 3 years or confined for up to 5 years, depending on the severity of the Juveniles investigated Few cases involving juvenile delin- offense. by U.S. attorneys quents are processed in U.S. district courts because of statutory restric- Transfer to adult status During 1995, 468 juveniles were re- tions. Between 1989 and 1994, the ferred to Federal prosecutors for inves- number of juveniles adjudicated for A person who committed an offense prior to age 18 may be adjudicated Table 1. Juveniles in delinquency proceedings terminated as an adult if  in U.S. district courts, 1989-95 the offense charged was a violent felony or drug trafficking or importation Number of Federal delinquency proceedings terminated offense and if the offense was commit- Most serious offense 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 ted after the person’s 15th birthday. Total* 206 217 194 144 124 134 122 the person possessed a firearm Violent offenses 49 66 62 43 41 56 34 during a violent offense and the Property offenses 65 40 37 53 30 18 27 offense was committed after the per- Fraudulent 11 4 42334 Other 54 36 33 51 27 15 23 son’s 13th birthday. Drug offenses 66 52 44 31 28 38 16 the person had been previously adju- Public-order offenses 26 52 49 17 25 17 28 dicated delinquent of a violent felony Regulatory 1 3 2147210 or drug offense (18 U.S.C. § 5032). Other 25 49 28 13 18 15 18 *Total includes cases for which an offense category could not be determined. While the Department of Justice does Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, criminal docket data file, annual. not systematically collect information

Juveniles in the State courts

In contrast to the Federal system, ted to a correctional or other residen- the State courts were waived to adult the State systems frequently charge tial facility and 56% were placed on status. Similar to the Federal sys- juveniles with delinquency. During probation. Almost a third (31%) of tem, approximately 44% of juveniles 1994 there were more than 1.5 mil- those charged with a violent offense transferred were charged with a vio- lion delinquency cases in courts with were committed. lent offense. Drug offenders repre- juvenile jurisdiction. Of these, al- sented few (11%) of the transfers. most 855,000 were formally proc- During 1994 less than 2% of all essed in the juvenile justice system. juveniles charged with offenses in While 12,300 juveniles were judi- Nearly half (49%) of those juveniles cially waived to adult status during formally processed at the State level Delinquency cases in State 1994, others were statutorily ex- were charged with property offenses courts, 1994 cluded from juvenile court jurisdiction (table). Few (9%) were charged with Adult based on their age and offense or Most serious offense Number transfers drug offenses. concurrent jurisdiction provisions. Total 855,200 12,300 In 13 States the upper age of juve- Approximately 58% of those juve- Personal offenses 196,900 5,400 nile court jurisdiction is 15 or 16 niles formally charged at the State Property offenses 415,800 4,600 years. Many States also exclude Drug offenses 73,400 1,300 level were adjudicated delinquent Public-order offenses 169,100 1,000 certain (not shown in a table). Similar to serious offenses  such as murder those in the Federal system, ap- Source: Jeffrey A. Butts, Howard N. Snyder, and other violent offenses  from Terrence A. Finnegan et al., Juvenile Court proximately 29% of those juveniles Statistics 1994, Office of Juvenile Justice and juvenile court jurisdiction. adjudicated delinquent were commit- Delinquency Prevention (1996).

2 Juvenile Delinquents in the Federal Criminal Justice System acts of delinquency in U.S. district Approximately 35% of those juveniles facility. The average time served courts ranged from 217 during 1990 to committed to a correctional facility was  122 during 1995 (table 1). The District were adjudicated delinquent of a vio- 14 months for all those released of South Dakota (12.3%), the District lent offense. Of those 37 juveniles 21 months for drug offenders of Arizona (10.7%), the District of Mon- committed during 1995, the average 17 months for violent offenders. tana (10.7%), and the Eastern District length of commitment required was 34 of North Carolina (9.8%) accounted for months (not shown in a table). Methodology approximately 44% of the total Federal juvenile caseload during 1995 (not Juvenile delinquents confined by The primary source of data presented shown in a table). the Federal Bureau of Prisons in this report is the BJS Federal Jus- tice Statistics Program (FJSP) data- Offense committed As of September 30, 1994, 124 juve- base. The FJSP database is presently nile delinquents were confined in a constructed from the source files pro- Consistent with the statutory directive, State juvenile correctional facility under vided by the U.S. attorneys, the Fed- juveniles charged with acts of juvenile contract to the Federal Bureau of Pris- eral courts, the U.S. Sentencing delinquency in U.S. district courts were ons (table 3). (The Federal Bureau of Commission, and the Federal Bureau most frequently charged with more Prisons does not have its own facilities of Prisons. Data tabulations, except serious offenses such as drug (15%) for juvenile delinquents.) Most (64%) where otherwise indicated, were pre- or violent (32%) offenses. were adjudicated delinquent of a vio- pared from BJS staff analysis of lent offense. source agency datasets. Adjudication Sixty-one percent of the confined Juvenile delinquency proceedings were Of the 122 juveniles charged with juvenile delinquents were Native identified using a delinquency proceed- delinquency whose cases were termi- Americans (table 4). The majority ing code included in the courts’ data- nated in the U.S. district courts during (81%) of the Native Americans con- base, the statute(s) charged (18 1995, approximately 81% were adjudi- fined were adjudicated delinquent of U.S.C. § 5031 et seq.), and a descrip- cated delinquent. Of adjudicated delin- a violent offense  sex offenses tive label in the name field  juvenile quents 87% admitted to the facts (32%), assault (28%), negligent man- records in the database typically do not alleged in the indictment (or informa- slaughter (20%), and robbery (1%). include identifying information such as tion) and 13% were adjudicated The remainder were adjudicated delin- names. Juveniles under jurisdiction of delinquent after a hearing (not shown quent of a property offense. the Bureau of Prisons are housed in in a table). Of juveniles who were not facilities specifically for juveniles. adjudicated delinquent, 90% had the Almost all (88%) of the juveniles con- charges dismissed and 10% were fined were U.S. citizens; 4% were found not delinquent. Mexican citizens, and 3% were Table 4. Demographic character- Chinese citizens. istics of juvenile delinquents Disposition/sanction imposed confined by the Federal Bureau of Prisons, 1994 During 1994, 102 juvenile delinquents Of those juveniles adjudicated delin- were released by the Federal Bureau quent during 1995, 37% were commit- of Prisons from a juvenile correctional Characteristic Number Percent ted to a correctional facility, 59% were Total 124 100.0% Race/ethnicity placed on probation, and 4% received Table 3. Juvenile delinquents a sentence that did not include super- White 9 7.3 confined by the Federal Bureau Black 15 12.1 vision or confinement (table 2). of Prisons, 1994 Hispanic 19 15.3 Native American 75 60.5 Table 2. Disposition of juveniles Most serious offense Number Percent Asian 6 4.8 adjudicated delinquent in U.S. Total* 124 100.0% Citizenship district courts, 1995 Violent offenses 77 64.7 United States 109 87.9 Property offenses 16 13.4 Mexico 5 4.0 Type of disposition Number Percent Drug offenses 17 14.3 China 4 3.2 Public-order offenses 9 7.6 Other 6 4.9 Total 99 100.0% Confinement only 32 32.3 *Includes cases for which an offense cate- Data source: U.S. Department of Justice, Confinement and probation 5 5.1 gory could not be determined. Bureau of Prisons, SENTRY system data Probation only 58 58.6 Data source: U.S. Department of Justice, file, fiscal year ending September 30, 1994. Bureau of Prisons, SENTRY system data No probation 4 4.0 file, fiscal year ending September 30, 1994. Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, criminal docket data file, annual.

Juvenile Delinquents in the Federal Criminal Justice System 3 Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention The Bureau of Justice Statistics is the statistical agency of the The Coordinating Council on Juve- In 1995 the Coordinating Council U.S. Department of Justice. nile Justice and Delinquency Preven- established the Policy Committee on Jan M. Chaiken, Ph.D., is director. tion, a council within the executive Youth in Federal Custody. The Pol- branch of Government, was estab- icy Committee was charged with BJS Special Reports address a lished by the Juvenile Justice and developing policies and procedures special topic in depth from one or Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 for apprehending and maintaining more datasets that cover many (42 U.S.C. § 5616). The Coordinat- custody of juveniles, providing assis- topics. ing Council encourages cooperation tance to agencies addressing unique among the Federal agencies with youth custody issues, and reporting John Scalia of the Bureau of juvenile delinquency programs. annually on the number of juveniles Justice Statistics wrote this report. taken into Federal custody. William J. Sabol of the Urban Insti- Under the Act, the Coordinating tute provided statistical review.  Council is required to As part of its study, the Policy Com- Gina Wood of the Office of Juvenile review the programs and practices mittee has surveyed Federal agen- Justice and Delinquency Prevention of Federal agencies concerning juve- cies on their policies and practices and Steve Shandy of the Criminal niles in their custody on taking juveniles into custody and Division, Department of Justice, review the reasons why Federal on placing those juveniles into provided assistance in the prepara- agencies take juveniles into custody secure custody. In addition, the tion of this report. Tom Hester and recommend how to improve Fed- Policy Committee asked BJS to Tina Dorsey edited the report. Mar- eral practices and facilities for hold- describe juveniles adjudicated in the ilyn Marbrook, assisted by Yvonne ing juveniles in custody Federal criminal justice system. The Boston, administered production. report on the degree to which Fed- Policy Committee will issue a report eral funds are used to deinstitutional- and recommendations to the Coordi- February 1997, NCJ-163066 ize status offenders, separate nating Council. incarcerated juveniles from adults, and remove juveniles from adult jails and lockups. Data presented in this report may be obtained from the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data at the University of Michigan, 1-800-999-0960. The report and data are also available on the Inter- net: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/

4 Juvenile Delinquents in the Federal Criminal Justice System