Transcript Lecture 6
CRIM 309 Intake and Diversion Intake • Intake=Process of screening cases referred to the juvenile justice system • Determines which cases will be formally processed v. those handled without formal court processing • Offenses range in seriousness; court resources are reserved for more serious cases – Avoids stigma – More efficient use of resources – More effective in the long run Accomplishing Intake • Intake officers review the case and make a determination of how to process • Who act as intake officers? Depends on the state and how the system is structured. Typically, this involves one of the following: – Probation officer acting as an intake officer makes the final decision on how to process – Prosecutor acting as an intake officer makes the final decision on how to process – Probation officer makes an initial decision that is referred to the prosecutor for a final decision – Probation officer handles less serious charges and the prosecutor handles more serious charges Court Rulings on Intake • Little guidance at the Supreme Court level • Does not require representation • Information collected prior to the adjudication can be tricky—can it be used later in the adjudication proceedings? – Use of Miranda would enable the use of the information – No clarity in how the information will be used before it is collected will cause problems – Some states prohibit the use of intake information in the adjudication proceeding Result of Intake • Intake officers determine whether the case will be dismissed, handled formally (delinquency petition), diverted, or waived to the adult court • Just over ½ will be petitioned to juvenile court for an adjudication hearing • A very small percent will be waived to adult court • The remaining amount will be dismissed or diverted from formal processing The Intake Process • Intake is essentially a point in the process to assess public safety with regard to specific offenders • Includes assessment of a variety of risk related characteristics • May include a screening tool to determine what should be done with the youth • Typically, this process is connected to referrals to other programming that may be needed by the youth and family Diversion • Informal handling of the charges; youth must admit to the charges – The case is “adjusted” • Youth must attend and successfully complete a program related to their offending • Typically, the youth must complete the program within a specific period of time • If youth successfully completes the program, the prosecutor does not charge the youth • If youth is not successful in completing the program, the prosecutor will formally adjudicate the youth in court for the charges Diversion, Continued • Acceptance of diversion is voluntary – If decline, the case is typically petitioned to court for adjudication • There is no constitutional right to diversion programming • Diversion programming can be viewed as a prior record • Diversion can be informal or formal Examples of Diversion • • • • • Teen Court Alcohol and Drug Education Program Scared Straight Pre-adjudication drug courts Victim mediation Concerns • When one takes diversion as an option, there are no due process protections • Diversion program raises concerns over net widening (bringing more kids under the system simply because programming is available)