John D. Burrow

Youth Behavior, School Structure, and Student Risk of Victimization

Although a growing body of research on student safety focuses on school disorder, school climate, and the intersection of community/situational factors, comparatively less research has focused specifically on the individual‐ and school‐level factors that put students at risk of victimization in the immediate school environ. The present study is an attempt to broaden our understanding of the contribution of schools and school behavior to the victimization experiences of students. We compare traditional routine activity constructs to understand whether and how they differentially influence the risk of community and school victimization. Additionally, we investigate what school‐related variables (behavioral and structural) explain variation in young people’s risk for school victimization.

Gender and Sentencing Outcomes in South Carolina: Examining the Interactions With Race, Age, and Offense Type

Despite sentencing reforms over the last few decades, many states failed to introduce guidelines, including South Carolina. The present article uses data collected from the now disbanded South Carolina Sentencing Commission (1982 to 2003) in order to assess the influence of gender, age, race, and type of crime. We found that females were consistently sentenced more leniently than were similarly situated males. Interactions between gender and the other variables, however, failed to gain significance with the exception of gender and offense type for the sentence length decision. Interestingly, we found a significant interaction between gender and offense severity level for both sentencing outcomes and criminal history for the incarceration decision. We discuss the implications of these findings in the event that South Carolina would have adopted sentencing guidelines.

Adolescent Victimization and Violent Self-Help

A generation of criminological research demonstrates considerable overlap between victim and offender populations. Although there is compelling theoretical and empirical evidence that criminal offenders live a high-risk lifestyle that exposes them to a higher likelihood of becoming victims of crime themselves, we take as a point of departure the possibility that an individual’s experiences as a crime victim might also motivate them to engage in certain forms of violent behavior as a form of ‘‘self-help.’’ In this study, violent self-help is conceptualized to encompass gang membership, handgun carrying, and aggravated assault. An analysis of data from a nationally representative sample of adolescents (12 years of age at the initial interview) provides support for the proposition that experienced and vicarious victimization are precursors to later violent behavior, even among youth with no history of violent behavior.

Reverse Waiver and the Effects of Legal, Statutory, and Secondary Legal Factors on Sentencing Outcomes for Juvenile Offenders

Over the past few decades, various forms of waiver have become increasingly used at the state level. Generally, the research literature has focused on three types of waiver: judicial, prosecutorial, and legislative. Reverse waiver, a fourth type, remains little studied. Moreover, little is known of the factors that judges consider when making the decision to either sentence juvenile offenders as adults or sentence them as juveniles after they have been waived. This article is an attempt to shed some light on how factors unrelated to the instant offense, often the case with reverse waiver, may affect sentencing outcomes for waived offenders. Several important findings were revealed. First, judges are sentencing the most violent and serious offenders as adults. Second, secondary legal factors such as pending charges and prior placements influence the sentencing decision. Third, the amount of experience that judges have in handling waiver cases significantly influences the sentencing decision.

Examining the influence of Matza's principles of justice and their impact on reverse waiver decisions: has kadi-(in)justice survived?

During the last decade, a number of studies have presented a mixed picture regarding the efficacy of transfer to adult court. A focus on legal and secondary legal factors have shed a considerable amount of light on transfer decisions; however, little is known about the factors that judges consider when they use reverse waiver to keep offenders under juvenile court jurisdiction. Using a sample of 530 offenders who were transferred to adult court (direct file), this study uses Matzas principles of justice as a framework for understanding the sentencing decisions of judges who use their sentencing power to reverse waive offenders back to juvenile court. Findings suggest that extralegal factors such as offense location and personal characteristics of judges may play an important role in the decision-making process.

A Multilevel Test of the Racial Threat Hypothesis in One State’s Juvenile Court:

Noting the paucity of research on the racial threat hypothesis in the juvenile courts, this study examined the interplay of defendant characteristics and country-level characteristics on dispositions. Data were retrieved from the Department of Juvenile Justice files in South Carolina and were analyzed using multinomial logistic hierarchical linear modeling. Results revealed support for the racial threat hypothesis, as racial inequity operated in a different manner (more punitively) for Black defendants. Larger Black populations in counties also led to an increased use of punitive sanctions. In addition, concentrated disadvantage effects were found, and heightened levels of teenage population led to higher incarceration rates for Black defendants. Limitations of this study, implications for stakeholders/practitioners, and directions for future research are discussed.

A Preliminary Assessment of the Impact of Plea Bargaining Among a Sample of Waiver-Eligible Offenders

This study examines the use of plea bargaining among a sample of waiver-eligible juveniles. Using focal concerns as our theoretical foundation, we examine whether concerns about public safety and blameworthiness help to shape plea bargain decision making. Data from a juvenile court in one South Carolina jurisdiction were analyzed using logistic regression (N = 241). This research finds that several factors influence the plea bargain decision including type of offense, number of victims, age, and race. Additionally, the analysis shows that there are several interactive effects between race, first-time offenders, and presence of an attorney. The theoretical and policy implications of these findings are discussed.

Untangling the Dynamics of Judicial Decision Making and Inmates’ Free Exercise Claims

The federal courts have played a central role in establishing important rights for inmates, including the Free Exercise of religion. However, there is little empirical research on the nexus between court decision making, inmates’ Free Exercise claims, and correctional policies/practices. This research is an attempt to understand this decision-making dynamic by using a sample of 330 federal cases from 2000 to 2007 to examine legal and nonlegal factors that are suspected to affect Free Exercise claims. Importantly, security concerns and legal precedents are among the strongest predictors of whether courts will find in favor of inmates who make Free Exercise claims.

How Long Must They Wait? Lackey Claims, Excessive Delay, and Evolving Standards of Decency

An almost inherent characteristic of American death penalty jurisprudence is the long period of time that passes between the sentencing of a death-eligible defendant and the defendant’s execution. Although defendants who are sentenced to death row have a clear interest in exhausting all appeals, in many cases, the entire process may take 20 to 30 years or more, possibly exposing these individuals to undue physical and psychological harm. Such harm, when combined with the execution itself, may violate the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The current piece examines the concept of Lackey claims and examines such claims within the framework of “evolving standards of decency.” Recommendations for policy are also discussed.