Kareem L. Jordan

Examining the Impact of Race and Ethnicity on the Sentencing of Juveniles in the Adult Court

Several studies have examined the effects of race and ethnicity on the sentences of adult offenders in the criminal court. The findings of these studies often show that race and ethnicity influence defendants’ sentencing outcomes. Few studies, however, have examined how race and ethnicity influence juvenile defendants sentenced in the adult criminal justice system. The purpose of this study, therefore, is to determine how race and ethnicity affect the sentences of juveniles, utilizing a national dataset of youth convicted of a felony in adult court. The findings suggest that race and ethnicity do impact the sentencing outcomes of convicted youthful offenders. In addition, the results suggest that the combination of race and other factors (i.e., interactions) has an effect on sentencing. Implications for subsequent research also are discussed.

Juvenile Transfer and Deterrence: Reexamining the Effectiveness of a “Get-Tough” Policy

Although research has examined the effectiveness of juvenile transfer on recidivism, there has been a lack of research done in assessing how well juvenile waiver to adult court meets the criteria necessary for deterrence to occur (i.e., certainty, severity, and swiftness of punishment). The purpose of this study is to assess how well juvenile transfer meets these criteria, using data on 345 youths legislatively waived to adult court in Pennsylvania. The findings indicate that there is greater punishment severity in adult court, but there is no difference in punishment certainty between the two court systems. In addition, court processing occurred more quickly in juvenile court. In other words, only one element of deterrence theory is achieved with juvenile transfer. Implications for subsequent research and policy are discussed.

The Decertification of Transferred Youth: Examining the Determinants of Reverse Waiver

Much of the research on juvenile transfer to adult court examines the predictors of the waiver decision. Few studies, however, have focused on the determinants of decertification, a process whereby certain initially transferred youth are reverse waived to juvenile court. This study sought to examine this underresearched area by focusing specifically on the factors that predict decertification and utilizing quantitative data pertaining to 345 youth initially transferred to adult court in 1996 under Pennsylvanias law that automatically excludes certain youth from juvenile court jurisdiction. The findings indicated that legal factors are the strongest predictors of decertification. The need for further research and policy implications also are discussed.

Racial Profiling in Decisions to Search: A Preliminary Analysis Using Propensity-Score Matching

The objective of the present study was to understand if racial and/or ethnic backgrounds are causal factors in a police officers decision to search individuals during traffic stops. Using the Police-Public Contact Survey and propensity-score matching, the study results indicate that Blacks are significantly more likely to be searched than Whites. There were no differences, however, in searches between Hispanics and Whites. These findings suggest that race, but not ethnicity, appears to be a causal factor in a police officers decision to search. The implications of this finding, along with directions for future research, are also discussed.

The Effect of Race/Ethnicity on Sentencing: Examining Sentence Type, Jail Length, and Prison Length

The purpose of this research was to examine the impact of race/ethnicity on criminal sentencing outcomes. The findings from prior studies tend to be mixed on this issue. Using 4 years of data from the State Court Processing Statistics (2000, 2002, 2004, and 2006) and propensity score matching, we examined the impact of race/ethnicity on sentencing outcomes among Blacks, Hispanics, and Whites. The findings suggest that racial/ethnic biases occur in the sentence type (community sanction, jail, or prison) and jail length decisions though not in the prison length decision. It is important to separate jail length and prison length when examining incarceration time. Combining the 2 distinct sentences may confound the true impact of factors on these outcomes.

Race and gender: An examination of the models that explain evaluations of the court system for differences

A growing body of research examines the relationship between procedural justice and discrimination and evaluations of the courts for different races/ethnicities and genders. This article uses a national probability sample to make this examination. The results show that fairness of treatment and the perception of performance are important to individuals in their evaluation of the courts. In the subsample analysis, the fairness of treatment by the courts is important to the evaluation of the courts. Further, z‐tests show that this measure impacts the evaluation of the courts equally for whites, blacks, Hispanics, males, and females. In addition, the study shows that fairness of treatment has about the same level of impact on evaluations of the courts when the subsample analysis is stratified by a combination of race/ethnicity and gender.

Minority threat and criminal sentencing: examining juveniles in the adult criminal justice system

Abstract Racial/ethnic threat has been researched regarding its impact on criminal sentencing. Past research has been fairly mixed, but a significant number of studies suggest that in areas of higher minority concentration, sentencing is generally harsher. Most of the existing research has utilized adult samples in testing this hypothesis. The current research adds to the existing research through the examination of juvenile offenders convicted in the adult criminal justice system. The data included a national sample of 3457 juveniles convicted in criminal court during 1998 across 40 counties within the United States. In this study, the racial/ethnic hypothesis was examined to assess its effect on sentencing among juveniles in the criminal system. The findings suggest some support for minority threat having an effect on sentencing decisions.

Race/Ethnicity and Perceptions of Safety Among a National Sample of Americans

This article examined the role of race/ethnicity on the perceptions of safety among a diverse sample of Americans. Using a recent Gallup poll, it was revealed that Blacks and Hispanics were less likely than Whites to be satisfied with their safety from harm and violence. The multivariate analyses also found that more educated individuals and those with higher incomes were more likely to be satisfied with their level of safety. Other significant factors included political ideology, church attendance, and region. Split sample logistic regression models found additional significant differences by race/ ethnicity. The implications of the research also are discussed.

Special Issue on Race and Juvenile Justice Official journal of the American Society of Criminology, Division on People of Color and Crime

Race and Justice: An International Journal is a quarterly forum for quality scholarship on race, ethnicity, and justice. Of particular interest to the journal are policy-oriented papers that examine how race and ethnicity intersect with justicesystem outcomes across the globe, and research that tests or expands theoretical perspectives exploring the intersection of race and ethnicity, class, gender, and justice. The journal is open to scholarship from all disciplinary origins and methodological approaches (qualitative and/or quantitative). The Race and Justice editors, associate editors, and editorial board strive to provide fair, useful reviews, prompt decisions, and timely publication.

Book Review: The Juvenile Justice System: Law and Process

The juvenile justice system officially emerged in the United States in 1899. Prior to that time, there was no official or legal distinction between “juveniles” and “adults” who engaged in illegal behavior. Although there were some attempts to separate youth from their adult counterparts prior to 1899 (e.g., in houses of refuge and reformatories), juveniles generally had their trials held in the same criminal court as adults, and many youth were housed subsequently with adult inmates. After the development of the juvenile court, youth were viewed as being a protected population. Through treatment, rehabilitation, and separation from adults, it was believed that they would have an increased likelihood of becoming productive citizens. This new system for youthful offenders was based on the doctrine of parens patriae, meaning if a youth’s parents were not able to “adequately” address the needs of their child, the state would act as a pseudo-parent for the child. This doctrine implied that individual needs of juveniles would be the main priority of the system, and the juvenile court should be able to exercise wide discretion in addressing those needs. The goals of the juvenile court were contrary to the goals of the adult criminal court, which emphasized incapacitation, retribution, and punishment for those convicted. Again, if juveniles were to be “saved,” there must be a clear distinction between the services, procedures, and goals of the juvenile and adult courts. The state of the juvenile court (past and present) and its processes are thoroughly examined in the recently published The Juvenile Justice System: Law and Process by Joseph B. Sanborn, Jr., and Anthony W. Salerno. In this book, Sanborn and Salerno provide extensive coverage of the history of the juvenile court, the nature of juvenile offenses, the juvenile court process itself, the roles of key players within the process, societal responses to juvenile misbehavior, and directions for the juvenile court in the future. The authors address three underlying themes throughout the text: the unique characteristics of juvenile court processing, the “unequal” processing that can occur in juvenile court, and the dual nature of processing in juvenile court (i.e., providing treatment and punishment). The theme of unique processing within juvenile court is critically examined throughout the entire text. First, Sanborn and Salerno briefly trace the history that led to the need for a juvenile court. They examine the effect of Quaker reforms, houses of refuge, reformatories, and the distinct efforts of “child-savers” on the resulting system for juvenile offenders. Although the discussion of each is not thorough, it is meant to provide a foundation to the rest of the text, for which it is successful.