U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Evalution of Statutory Time Limit Pilot Schemes in the Youth Court

NCJ Number
212172
Author(s)
Joanna Shapland; Jennifer Johnstone; Angela Sorsby; Tamsin Stubbing; Jeremy Hibbert; Marie Howes; John Jackson; Emily Colledge
Date Published
January 2003
Length
254 pages
Annotation
This is the final report on the evaluation of the use of statutory time limits in youth courts in six pilot jurisdictions in England and Wales.
Abstract
The statutory time limits were introduced in the six jurisdictions on November 1, 1999. Three time frames were mandated for case processing: the initial time limit (ITL), which extended from arrest to first appearance in the youth court (limit of 36 days); the overall time limit (OTL), which extended from the first appearance in court to the first day of trial (limit of 99 days); and the sentencing time limit (STL), which extended from conviction to sentencing (limit of 29 days). The first stage of the evaluation was from January 2000 to late 2000, leading to an interim report; and the second stage was completed at the end of 2001. The evaluation produced three databases on police arrests and three databases on the progress of cases at court. There were 31,892 arrests in the sample and 14,733 charges/summonses. Interviews were conducted with 164 practitioners in 2000 and 154 practitioners in 2001. Observations were performed in all youth courts. The evaluation concludes that time limits are an effective means of safeguarding the right to be brought to trial as soon as possible and that the pilot time limits conform to the standards set by the European Court under the European Convention. The overall view of interviewees was that the time limits, with the exception of the STL, be implemented nationally for youth courts. The evaluators agree with this view. Some areas noted for attention pertain to exactly when time limits begin; when and in what circumstance they resume once they have been interrupted; and when, in cases where defendants plead guilty but then change their plea to not guilty, the time limit ends. Extensive tables and figures and 33 references