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

Nonresident Delinquents: Whose Problem Are They?

NCJ Number
138227
Journal
Journal of Juvenile Law Volume: 10 Issue: 2 Dated: (1989) Pages: 179-192
Author(s)
A R Mahoney
Date Published
1989
Length
14 pages
Annotation
Data from all the youths who entered diversion or the juvenile court in one suburban jurisdiction in 1980 were used to examine the hypothesis that juvenile courts are less likely to provide local resources to nonresident youths than to resident youths.
Abstract
Information came from police reports, court and diversion program records, and predisposition reports on all 710 youths for whom delinquency petitions were filed and all 452 youths for whom diversion referrals were made during that year. Results revealed that 34 percent of the youths who had petitions filed in court and 22 percent of the diverted youths were nonresidents, most of whom lived in the nearby city. However, nonresidents did not differ greatly from residents on personal and offense characteristics or on previous record. Case processing times were also similar for the two groups. Nevertheless, the case outcomes differed. Nonresidents were less likely than residents to be referred to the local diversion program and when referred were less likely to have as many meetings with their counselors. When they were sent to court, they were more likely to be dismissed. When nonresidents received court dispositions, they were more likely to receive ones with lower costs to the community. Thus, they were more likely than residents to receive fines, less likely to be placed on probation, and more likely to be committed to State institutions than to locally financed facilities. Findings support the view that nonresidents are marginal in this court and receive proportionately less of the court's resources than residents. Results indicate the usefulness of expanding the range of variables considered when analyzing decisionmaking in juvenile courts and other courts. Tables and footnotes