Juvenile Justice: An Introduction, 8th edition, presents a comprehensive picture of juvenile offending, delinquency theories, and how juvenile justice actors and agencies react to delinquency. It covers the history and development of the juvenile justice system and the unique issues related to juveniles, offering evidence-based suggestions for successful interventions and treatment and examining the new balance model of juvenile court. This new edition not only includes the latest available statistics on juvenile crime and victimization, drug use, court processing, and corrections, but provides insightful analysis of recent developments, such as those related to the use of probation supervision fees; responses to gangs and cyber bullying; implementing the deterrence model (Project Hope); the possible impact of drug legalization; the school-to-prison pipeline; the extent of victimization and mental illness in institutions; and implications of major court decisions regarding juveniles, such as Life Without Parole (LWOP) for juveniles. Each chapter enhances student understanding with Key Terms, a "What You Need to Know" section highlighting important points, and Discussion Questions. Links at key points in the text show students where they can go to get the latest information, and a comprehensive glossary aids comprehension. / https://dc.etsu.edu/etsu_books/1008/thumbnail.jpg

Building on the success of the popular first edition, the authors provide hypothetical criminal justice scenarios for analysis, having found in their experience as teachers that the process adds depth and dimension to the study of justice and ethics. This expanded second edition offers ten new cases addressing the intricate process of moral and ethical decision making. Focusing on both personal and social context, the authors explore true-to-life situations and encourage readers to think about the possible consequences that could result from the choices they make. / https://dc.etsu.edu/etsu_books/1032/thumbnail.jpg

This student-friendly introductory text describes the criminal justice process―outlining the decisions, practices, people, and issues involved. It provides a solid introduction to the mechanisms of the criminal justice system, with balanced coverage of the issues presented by each facet of the process, including a thorough review of practices and controversies in law enforcement, the criminal courts, and corrections. / https://dc.etsu.edu/etsu_books/1022/thumbnail.jpg

Sentencing reform and "tough on crime" policies have assisted in the inflation of the United States' prison population by nearly 400% over the last 50 years. In 2003, justice reinvestment was conceptualized as a way to decrease recidivism and remedy the exorbitant correctional spending by reinvesting funds on rehabilitation and reentry assistance to those leaving custodial institutions. Early implementations of justice reinvestment in Connecticut and Texas achieved both savings and reductions in prison populations. This led to the creation of the Justice Reinvestment Initiative by the U.S. Bureau of Justice Assistance in 2010. Officials of the Justice Reinvestment Initiative sought states who were willing to achieve bi-partisan agreements on reform and reinvestment strategies to assist in the creation and implementation of this new policy. The State of Oregon began this process in early 2012 and completed the process with the enrollment of HB 3194 in July of 2013. Despite the implementation of this policy in 17 states, few evaluations have been performed on the effectiveness of justice reinvestment policy. This study employs a quasi-experimental time series analysis of corrections data from the State of Oregon, the high usage county, medium usage county, and the low usage county proxies to assess the effectiveness of the law. Counties were selected as proxies for levels of justice reinvestment grant usage. These data include prison admissions (June 2010-July 2016), probation admissions (June 2010-July 2016), and the number of individuals on community supervision (July 2010-December 2015). Analyses reveal significant changes in all measures. The results of this study have several implications for current and future implementations of justice reinvestment.

A Specialized or Super Intensive-1 (SI-1) supervision level refers to a contact requirement imposed on special needs offenders (SNOs) under Texas parole supervision. SI-1 supervision requires greater contact with parole officers and treatment providers than supervision levels used on regular offenders (ROs), yet little is known about whether SI-1 supervision offenders violate terms of their parole or commit new crimes at a different rate compared to the regular offender population in the State of Texas. Reconstruction theory and the social construction of reality were used as theoretical underpinnings of this study, which examined whether differences in offenders' supervision levels created statistically significant differences in technical or new law violations in Texas parole hearings. A random sample of 200 SNOs and ROs data were analyzed using a 2-way ANOVA. Results indicated a positive and statistically significant difference between level of supervision and technical violations, with SI-1 offenders committing a greater number of violations of non-criminal terms of parole, but with SI-1 offenders being less likely than the regular offender population to commit new crimes. These findings challenge the social construction that SI-1 offenders introduce a higher element of risk to the community regarding new criminal activity. The positive social change implications of the study include policy recommendations to the Texas legislature and Texas Department of Criminal Justice to refocus resources on improving outcomes related to technical parole violations, including a reduction in SNOs' contact standards, which in turn, promote fiscal responsibility and improvements in public safety for the people of the state of Texas.

For the past several decades, the county jail in a large metropolitan city in the southeast United States has been overcrowded, which has resulted in violence within the jail, excessive costs to the Sheriff's Office, and a requirement of Federal oversight of the jail from 2005 to 2015. In spite of these events, little is understood about why jail overcrowding is prevalent in the county and what impacts overcrowding may have on the communities around the jail. Using Shaw and McKay's social disorganization theory as the foundation, the purpose of this case study was to understand the unique circumstances around in the geographic region that may contribute to overcrowding in order to avoid the risk of future federal government intervention. Data were collected through interviews with jail administrators and staff, commissioners, and judges. Additionally, publicly available data related to the operations of the jail were collected. These data were inductively coded and then subjected to a thematic analysis procedure. Key findings identified the primary causes of overcrowding to include increases in the number of correctional clients with mental health problems, increases in the number of youthful offenders, and deficiencies in capacity at the primary jail facility that has not kept pace with population changes in the county. Positive social change implications include recommendations to jail administrators and lawmakers to use statutory authority to alleviate some of the problems in and around the jail facility. These recommendations may reduce the financial and legal risk for the county and promote public safety both within and outside the jail.

Available research demonstrates that public perceptions and beliefs about the Criminal Justice System (CJS) differ from its actual processes and procedures, but there is little research on the effects of such a difference, specifically with regard to wrongful accusation and/or conviction of factually innocent persons, and their families. Perceptions and beliefs, held as reliable and accurate knowledge, may impact on wrongful accusation/conviction of the factually innocent, both on the lived experiences of wrongly accused/convicted persons themselves, and on perceptions held about them (and responses to calls for case reviews) within the wider public. Although a great deal of research has been carried out on the subject of wrongful conviction generally, this has focussed, in the main, on legal, procedural and structural causes of wrongful conviction, and, in particular, on a small number of ‘high profile’ cases. This research examines perceptions and beliefs held as knowledge by individuals claiming to be factually innocent, wrongly accused/convicted persons, and the results of attempts to employ such perceptions and beliefs to maintain claims of innocence. Further, the experiences of family and friends of the wrongly convicted, whose lives continue in the community following the conviction of their family member, are examined, with particular attention to the interface of beliefs and perceptions between such families and the wider community. To a lesser extent, the role of the media, in shaping public opinion, the effects of media coverage on trial procedures and outcomes, and non-reporting or selective reporting is also addressed. A series of semi-structured interviews was carried out throughout the UK, with wrongly accused/convicted persons, family members of those individuals, and members of groups and organisations working to highlight the problems of wrongful accusation and conviction. A survey aimed at examining key perceptions and beliefs, held as factual knowledge about the CJS within the wider public, was also conducted. The analysis of the data indicated that not only do individuals and families attempt to employ erroneous perceptions and beliefs as factual knowledge in cases of wrongful accusation and conviction, but that such attempts feed into and support the case against the wrongly accused (in direct opposition to the aims and objectives of those employing them). Furthermore, knowledge of the actual workings of the CJS (held by CJS actors) can be, and is, used to exploit the ignorance of those so accused, and their family members. This is made possible because legal meanings of key words and phrases are vastly different from their commonly understood meanings, a factor known only to CJS actors, and not, generally, to the wider public. Political rhetoric and media representations support and reinforce those commonly held understandings, simultaneously maintaining the inaccessible code of actual CJS processes, thereby influencing public perceptions of those who are accused and convicted.

published_or_final_version / Sociology / Master / Master of Social Sciences

No description available.

No description available.