Guide To Juvenile Justice In Nyc

Transcription

CITIZENS CRIME COMMISSION
OF NEW YORK CITY
Guide to Juvenile Justice in New York City
By:
Ashley Cannon
Richard Aborn
John Bennett
Advisor: Judge Philip C. Segal (ret.)
Citizens Crime Commission of New York City, Inc.
An independent nonprofit organization working to make criminal justice and
public safety policies and practices more effective through innovation, research,
and education.
May 2010
Citizens Crime Commission of New York City, Inc.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This report was researched and written by Ashley Cannon, with
editing by Richard Aborn and John Bennett.
The Crime Commission would like to thank Judge Philip Segal for
his advisement and the Crime Commission Board of Directors for
their guidance and support throughout this project.
The Crime Commission would also like to thank Tiffany Bryant,
and all the organizations that submitted information and data for
their contribution to this report.
A letter from Richard Aborn
President of the Citizens Crime Commission
The Crime Commission has been a long-time supporter of a comprehensive approach to preventing and responding
to juvenile crime. Juvenile crime is a priority in the Crime Commission’s work because effective prevention and
intervention strategies can deter future criminality. The juvenile justice system is an important component in
intervention strategies “because youth referred to court before the age of 13 are far more likely to become chronic
offenders than youth whose initial contact occurs at a later age.”1
New York’s juvenile justice system has reached a point of extreme crisis. With increasing frequency, reports of
fundamental breakdowns throughout the system have come to the public’s attention:
• A State Senate report found that an overburdened Family Court system is resulting in “missed
chances to rescue teenagers from delinquency and crime.”2
• An investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice documented excessive use of force, and
inadequate mental health care and treatment services in several New York State Office of
Children and Family Services (OCFS) facilities [juvenile prisons].3
• Governor Paterson’s Task Force on Transforming Juvenile Justice concluded that “New York
State’s current approach fails the young people who are drawn into the system, the public whose
safety it is intended to protect, and the principles of good governance that demand effective use
of scarce state resources.”4
This is a critical moment to take actions that will fix the juvenile justice system and better serve our youth. The
Bloomberg and Paterson Administrations have made a priority of enhancing public safety through improving the
outcomes of the juvenile justice system. Over the past few years, reforms have emerged at both the state and city
level:
• OCFS Commissioner Gladys Carrión has closed several underutilized facilities, has begun to
implement a therapeutic model within placement facilities, and has urged the expanded use of
community-based alternatives to incarceration.5
• Governor Paterson’s Task Force on Transforming Juvenile Justice issued a set of
recommendations that “aim to reduce the use of institutional placement; reinvest resources in
community-based alternatives; eliminate inequities across the system, including those practices
that disproportionately impact youth of color; improve the supports and services provided to
young people in state custody and upon release; and ensure system accountability.”6
• To expand services to court-involved youth, in 2010, Mayor Bloomberg reorganized the city’s
administration of juvenile detention by consolidating the Department of Juvenile Justice under
the Administration for Children’s Services.7
• Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman has announced a series of initiatives to help address juvenile
crime: a) the introduction of a legislative proposal to enable the Judiciary to assume statewide
oversight of juvenile probation; b) a pilot program in Queens that will provide mentally-ill young
people with treatment in the community as an alternative to incarceration; and a plan for a
Community Court in Brownsville, Brooklyn to address juvenile crime and expand services for
young offenders.8
i
Citizens Crime Commission of New York City
• A series of best practices are emerging that have significant potential to reduce the incidents of
juvenile offending. Practices such as Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care, Multisystemic
Therapy, and Functional Family Therapy.
These are all steps in the right direction, but there are still areas that have not been addressed:
• New York currently sends youth ages 16 and 17 to the adult criminal justice system, despite
extensive research indicating that youth at this stage of development would benefit from other
interventions, and that this not an effective approach to reducing future criminality.
• Reforms to date have focused on the events that occur after a youth has entered the justice
system, we are in need of a more comprehensive approach that prevents delinquency and justice
system involvement. The state and city must continue to look at what can be done within the
education system and at the police level to better protect youth. Such programs have focused on
truancy reduction; training teachers to identify risk factors and providing them the tools to
intervene; training police officers in de-escalation techniques; and improving police-youth
relationships.
In light of the increasing attention to the juvenile justice system and the substantial reforms planned and
implemented, the Citizens Crime Commission of New York City has developed a Guide to Juvenile Justice in
New York City, to enhance the public’s understanding of the City’s juvenile justice policies and practices, which
can often be confusing. This guide provides an overview of New York City’s juvenile justice system with historical
context, and highlights the recent efforts made by the City and State to expand alternative programs available to
court-involved youth.
We hope this guide will better inform the citizens of New York of the critical need to better serve our youth.
Very truly yours,
Richard M. Aborn
President
ii
Reform Timeline 2270 B.C. - 1979 A.D.
2270 B.C.
Code of Hammurabi
A.D.
1797
NY Juveniles begin to be tried in Criminal Court
1824
NY Legislation requires youths to be in separate institutions from
adults
1825
House of Refuge opens
1851
NY Juvenile Asylum opens
1865
Disorderly Child Act
1902
Manhattan Children’s Court opens
1924
Truly independent Children’s Court begins operation
1927
NY Court of Appeals rules to apply standards of Criminal Procedure
to juvenile cases
1953
Manida Juvenile Center for girls opens in Hunts Point
1957
Spofford Juvenile Center for boys opens in Hunts Point
1962
NY Family Court Act creates the Family Court structure used today
1966
Kent v. United States - applies due process standards to proceedings
to transfer juveniles to adult court
1967
In re Gault - applies 14th Amendment protections to juvenile cases
1968
Federal Juvenile Delinquency Prevention and Control Act
1970
In re Winship - changes the standard of proof in juvenile cases to
‘Beyond a Reasonable Doubt’
1971
McKeiver v. Pennsylvania - Supreme Court rules jury trial is not
constitutionally required in juvenile cases
1974
Federal Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act
1976
NY Juvenile Justice Reform Act
1978
NY Juvenile Offender Act
iii
Reform Timeline 1984 - Present
1979
NYC Department of Juvenile Justice created
1984
Schall v. Martin - Supreme Court rules to allow the preventative
detention of juveniles
1990
Juveniles viewed as “superpredators”
1998
Horizon and Crossroads Juvenile Centers open
1999
Bridges Juvenile Center opens
2001
NY expands the maximum age of status offenders from 16 to 18
providing more access to the PINS system
2006
NYC Department of Probation closes Alternative to Detention
program
2007
Mayor Bloomberg vows to hold youths accountable and help youths
get services in State of the City address
NYC Department of Probation launches new Alternative-toDetention program with incorporated Risk Assessment Instrument
2008
NYC begins weekend arraignment for juvenile cases
OCFS announces right-sizing plan to close residential facilities and
reduce capacity in others
Governor Paterson convenes Task Force on Transforming New
York’s Juvenile Justice System
2009
U.S. Department of Justice investigation finds use of excessive force
in NY juvenile placement facilities
Governor Paterson’s Task Force on Transforming New York’s
Juvenile Justice System releases recommendations to reform the
State’s juvenile placement process
2010
iv
Mayor Bloomberg announces the consolidation of the city
Department of Juvenile Justice and Administration for Children’s
Services in State of the City address
Table of Contents
Page Number
LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT
i
REFORM TIMELINE
iii
I: INTRODUCTION
1
II: BACKGROUND
3
A. The Juvenile Under New York State Law
3
B. History
5
III: NEW YORK CITY JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM
13
A. Juvenile Justice Process
19
B. Continuum of Services
45
APPENDIX
79
I. New York Juvenile Justice Statistics
81
II. National Juvenile Justice Statistics
95
ENDNOTES
99
v
Page Number
EXHIBITS, NOTES, FIGURES, & TABLES
EXHIBIT 1: Deterrence
EXHIBIT 2: Extended Jurisdiction
EXHIBIT 3: Detention and Placement Definitions
EXHIBIT 4: Designated Felonies
EXHIBIT 5: Person In Need of Supervision (PINS)
EXHIBIT 6: Parens Patriae
NOTE 1: New York City Domestic Relations Court
EXHIBIT 7: Status Offenses
EXHIBIT 8: Aftercare
FIGURE 1: Juvenile Justice System Flow Chart: Juvenile Delinquent
FIGURE 2: Juvenile Justice System Flow Chart: Juvenile Offender
NOTE 2: Youthful Offender and 16 & 17 year-old Arrests
TABLE 1: Juvenile Arrests
EXHIBIT 9: Risk Assessment Instrument
TABLE 2: Juvenile Offender Cases CY2008
EXHIBIT 10: Family Court
EXHIBIT 11: Initial Court Appearance and Arraignment
EXHIBIT 12: Criminal Court
NOTE 3: Weekend Arraignment
NOTE 4: Detention Administration
EXHIBIT 13: MAYSI
EXHIBIT 14: Fact-Finding Hearing and Trial
EXHIBIT 15: Disposition Hearing and Sentencing Hearing
EXHIBIT 16: Criminal Supreme Court
Table 3: Range of Minimum and Maximum Sentences by Felony
Class Category Juvenile Offenders
EXHIBIT 17: Indeterminate and Determinate Sentence Definitions
EXHIBIT 18: Board of Parole
EXHIBIT 19: Merit Time Eligibility
TABLE 4: Example Release Eligibility Calculation
EXHIBIT 20: Alternative Courts
FIGURE 3: Juvenile Justice System Continuum of Services
FIGURE 4: ATD Program Continuum of Supervision Services
Data Disclaimer: Organizations that collect data on the juvenile justice
system maintain different compilation methods including timeframes
(i.e. fiscal year or calendar year) and publication requirements (i.e.
annually or biannually). Therefore, the data included in this report
may not be able to be compared on a one-to-one basis.
The NYC Government’s fiscal year runs from July 1st to June 30th.
vi
1
1
2
3
5
5
6
7
9
13
16
19
19
20
21
22
22
23
24
24
26
28
28
31
31
35
35
36
36
42
45
51
INTRODUCTION
“No area of domestic policy…has been so thoroughly abandoned to
misinformation…emotion and disregard for consequences as has the area of
juvenile justice.” – Douglas Nelson, President, Annie E. Casey Foundation, 19999
Over 12,500 juveniles entered the New York City justice system in 2008.10 This statistic illustrates the
significant number of youths who come in contact with New York City’s Juvenile Justice System. New York State
defines the objectives and principles of the juvenile justice system as seeking to:
promote community safety by deterring [see exhibit 1] crime and other Exhibit 1: Deterrence
anti-social behavior among the state’s young people.
Objectives are to:
y Reduce violent and serious crime,
y Prevent delinquency through positive youth development,
y Promote individual accountability, and
y Provide effective treatment and aftercare services for
youths involved in the system.
Theses objectives are based on the following principles:
y The right of all citizens to public safety and protection,
y The needs and rights of victims,
y The right of the accused to a fair and impartial
consideration of the facts,
• Selection of an appropriate disposition, including sanctions
to repair harm to the victim and community, and
• The provision of services, treatment, and/or custody for
those needing intervention.11
Deterrence is a behavioral
outcome of reduced offending or
re-offending.
Specific Deterrence - refers to
juveniles who have come in
contact with the justice system.
General Deterrence - refers to
juveniles in the population who
may engage in criminal activity.
Exhibit 2: Extended Jurisdiction
In New York, juvenile jurisdiction encompasses youths over 7 and under 16 Extended jurisdiction allows the
years of age, with extended jurisdiction (see exhibit 2) through age
20.12
Youths
who break the law may be prosecuted in Family or Criminal Court depending
on their age and the nature of the offense.
The juvenile justice process in New York City involves a complex and
vast system of city and state agencies and nonprofit providers operating to
Family Court judge to maintain
authority over a delinquency case
past the court’s original
jurisdiction for disposition
purposes. In effect, the judge
may order a juvenile delinquent
to remain under the supervision
of juvenile correctional
authorities until his/her 21st
birthday instead of transferring
the individual to the adult
corrections system at age 16.
1
achieve the objectives set out by the State. The policies governing the juvenile justice
system, however, do not always produce these intended outcomes. This fact is
illustrated by the significant recidivism rates among youths leaving detention and
placement—49.4% of youths released from detention facilities are readmitted;13 and
an estimated eighty percent of youths released from placement return within three
years14 (see exhibit 3). Further, the system is disproportionately impacting minority
groups, the mentally ill, substance abusers, and under-resourced neighborhoods—95%
of youths entering detention are of African-American or Latino decent;15 83% of
Exhibit 3: Detention and
Placement Definitions
In the juvenile system,
detention is the equivalent
of jail in the adult criminal
justice system, and
placement is the
equivalent of prison in the
adult criminal justice
system.
youths in detention required mental health services in fiscal year (FY) 2008;16 74%
of youths in placement require substance abuse treatment;17 and 40% of youths
admitted to detention in FY2008 came from only 15 of the city’s 59 community
districts,18 and 68% of those youths came from areas where poverty rates are between
32% and 46%.19 In addition, this is occurring at an exorbitant expense to the City and
State—the total City budget for the juvenile justice system in FY2008 was over $251
million.20
The Bloomberg and Paterson Administrations have made a priority of
enhancing public safety through improving the outcomes of the juvenile justice
system. Over the past few years, substantial reforms have been recommended and
implemented to expand the opportunities for court-involved youths to receive services
that address their needs while still holding them accountable. The purpose of the
Citizens Crime Commission of New York City’s Guide to Juvenile Justice in New
York City, is to enhance the public’s understanding of the City’s juvenile justice
policies and practices. This guide provides an overview of New York City’s juvenile
justice system with historical context, and highlights the recent efforts made by the
City and State to expand alternative programs available to court-involved youths.
2
BACKGROUND
A.The Juvenile Under New York Law
Beginning at age seven, youths in New York can be prosecuted for engaging in criminal behavior.
Under New York State law these youths fall into one of three categories: Juvenile Delinquent, Juvenile Offender,
or Youthful Offender. These categories are defined by the youth’s age and are contingent on whether the youth
is considered to be criminally responsible for his/her behavior.
Juvenile Delinquent
A Juvenile Delinquent is a youth over 7 and under 16 who commits an
Exhibit 4: Designated Felonies
act that would be a crime if committed by an adult and is not criminally
responsible for his/her actions due to infancy.22 Juvenile Delinquents are
prosecuted in Family Court by the New York City Law Department. Following
adjudication these youths may face a disposition of a term of placement for a
maximum of 12 months for a misdemeanor; 18 months for a felony; or 5 years
for a designated felony (see exhibit 4), in New York State Office of Children and
Family Services (OCFS) administered facilities.23 The court may extend the term
of placement if the youth requires further services, without consent of the youth
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
Murder
Kidnapping
Arson
Assault
Manslaughter
Rape
Sodomy
Aggravated sexual abuse
Robbery
Burglary
Assault21
up to age 18 or with consent from the youth up to age 21.24
Juvenile Offender
A Juvenile Offender is a youth age 13, 14 or 15 who commits a serious crime and is assumed to be
criminally responsible due to the serious nature of the offense. This category applies to youths who commit serious
or violent crimes (including all designated felonies).25 Juvenile Offender cases are automatically assigned to the
adult criminal court system for prosecution by the county District Attorney’s Office. Although prosecuted in the
adult system, convicted youths serve their sentence in secure Office of Children and Family Services facilities
until their 16th birthday (or age 21 if permitted). Juvenile Offenders are subject to adult sentences and may face
up to life in prison for murder.26 The juvenile offender case may be transferred to Family Court prior to indictment,
before trial, or for sentencing, to be handled as a juvenile delinquency designated felony case, if the court finds
there is not reasonable cause to believe that the defendant is criminally responsible.27
3
Youthful Offender
Once youths reach age 16, under New York law they are
considered criminally responsible and fall under the jurisdiction of the
adult criminal justice system. Individuals 16 and over are prosecuted in
criminal court by the county District Attorney’s Office and serve their
sentence under adult correctional authorities. Any youth who is convicted
as a Juvenile Offender or is convicted of a crime committed between the
ages of 16 and 18 may be eligible for consideration as a Youthful
Offender. In the interest of justice, the court may grant a ‘youthful
offender finding’ in substitution for a criminal conviction providing a
discounted sentence and relieving the onus of a criminal record.28 Thus,
Youthful Offenders are not identified as such until the sentencing hearing.
Youthful Offenders who were not originally convicted as Juvenile
Offenders (those who committed a crime between ages 16 and 18) serve
their sentence with the New York State Department of Correctional
Services (DOCS). Juvenile Offenders who are granted a youthful offender
finding serve their sentences in secure OCFS facilities until they reach
their 16th birthday at which time they may be transferred to the DOCS—
unless permitted to remain under OCFS supervision until age 21. All
Youthful Offenders are subject to sentences of up to four years in secure
facilities. Youths who commit class AI or AII felonies and those
previously convicted of a felony are not eligible for youthful offender
status, as well as individuals who commit an armed felony, rape in the
first degree, sodomy in the first degree, or aggravated sexual abuse, in the
absence of mitigating circumstances.29
4
B. History
Concepts of juvenile justice date back thousands of years to the Code of
Hammurabi (2270 B.C.) which addressed runaways, children who disowned their
parents, and sons who cursed their fathers.30 Since then society has continued to
struggle with the appropriate means to address juvenile delinquency. New York City
was one of the first jurisdictions in the United States to engage in juvenile justice
reform.31
Soon after the New York State Penitentiary opened in 1797, juveniles began
to be tried in criminal courts and committed to prisons with adults. In 1824, the New
York Society for the Prevention of Pauperism successfully lobbied the State Assembly
to pass legislation requiring children convicted of crimes to be rehabilitated in a
separate institution, apart from adults. This legislative victory resulted in the creation
of the House of Refuge, a juvenile justice institution modeled after the prison system,
Exhibit 5: Person In Need
of Supervision (PINS)
PINS status refers to
someone under 18 years of
age who does not attend
school, or behaves in a
way considered dangerous.
run by the Society for the Reformation of Juvenile Delinquents (a subsidiary of the
New York Society for the Prevention of Pauperism).32 Laws granted the criminal
courts the option to sentence children under the age of 16 to serve an indeterminate
sentence (which could remain in effect until age 21 for boys and 18 for girls) under
the supervision of the Society for the Reformation of Juvenile Delinquents—until
1851 when the Children’s Aid Society built the New York Juvenile Asylum for
children under 12.33
In 1865, New York State passed the Disorderly Child Act (which resembles
the current Persons In Need of Supervision (PINS) statute (see exhibit 5)), providing
parents and guardians the ability to petition the court to detain their child for
non-criminal acts. This move to granting the state control of children led the way for
reforms further reducing parental authority. During the late 1800s, the Society for the
Prevention of Cruelty to Children advocated for children’s rights, resulting in the
Exhibit 6: Parens Patriae
The parens patriae
doctrine provides the
“power of the state to act
in behalf of the child and
provide care and
protection equivalent to
that of a parent.36
passage of protections against child neglect, the adoption of the parens patriae (see
exhibit 6) doctrine, and the formal organization of laws governing children.34 Most
significantly, the shift to parens patriae allowed the state to intervene in a different
way than under the adult system. Due to the diminished legal capacity of children,
parens patriae provides the state the inherent right to protect children who are not
receiving appropriate care or supervision. The doctrine ultimately limits parental rights
and asserts that parents are merely the agents of the state in raising a child.35
5
Advocacy efforts culminated with the creation of the Manhattan Children’s Court
in 1902, which allowed for all cases involving the commitment or trial of juveniles to
be heard and determined by a segregated court division devoted to juvenile cases.37
During the turn of the century, New York proceeded to strengthen earlier laws—
mandating the segregation of juvenile cases and maintenance of records statewide, and
reserving the conviction of juveniles to misdemeanors except in capital cases.38 The
State also expanded services for youths by applying probation to juvenile proceedings.39
The 1920s brought several reforms that changed the administration of juvenile
justice. In 1924, a truly independent Children’s Court was established in New York City
(see note 1). Further reforms expanded the definition of juvenile delinquency to
Note 1: New York City
Domestic Relations Court
In 1933, the New York
City Children’s Court
became the New York
City Domestic Relations
Court.
encompass criminal activity, disorderly conduct, truancy, and desertion.40 Then in 1927,
the State Court of Appeals held that the standards of criminal procedure, including due
process protections, were required in delinquency proceedings.41 These protections were
quickly eroded in the 1932 case People v. Lewis, in which the New York Court of
Appeals held that due to the differences in criminal and delinquency proceedings, civil
standards were sufficient in delinquency cases.42 As a result, juvenile delinquents were
no longer protected against self incrimination, and the standard of proof in delinquency
cases was changed to a ‘preponderance of the evidence.’43 This remained in practice
until the 1960s.44
Reform efforts also addressed detention issues, leading to the expansion of
detention facilities over the next 30 years. Overcrowding in the lower Manhattan Youth
Houses resulted in the relocation of detention facilities to the Bronx. Hunts Point became
home of the Manida Juvenile Center for girls in 1953, followed by the Spofford Juvenile
Center for boys in 1957. Despite the move, problems continued to plague the detention
facilities. Spofford quickly became seen as a place that exacerbated the problems of its
detainees, instead of rehabilitating them, due to ongoing administrative failures,
accusations of staff abuse and physical limitations of the facility.45
Continuing problems in the administration of juvenile justice in both the courts
and detention facilities coupled with federal reforms brought more changes in the 1960s
and 70s. In 1962, New York created the current Family Court structure as an effort to
resolve the Children’s Court’s limitations of split jurisdiction, lack of legal
representation, and procedural inefficiency. The Family Court Act created a countybased system of trial courts dedicated to hearing matters involving adoption,
6
guardianship, foster care approval and review, juvenile delinquency, family
violence, child abuse and neglect, and child support, custody and visitation. In
addition, the Act provided various procedural and substantive safeguards to youths
including assigned counsel.46
Federal reforms provided more changes in the state juvenile justice system.
During the 1960s and 70s, the Supreme Court decided a number of cases that
impacted juvenile justice procedures. These decisions took aim at the parens patriae
Exhibit 7: Status Offenses
philosophy of juvenile courts, finding that Fourteenth Amendment protections
Status offenses are acts
which are only classified as
violations because of the
offender’s status as a
minor, such acts include
truancy, running away,
underage alcohol
consumption, and others. In
New York, youths who
commit status offenses are
referred to as Persons In
Need of Supervision
(PINS).
should be afforded to juveniles because the court may not always act to help the
juvenile, it may also punish. The Fourteenth Amendment protections were granted
gradually over this time period. In 1966, Kent v. United States found that courts
must provide the “essentials of due process” in transferring juveniles to the adult
system.47 The following year, In re Gault applied the right to notification and
counsel, to question witnesses, and to protection against self-incrimination, to
juveniles facing commitment.48 In 1970, In re Winship changed the standard of
proof in delinquency cases from a ‘preponderance of evidence’ to ‘beyond a
reasonable doubt.’49 Although the Court has applied many of the due process
protections to juvenile court during the fact-finding stage, in McKeiver v.
Pennsylvania it found, due to the non-adversarial nature of the juvenile court, that
the Fourteenth amendment does not require jury trials in the adjudication stage.50
While the Supreme Court was actively responding to juvenile justice system
issues, Congress also began to pursue reform. In 1968, Congress passed the Juvenile
Delinquency Prevention and Control Act recommending the diversion of status
offenders (see exhibit 7) from the court system and facilitated the allocation of
federal funds to states for juvenile delinquency prevention programs. A few years
later, the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 (JJDP Act)
created a coordinated national effort to control and prevent delinquency. Expanding
on the Juvenile Delinquency Prevention and Control Act, the JJDP Act provided
state funding contingent on the deinstitutionalization of status offenders and the
separation of juvenile delinquents from convicted adults in penitentiaries. The Act
also created offices to support local and state efforts including the Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) and the National Institute for Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention. After signs of success including a decrease in
total cases and status offender cases referred to juvenile court and a decrease in the
7
rate of detention of status offenders, the JJDP Act was reauthorized and expanded
over the next two decades.51
The increase in juvenile crime in the 1970s and the historically lenient
penalties for juveniles led to the passage of the Juvenile Justice Reform Act of 1976
and the Juvenile Offender Act of 1978 by the New York State Legislature. The
Juvenile Justice Reform Act created a new category of delinquency comprised of
youths 14 and 15 years old who commit a designated felony. These youths can be
prosecuted by the district attorney in Family Court and can be placed in secure
confinement for periods of three to five years.52 In 1978, the Juvenile Justice Reform
Act was expanded to include 13-year-olds and additional designated felonies, as
well as a recidivist provision allowing the restrictive placement of any youth
between ages 7 and 16 convicted of a third felony.53
The Juvenile Offender Act of 1978 marked an important change for juvenile
justice in New York. Up to this point all criminal youths were treated as delinquents,
this Act created the category of juvenile offenders—youths ages 13 to 15 who
commit serious crimes (including all designated felonies and additional crimes)—
lowered the age of criminal responsibility, and moved prosecution of these cases
to adult criminal court.54 These ‘juvenile offenders’ are charged as adults and placed
in juvenile correctional facilities.
Under these acts, offenders were to be removed from the community and
provided intensive rehabilitative services in a secure facility, but New York City’s
detention facilities were not providing a rehabilitative environment. The ongoing
problems at Spofford influenced then Mayor Edward Koch to establish a
commission to review juvenile justice issues. The commission recommended the
creation of a new department of city government, the Department of Juvenile Justice
(DJJ), to administer all secure and non-secure detention facilities.55
In 1979, the New York City Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) was
created. The Department’s first Commissioner, Paul Strasburg, facilitated the shift
back to rehabilitation by focusing on safety, education, and medical care. DJJ
implemented educational assessments and opened the Carter G. Woodson Academy,
a state-approved school for detained youths.56
As the Department restored order it continued to revise its mission. When
the second Commissioner, Ellen Schall, took over in 1983, she shifted the focus of
the Department to delinquency prevention and addressing the underlying problems
8
of the youth. Schall implemented a case management system, a Behavior
Management Program, and an aftercare program (see exhibit 8). These changes
provided youths a structured environment and access to social services based
on their individual
needs.57
New York’s detention policies gained national
attention in 1984 when juveniles who had been detained under the New York
Family Court Act challenged the constitutionality of pretrial detention practices,
claiming such practices violate the due process clause. In Schall v. Martin, the
US Supreme Court ruled to uphold the statute allowing for the placement of
youths in preventative detention before their adjudication.58 The Court concluded
that it was not unreasonable to detain juveniles for their own protection.
Although the physical structure of Spofford limited the rehabilitative
environment—and DJJ had been seeking to replace it with smaller, less
institutional facilities, in more accessible locations since its creation—funding
Exhibit 8: Aftercare
Aftercare is programming
provided to youths discharged
from detention or placement.
Aftercare programming links
youths to community-based
services to address their
specific needs and provides
supervision and structure to
facilitate the successful reentry
of the youth back into the
community. Services may
include mental health or drug
treatment, or supervision in the
form of drug testing or
employment verification.
did not become available for such changes until the late 1980s. Ten years later,
DJJ opened the Horizon and Crossroads Juvenile Centers, both constructed to
be less restrictive and smaller than Spofford. Despite the new construction, a
long-term population increase required more space. In 1999, DJJ returned to the
Spofford facility, newly renovated and renamed—Bridges Juvenile Center—for
the administration of intake, admission, and transfer of youths.59
A shift toward harsher responses to juvenile crime was seen in New York
during the late 1970s and echoed by the federal government throughout the
1980s and early 90s during the administrations of Presidents Ronald Reagan
and George H. W. Bush. Those administrations pushed a conservative reform
agenda that called for new penalties for serious and violent juvenile offenders
and decreased funding for the federal juvenile justice program.60 OJJDP’s focus
turned to combating drugs, gangs, and pornography, and addressing the plight
of missing and exploited children. A Democratic Congress was able to maintain
the funding for OJJDP, but struggled to maintain the ideals set out in the JJDP
Act.
This punitive turn in juvenile justice was exacerbated by research that
emerged during this time painting juveniles as “superpredators”—youths more
violent than previous generations. The growing juvenile population, coupled
with a perception of increased juvenile crime during the early 90s, fueled
national legislative changes to move violent youths to adult criminal court. It
9
was not until the late 90s that statistics discredited this theory—the increased
juvenile crime had actually declined back to the previous rate by 1995 and arrest
rates have been found to be unrelated to the size of the juvenile population—but
states had already moved toward a more punitive juvenile justice system.61
Delinquency prevention once again became the focus of OJJDP during the
Clinton Administration. Under the guidance of U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno,
efforts were made to promote early childhood education programs and prevent the
maltreatment of children as crime reduction strategies. OJJDP focused research on
the issues of disproportionate minority contact and conditions of confinement within
the juvenile justice system. Most importantly, states were encouraged to implement
programs of ‘proven effectiveness.’62
In recent years, the federal government’s focus on combating terrorism has
taken the spotlight off juvenile crime. Under the administration of President George
W. Bush, resources for OJJDP became limited and the Office shifted back to
focusing on missing and exploited children. In addition, OJJDP supported the
expansion of faith-based services and mentoring programs.63 Under the
administration of President Barack Obama OJJDP has set new priorities. OJJDP’s
plan for FY2010 prioritizes “addressing youth violence and victimization and
improving protections for youth involved in the juvenile justice system.” The plan
focuses these efforts on supporting programs to address and treat children exposed
to violence; expanding community-based violence prevention efforts; reducing
disproportionate minority contact; replicating youth gang prevention and
intervention strategies; and continuing efforts in traditional OJJDP focus areas such
as, tribal youth, girls delinquency, mentoring, research and evaluation, and missing
and exploited children, among other topics.64
To date the City and State continue to struggle with the appropriate means
to address juvenile crime. Recent reports assessing the state of juvenile justice in
New York have uncovered significant areas in need of reform including reports of
abuse and inadequate services in juvenile placement facilities,65 and research
indicating juveniles may be better served closer to home.66 In response to these
reports, Governor Paterson convened a task force to create a blueprint for
transforming the state juvenile justice system;67 and in Mayor Bloomberg’s 2007
10
State of the City address, he vowed to “do more than ever to hold accountable the children and teens who run
afoul of the law and also help them get the services they need.”68
To accomplish these goals, the City and State have created plans for reform and implemented several new
initiatives to divert youths from detention and placement as well as improve the services provided to address their
needs. For example, to assist pre-adjudication diversion decisions, the City has implemented the use of a risk
assessment tool in Family Court to provide judges information on each youth’s risk of failure to appear in court
and risk of re-arrest. The risk assessment instrument is also utilized to target youths for the new Alternative-toDetention (ATD) program, implemented citywide in 2008, that focuses on maintaining community ties and school
enrollment.69 To divert youths after adjudication, the Department of Probation and the Administration for
Children’s Services have created an alternative-to-placement and aftercare program that utilizes evidence-based
services to treat youths and their families.70i In addition to programming, reform efforts have focused on the
administration of detention and placement. In December 2009, Governor Paterson’s Task Force on Transforming
Juvenile Justice released recommendations to expand alternatives to placement and reentry programs and improve
institutional placement services.71 Beginning in 2010, New York City reorganized its administration of juvenile
detention by consolidating the Department of Juvenile Justice under the Administration for Children’s Services.72
i For
more information on these programs see the Continuum of Services section.
11
12
Juvenile
Delinquent
Arrest
Police
Precinct
Arrest & Intake
Police may:
Release
to
Parent
Admit to
Non-Secure
Detention
Detention Intake
Admit to
Secure
Detention
Transport to
Bridges Juvenile Center
OR
Transport to
Family Court
OR
Release to Parent
with a
Family Court
Appearance Ticket
OR
Release to Parent
Probation
Intake
Dismiss
or
Adjust
Juvenile Delinquent
Law
Department
File
Petition
Decline to Prosecute
Reconsider Adjustment
Refer for prosecution
Figure 1: Juvenile Justice System Flow Chart
NEW YORK CITY JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM
13
14
Family Court
Disposition
Hearing
Juvenile admits
to the petition
Release
charges
to
Parent
(Low Risk)
Initial Court
Appearance
Dismissal
or
Post-Petition
Adjustment
or
ACD
OR
Alternative
to
Detention
(Moderate Risk)
Non - Secure
Detention
(High Risk)
Secure
Detention
(High Risk)
OR
If a youth is detained more than 3 days
awaiting fact-finding hearing a Probable
Cause Hearing is held to determine if
continued detention is necessary
OR
Juvenile denies the petition charges
Based on the results of the Risk Assessment Instrument
Judge may order one of the following for pendency of trial:
Initial Court Appearance & Fact-Finding Hearing
Probable
Cause
Hearing
Fact Finding
Hearing
Dismissal
or
ACD
Adjudicated
Juvenile Delinquent
Probation
Investigation
& Report
Recommendations to judge
Discharge
Conditional
OR
Probation
OR
Alternative
to
Placement
OR
Placement
Judge finds youth in need of supervision.
Judge may order any one or combination
of the following options:
If a youth violates a condition of supervision, the judge
may hold a violation hearing. If found in violation, the
judge may then revoke, or continue or modify the order.
If the order is revoked, the judge may order placement.
Disposition
Hearing
Dismissal
or
ACD
Disposition Hearing & Post-Disposition Procedures
Reenter Community
Aftercare
15
16
Juvenile
Offender
Arrest
Precinct
Arrest & Intake
Admit to
Secure
Detention
Detention
Intake
Bridges
Juvenile
Center
Probation
Intake
Dismiss
or
Adjust
* At this point, the case may
be informally referred to
Family Court for prosecution.
District
Attorney
Decline to Prosecute
Reconsider Adjustment
Refer for prosecution
Juvenile Offender
Figure 2: Juvenile Justice System Flow Chart
File complaint
Set Bail
Sentencing
Hearing
Plead
Guilty
Criminal
Court
Arraignment
Dismissal
OR
Release on Own
Recognizance (ROR)
Grand
Jury
Dismissal
* At any point following Criminal
Court arraignment, a removal
proceeding may take place to
transfer the case to Family
Court for prosecution.
Remand to
Secure Detention
OR
Plead Not Guilty
Judge may:
Arraignment & Trial
Indictment
Set Bail
Sentencing
Hearing
Plead
Guilty
Supreme
Court
Arraignment
Dismissal
OR
Remand to
Secure Detention
OR
Plead Not Guilty
Judge may:
Release on Own
Recognizance (ROR)
Trial
Convicted
Dismissal
or
Found Not Guilty
17
18
Probation
Investigation
& Report
Sentencing
Hearing
Conditional
Discharge
OR
Probation Placement/ Reenter Community
Prison
OR
The judge may order any one
or combination of the following
sentencing options:
If a youth violates a condition of supervision, the judge or parole
board may hold a violation hearing. If found in violation, the judge
or parole board may then revoke, or continue or modify the order.
If the order is revoked, the judge may order placement.
Recommendations to judge
Sentencing & Post-Dispositional Procedures
Parole/
Conditional
Release
A. Juvenile Justice Process
This section examines the juvenile justice process in New York City beginning with arrest and intake;
detention and alternatives to detention; adjudication and disposition of juvenile cases, including placement,
alternatives to placement, and aftercare.
Arrest and Intake
When police encounter a youth who has broken the law, they may exercise
Note 2: Youthful Offender
and 16 & 17 year-old Arrests
informal discretion in deciding whether to arrest the youth or divert him/her from
the juvenile justice system by releasing the youth with a warning or a referral to
services. Depending on the severity of the offense and the age of the youth, upon
arrest a police officer may process the case in a variety of ways. Alleged Juvenile
Delinquents may be 1) released to a parent; 2) released with a Family Court
Appearance Ticket, requiring the youth to report to court on a certain date; 3)
transported directly to Family Court; or 4) if court is closed, transported to Bridges
Juvenile Center for detention intake.73 Alleged Juvenile Offenders are transported
Youthful Offenders are not
identified as such at this point
of the justice process. Youths
16 years and older who are
arrested are transported from
the police precinct directly to
Criminal Court for
arraignment. If they are not
released on recognizance or
bail following arraignment,
these youths are jailed in New
York City Department of
Correction facilities. Their
cases follow the same process
as Juvenile Offenders , with
the exception that their cases
cannot be removed to Family
Court.
from the police precinct directly to Bridges Juvenile Center, and after intake are
placed in secure detention facilities pending arraignment.74 (see note 2)
Table 1: Juvenile Arrests
Total number of juvenile arrests, for both juvenile and juvenile
offender acts in CY2008.75
Total number of arrests made for juvenile offender offenses in
2,223
CY2008.76
Total number of juveniles ages 7 through 15 arrested for major
felony offenses, including murder and nonnegligent manslaughter,
4,207 forcible rape, robbery, felonious assault, burglary, grand larceny,
and grand larceny auto, in FY2009.77
12,558
19
Juvenile Delinquent Case
11,846
After arrest, the New York City Department of Probation
conducts an intake interview to determine whether the case should be
total Probation
intakes in FY200983
dismissed, adjusted (diverted from court) or referred to the presentment
28%
interviews all concerned parties including the youth, the arresting
of intakes were diverted
through adjustment84
After gathering all the essential information regarding the case, the
59%
of intakes were filed
for prosecution85
agency (prosecutor) for formal court processing.78 A Probation Officer
officer, the complainant (victim), and the youth’s family members.
probation officer decides how to resolve the case.
With the consent of the complainant, a case may be adjusted
after intake.79 During the adjustment process, the probation officer
works with the parties involved to resolve the case without involving
the court and monitors the youth for up to 60 days—this term may be
extended for an additional 60 days with court approval.80 During this
term, the youth must adhere to agreed upon conditions such as
Exhibit 9: Risk Assessment Instrument
community service and/or restitution. If conditions are not satisfied,
The RAI measures the risk of failure to
appear based on the following factors:
the Probation Officer will recommend the case for prosecution.81
x Whether an adult appeared on behalf
of the juvenile at probation intake;
x Whether the youth has an open
juvenile delinquent warrant;
x Whether the youth’s school
attendance was less than 30% in the
last full semester; and
x Whether the youth has prior juvenile
delinquent or Persons in Need of
Supervision warrants.
decides to pursue it, the case is referred to the New York City Law
If a case is not adjusted, and the Department of Probation
Department. In juvenile delinquency cases, an Assistant Corporation
Counsel from the New York City Law Department’s Family Court
Division is responsible for prosecuting the case. The Law Department
maintain the discretion to refer a case back to the Department of
Probation for adjustment, decline to prosecute a case, or file a petition
in court to commence proceedings.82
The tool measures the risk of being rearrested based on:
x Whether the youth has prior unsealed
arrests or prior unsealed felony
arrests;
x Whether the youth has prior juvenile
delinquent adjudications or
designated felony adjudications;
x Whether the youth is currently on
juvenile delinquent probation; and
x Whether the youth’s school
attendance is more than 80%.86
20
For cases referred for prosecution, during the intake process,
the Probation Officer will complete the Risk Assessment Instrument
(RAI) to objectively measure the youth’s risk for failure to appear in
court and re-offending during the course of the case process. (see
exhibit 9) Each factor is assigned a point value and is tallied to produce
a score indicating high-, moderate-, or low-risk. Youths who score as
low-risk are eligible to be released to their parents; youths who score
moderate-risk are eligible for an alternative to detention program; and
high-risk scoring youths are recommended for secure or non-secure
detention.87 The RAI results are provided to the judge at the initial court
appearance to objectively inform the detention decision.88
Juvenile Offender Case
In cases involving Juvenile Offenders, the Department of
Probation completes an intake interview. After gathering all the essential
information regarding the case the probation officer decides how to
resolve the case—either dismiss, divert from court, or file a complaint in
court. A juvenile offender case may be eligible for adjustment upon
approval from the court, and in some cases the presentment agency.89
An Assistant District Attorney is responsible for prosecuting the
juvenile offender case. The District Attorney’s Office maintain the
discretion to refer a case back to the Department of Probation for
diversion, decline to prosecute a case, or file a complaint in court.
Table 2: Juvenile Offender Cases CY2008
2,223
30%
Total number of juvenile arrests for juvenile
offender crimes.90
Percent of cases docketed for arraingment—
the remainder were either declinded for
prosecution or transferred to Family Court.91
21
Initial Court Appearance / Arraignment
When a decision is made to pursue a case, the presentment agency
prepares a petition or complaint against the youth indicating the acts s/he is
accused of committing and asks the court to make a decision whether the youth
Exhibit 10: Family Court
Part of the New York State
Unified Court System, countybased Family Courts hold
jurisdiction over delinquency
proceedings. Family Courts are
trial courts of limited jurisdiction,
hearing matters involving
adoption, guardianship, foster
care approval and review, juvenile
delinquency, family violence,
child abuse and neglect, and child
support, custody and visitation.93
In New York City Family Courts
judges are appointed by the
Mayor to 10-year terms.
is a Juvenile Delinquent or a Juvenile Offender.92 A petition is filed with the
Family Court for juvenile delinquency cases and a complaint is filed in Criminal
Court for juvenile offender cases.
Family Court
In Family Court (see exhibit 10), an assistant corporation counsel will
present the delinquency case at the initial court appearance (see exhibit 11).
The initial court appearance must take place within 72 hours after the petition
is filed if the youth is detained, or within 10 days otherwise.94 It is at this point
Exhibit 11: Initial Court
Appearance & Arraignment
Initial Court Appearance - The
first appearance in Family Court
cases. At this hearing, the youth is
notified of the charges and his/her
rights, and then admits or denies
the charges. The judge will also
determine whether a youth is to
be detained or released while
judicial proceedings are pending.
Arraignment - The first court
appearance in Criminal Court
cases and the final stage of the
arrest process. At this hearing the
defendant is notified of the
charges and his/her rights and
then enters a plea of guilty or not
guilty. Following the plea the
judge makes a bail decision.
that the youth denies or admits guilt regarding the charges. At the initial court
appearance, the court makes several determinations including whether the case
should be referred back to the Department of Probation for adjustment; whether
detention is necessary; if the youth is currently detained, the date of the probable
cause hearing; and the date of the fact-finding hearing.95 There is no bail option
in Family Court, youths are either released to a parent or guardian, remanded
to detention, or released to an alternative-to-detention program.96
If the youth denies a charge contained in the petition and the court orders
detention of the youth for more than three days pending a fact-finding hearing
the court will hold a probable cause hearing. The hearing must take place within
three days of the initial court appearance or within four days of filing of the
22
petition.97 At the probable cause hearing, the court will hear evidence in
support and in defense of the charges. At the conclusion of the hearing,
5,833
the court must determine: “whether it is reasonable to believe that a crime
youths were admitted
to detention in FY2009102
was committed; and whether it is reasonable to believe that the
respondent [the youth] committed such crime.”98 At this point, if
reasonable cause is found, the court will also determine if continued
detention is necessary. If reasonable cause is not found, the case will be
adjourned and the youth released from detention.99
Criminal Court
Juvenile offender cases are commenced in New York City
Criminal Court (see exhibit 12). At arraignment, (see exhibit 11) the
assistant district attorney will present the juvenile offender case and the
youth will enter a plea. If the youth enters a plea of guilty, the offense is
Exhibit 12: Criminal Court
Also part of the New York State Unified
Court System, New York City Criminal
Court has preliminary jurisdiction over all
arrests processed in the five boroughs by
state and local law enforcement agencies.
The majority of felony, misdemeanor and
petty offense cases are arraigned in
Criminal Court. In New York City
Criminal Courts judges are appointed by
the Mayor to 10-year terms.103 New York
City Criminal Court has trial jurisdiction
over all misdemeanor* cases not
prosecuted by indictments and over
summons matters. In addition, Criminal
Court has preliminary jurisdiction over
felony cases. Felony cases are arraigned in
Criminal Court then, if not disposed,
adjourned to a Felony Waiver Part to await
the decision of the Grand Jury. Felony
cases are transferred to Supreme Court
after a grand jury votes an indictment.
charged and a sentencing hearing is scheduled. If the youth pleads not
guilty, the judge will make a bail decision, determining if the youth will
*In Bronx County, misdemeanor cases that
are not disposed at arraignment are
transferred to Supreme Court for trial.
be detained awaiting trial or released on recognizance; and the case will
be adjourned to a Felony Waiver Part to await the decision of a Grand
Jury.100 Juvenile Offenders are eligible for alternative-to-detention
programs after grand jury indictment. If bail is not made or the judge
660
juvenile offender cases were
arraigned in Criminal Court
in CY2008*104
does not release the juvenile on recognizance or to an ATD program,
s/he must be held in a secure detention facility pending trial.101
Under certain circumstances juvenile offender cases may be
transferred to Family Court. If there is not reasonable cause to believe
48%
of youths were detained
pending trial105
*Excludes cases prosecuted in Staten Island
that the defendant committed a crime for which a person under the age
23
of 16 is criminally responsible but there is reasonable cause to believe the
135
juvenile offender cases
docketed in NYC criminal
courts were removed to
Family Court
in CY2008106
defendant is a juvenile delinquent, the court, grand jury, or the district
attorney may refer the case to Family Court or request a removal of
proceeding.109 This request may take place prior to indictment, before trial,
or for sentencing. A referral is an informal transfer that can take place prior
to or after filing in criminal court, or in the event the criminal court dismisses
642
the case. A removal is a judicial transfer that may only take place after the
cases were disposed
at this point107
case has been filed in criminal court. In the event that a juvenile offender
87
designated felony case by an assistant corporation counsel.110
cases were disposed
by transfer to
Family Court108
case is transferred to Family Court, the case will be prosecuted as a
Detention
If there is a high risk that the youth will flee, or will commit another
crime prior to his/her next court appearance, a youth may be detained by
Note 3: Weekend Arraignment
Beginning May 31, 2008, NYC
began weekend arraignment (initial
court appearance) of youths under
age 16 in Manhattan Criminal Court
to decrease the utilization of police
admits to detention.
police admit or court order.111 A police admit occurs if court is closed (see
note 3). If a judge finds the youth to be ‘high-risk,’ a court order will be
issued to detain the youth in a secure or non-secure detention facility112—the
Family Court Act prohibits the detention of youths under the age of 10 in
secure facilities.113 New York City’s juvenile detention system is
administered by the Administration for Children’s Services (ACS), an entity
Note 4: Detention Administration
of New York City government (see note 4). New York State has nine secure
Prior to 2010, NYC juvenile
detention was administered by the
City Department of Juvenile Justice.
The Department was consolidated
with the Administration for
Children’s Services in an effort to
expand the services available to
court-involved youths.
detention facilities—three operating in New York City (Horizons,
Crossroads, and Bridges).114 Both Juvenile Delinquents and Juvenile
Offenders are detained in Administration for Children’s Services facilities.
The judge may decide whether a youth is admitted to either a secure or a
24
non-secure detention facility or may allow ACS to decide. The Family Court
Act defines secure detention facilities by the characteristics of “physically
restricting construction, hardware and procedures.”115 By law, secure detention
must maintain an eight-to-one juvenile-to-staff ratio.116 In secure detention,
youths must follow a rigid daily schedule, beginning at 5:30 A.M. and ending
at 9:30 P.M., involving showering, cleaning, meals, attending school or court,
5,833
total admissions to detention
in FY2009 (majority alleged
juvenile delinquents)123
and recreational activities.117
Bridges Juvenile Center is the intake/admissions center for all detained
279
youths and houses post-adjudicated youths awaiting transfer to New York State
average daily population
in secure detention124
Office of Children and Family Services (OCFS) placement facilities. During
intake, youths undergo comprehensive health and mental health assessments,
which may take up to three days. After this point youths may be transferred to
another secure or non-secure detention facility.118
151
average daily population
in non-secure detention125
In addition to the three secure detention facilities, ACS oversees a
network of non-secure detention group homes located throughout the city—the
majority of group homes are operated through contracts with private social
20 days
service organizations.119ii Non-Secure Detention facilities are defined by not
average length of stay
in secure detention126
having the “physically restrictive hardware, construction, or procedures” of the
secure facilities.120 Non-Secure facilities are intended to offer a home-like
environment while providing close supervision. By law, each non-secure facility
32 days
may house up to 12 youths and must maintain at least two staff members on
average length of stay
in non-secure detention127
site at all times.121 Youths in non-secure detention follow a similar daily
schedule as those in secure facilities; however, youths in non-secure facilities
attend school outside the facility.122
ii
See Continuum of Services section for more information.
25
Juveniles can be held in detention facilities pre- and post-adjudication,
but detention may not be utilized as a disposition option or a sanction for
probation violations.129
The detention facilities must meet the standards set forth by the New
York Codes, Rules, and Regulations130 and the Office of Children and Family
Services governing all juvenile facilities.131 These regulations apply to
Exhibit 13: MAYSI
The MAYSI is a screening
tool developed to identify
youths age 12 to 17 in the
juvenile justice system who
have mental health needs.
The tool consists of 52 yes or
no questions to be completed
by the youth. MAYSI is based
on seven scales for boys and
six scales for girls. Scales
measure the following:
y Alcohol/Drug Use
y Anger-Irritable
y Depressed-Anxious
y Somatic Complaints
y Suicide Ideation
y Thought Disturbance
(boys only)
y Traumatic Experiences.128
education, medical and mental health services, religious services, recreation,
and case management.132 Youths in detention attend school at Passages
Academy, operated by the New York City Department of Education, located in
each of the secure facilities and one separate facility for those in non-secure
detention. Educational services are tailored to the needs of the students and
cover all major academic subjects, with a strong focus on literacy and numeracy.
Youths are eligible to receive credit on their transcripts for the work
accomplished while in detention.133
In secure facilities, medical presence is required 24 hours a day, seven
days a week. Youths in custody receive treatment on site by the Floating
Hospital for medical needs, Forensic Health Services for mental health needs
and Charles Jin Medical Services for psychiatric needs. All youths are screened
for mental health needs using the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument
(MAYSI) (see exhibit 13). In addition, youths can refer themselves for treatment
and detention staff may refer youths.134
ACS must set forth efforts to preserve and protect the religious faiths of
all youths in custody. Each secure facility has a chapel and a chaplain is
employed to conduct religious services and counsel youths. Youths in detention
must receive indoor or outdoor recreational activity every day. Case
26
management must be provided to all youths in custody soon after admission and a
master’s level social worker must supervise case managers. In addition to the
mandated services, the detention administration has collaborated with communitybased organizations to expand programs for detained youths including the
Leadership through Sports program, an arts program based in court detention rooms,
and the LIFE Transitions initiative that focuses on school attachment and career
aspirations.135
Alternatives to Detention
Research has revealed numerous flaws in the practice of pretrial detention.
Judges have been found to be making detention decisions on factors that are not
1,800
prescribed by legal guidelines, or based on the risk to public safety and the severity
of the offense.136 Pretrial detention has been found to negatively effect youths in
many aspects of their lives.137 In addition, detention consumes a large portion of
total youths per year the
Department of Probation
ATD program has
capacity to serve140
the City’s budget for the juvenile justice system.138 In light of these findings,
policymakers have developed alternatives to detention for youths pending
adjudication that protect the public and ensure legal guidelines are observed.
If there is a moderate risk that the youth will flee or will commit another
crime prior to his/her next court appearance a youth may be admitted to an
alternative-to-detention (ATD) program. ATD programs allow youths to remain in
the community under supervision provided by the Department of Probation or a
contracted community-based organization. These programs focus on maintaining
positive community ties by keeping youths in school and providing access to
services that address their needs while they await adjudication.139iii
iii For
more information about alternative to detention programs see the Continuum of Services section.
27
Adjudication and Disposition / Trial and Sentencing
Family Court
The petition is next reviewed at a fact-finding hearing (see exhibit 14) to
determine whether the allegations are valid. If the youth is detained and the
highest count of the petition is a class A, B or C felony, the hearing must take
place within 14 days of the initial court appearance; if less than a C felony the
Exhibit 14: Fact-Finding
Hearing & Trial
Fact-Finding Hearing - The
Family Court judge determines
whether there is sufficient
evidence to sustain the
allegations in a petition.
Trial - A Supreme Court judge
or jury decides whether the
defendant is guilty or not guilty
of the charges against him/her.
hearing must take place within three days of the initial court appearance.141 If the
youth is not detained, the fact-finding hearing must take place within 60 days of
the initial court appearance.142
At the fact-finding hearing the presentment agency attempts to prove the
case beyond a reasonable doubt to the presiding judge (there are no jury trials in
Family Court).143 If the judge makes a finding in favor of the prosecution, a
dispositional hearing (see exhibit 15) will be scheduled and the Department of
Probation will be ordered to investigate the youth’s home and school behavior.144
If the judge finds the allegations are invalid, the petition is dismissed and the
Exhibit 15: Disposition Hearing
& Sentencing Hearing
Disposition Hearing - The
Family Court judge pronounces
the resolution of the case. The
Juvenile Delinquent is informed
of the terms of his /her sentence.
Sentencing Hearing - The
Criminal Court judge
pronounces the punishment. The
Juvenile Offender or Youthful
Offender is informed of the
terms of his/her sentence.
youth is released. The judge may also dismiss the petition through an adjournment
in contemplation of dismissal (ACD).145 An adjournment in contemplation allows
the case to be put on hold for up to six months, granting the youth an opportunity
to have the charges dismissed if s/he successfully abides by conditions during
the adjournment period.146 If the youth is adjudicated as a Juvenile Delinquent,
the court records will be sealed after the completion of the imposed disposition,
therefore, the case will not appear on his/her criminal record.147
After a petition is found valid, a disposition hearing is held to determine
if the Juvenile Delinquent is in need of supervision, treatment, or confinement.148
If the youth is detained and adjudicated for a designated felony, the hearing must
28
take place within 10 days of the order; for all other cases it must take place within
50 days of the order.149 Prior to the disposition hearing, the Department of Probation
will complete an Investigation and Report (I&R)—a more thorough report than the
intake interview—which includes information from the youth, guardians, school,
71%
NYC Law
Department juvenile
delinquency conviction
rate in FY2009160
community-based programs, and other sources.150 To support the I&R and the
officer’s disposition recommendation, the New York City Department of Probation
utilizes a risk assessment tool, the Probation Assessment Tool (PAT).151 PAT
measures the risk of re-arrest and the potential for success or failure on probation,
based on individual risk factors and assets. In addition to the I&R, the court may
order an Exploration of Placement to find a suitable placement program for the youth.
5,295
cases were disposed
in Family Court
in CY2008
(includes court order
violations and
modifications)161
The exploration of placement process involves the Department of Probation sending
the I&R and the courts psychiatric and psychological reports to residential facilities
to determine if the youth is eligible for its
program.152
After reviewing all the information collected, the Probation Officer will make
35%
of cases received a
placement order162
a recommendation to the court regarding the most appropriate disposition. The
Probation Officer may recommend several disposition options including: placement
(for up to 18 months for a felony; 5 years for a designated felony; or 12 months for
43%
of cases received a
probation order163
a misdemeanor153), alternative-to-placement program (term is determined by the
length of the program), conditional discharge (up to one year154), adjournment in
contemplation of dismissal (up to six months155), or probation supervision (up to two
years156).157 The judge will make a determination based on the information gathered
by the Probation Officer, the case history, and any additional testimony. At the
15%
of cases received an
adjournment in
contemplation
of dismissal164
conclusion of the disposition hearing, the judge may accept the Probation Officer’s
recommendation, order a different finding, or find that the youth is not in need of
supervision, treatment, or confinement—dismissing the petition.158 For nondesignated felony cases, the judge must choose the least restrictive disposition option
7%
of cases received
a conditional
discharge order165
available.159
29
429
cases were arraigned in
Criminal Supreme Court
in CY2008177
38%
of cases were detained
pending trial178
Criminal Supreme Court
The evidence for a juvenile offender complaint will next be presented
to a grand jury, made up of 16 to 23 people.166 After hearing all of the evidence,
the grand jury will decide if there is enough evidence to put the youth on trial.
If the grand jurors find there is sufficient evidence, they vote for an indictment.
If they do not find sufficient evidence, the charges are dropped and the youth is
released.167 Upon grand jury indictment felony cases are transferred to Supreme
15
Court (see exhibit 16) for formal charging.168 In Supreme Court, another
cases were removed to
Family Court at
arraignment179
arraignment will be held where the youth will enter a plea—either guilty or not
315
case is adjourned for trial.169
guilty—to the charges in the indictment. If the youth pleads guilty, a sentencing
hearing (see exhibit 15) will be scheduled. If the youth pleads not guilty, the
At trial, the assistant district attorney attempts to prove the case beyond
cases were disposed180
a reasonable doubt to the jury.170 If the jury makes a finding in favor of the
75%
of cases were convicted181
33
Cases were removed to
Family Court at
sentencing182
prosecution, a sentencing hearing will be scheduled, and if ordered the
Department of Probation will complete an investigation and report (I&R).171 If
the jury finds the youth not guilty, the charges are dismissed and the youth is
released.172 At the sentencing hearing, the judge will pronounce the punishment.
Possible sentences include: placement (see table 3); probation; conditional
discharge; unconditional discharge; restitution; or fines.173
Upon conviction, in the interest of justice, Juvenile Offenders and
225
adolescents between the ages of 16 and 18 who are prosecuted in criminal court
cases were sentenced183
offender finding provides that the conviction will be vacated and the defendant
49
for certain crimes may be eligible for a youthful offender finding.174 A youthful
can be sentenced to an indeterminate term of less than four years. This finding
is intended to relieve the onus of a criminal record. A youthful offender finding
cases were sentenced as
juvenile offenders184
is considered an adjudication, not a conviction, therefore court records will be
78%
Offenders who are not granted a youthful offender finding do not have the
of sentenced cases
received a youthful
offender finding185
30
sealed after the completion of the mandated sentence.175 Convicted Juvenile
benefits of having the case records sealed—the conviction will appear on the
youth’s criminal record.176
Exhibit 16: Supreme Court
Part of the New York State Unified Court
System, Supreme Court is a trial court of
unlimited, original jurisdiction. The Criminal
Term of the Supreme Court is responsible for
adjudication of all felony prosecutions.
After indictment, the juvenile offender case is
transferred to Supreme Court for trial. The case
will be heard in a specialized courtroom called
“Juvenile Offender Part” (JO Part). The case
will be assigned to a JO Part for Supreme Court
arraignment or subsequent to arraignment.
(There are no JO Parts in Staten Island courts.)
2,504
16- and 17-year-olds
received youthful offender
adjudications in CY2008186
Table 3: Range of Minimum and Maximum Sentences by Felony Class Category - Juvenile Offenders187
Crime
Minimum
Maximum
Ages
Specific Crime
Classification
Sentence Range Sentence Rage
Murder 2nd (except Felony Murder)
14 & 15
A-I
7 ½ – 15 Years
Life
PL § 125.25(1)(2)
Murder 2nd (except Felony Murder)
13
A-I
5 – 9 Years
Life
PL § 125.25(1)(2)
Murder 2nd (Felony Murder included
14 & 15
A-I
but restricted to felonies listed below)
5 – 9 Years
Life
PL § 125.25(3)
Arson 1st PL § 150.20
14 & 15
A-I
4 – 6 Years
12 – 15 Years
Kidnapping 1st PL § 135.25
Aggravated Sexual Abuse 1st PL §
130.70
Arson 2nd PL § 150.15
Assault 1st (intentional) PL §
120.10(1)(2)
Attempt Kidnapping 1st PL §
110/135.25
1/3 Maximum
14 & 15
B-Violent
Attempt Murder 2nd PL § 110/125.25
3 – 10 Years
Sentence
Burglary 1st PL § 140.30
Manslaughter 1st PL § 125.20
Rape 1st (non-consensual) PL §
130.35(1)(2)
Robbery 1st PL § 160.15
Sodomy 1st (non-consensual) PL §
130.50(1)(2)
14 & 15
C-Violent
Burglary 2nd (weapon or injury) PL §
140.25(1)
Robbery 2nd (weapon or injury) PL §
160.10(2)
Possession of Weapon 2nd (on school
grounds) PL § 265.03
14 & 15
D-Violent
Possession of a Weapon 3rd (on school
grounds) PL § 265.02(4)
1/3 Maximum
Sentence
3 – 7 Years
1/3 Maximum
Sentence
3 – 4 Years
31
86%
of Juvenile Offenders
were sentenced to
placement in CY2008188
40%
of Juvenile OffenderYouthful Offenders were
sentenced to placement in
CY2008189
1,632
youths entered OCFS
placement in CY2008190
1,009
Placement
The court may place a youth in his/her home, in the custody of a relative or
other suitable person, the commissioner of social services, or with the division of
youth.196 If the judge finds the youth needs to be confined, the judge will decide
which type of facility is most appropriate. Juvenile Delinquents and Juvenile
Offenders are placed with the New York State Office of Children and Family
Services’ Division of Juvenile Justice and Opportunities for Youth (OCFS)197 and
non-Juvenile Offender-Youthful Offenders (16 – 18 year-olds) are placed with the
New York State Department of Correctional Services (DOCS).198
The Office of Children and Family Services’ Division of Juvenile Justice
and Opportunities for Youth administers placement services through the operation
of placement facilities and under contract with private voluntary agencies. Youths
admitted to OCFS report to a reception center where they undergo an intake
or 62% of youths were
from New York City191
assessment prior to assignment to a placement facility. OCFS centers and homes
38
facilities are typically reserved for youths who are considered to be at highest risk
of the NYC juveniles
admitted to OCFS were
Juvenile Offenders192
82
are divided into three risk levels: Secure, Limited-Secure, and Non-Secure. Secure
for re-offending. Most voluntary agency facilities provide placement services in a
non-secure setting for lower-risk youths.199
OCFS must follow the rules and regulations set forth in the New York Codes,
Rules, and Regulations governing the Executive Department Division for Youth for
juvenile detention facilities.200 OCFS has expanded on the requirements for facilities
Juvenile OffenderYouthful Offenders193
in its Policy and Procedure Manual. All facilities provide counseling, health, mental
886
Bridges Juvenile Center to await transfer to an OCFS facility. Any time spent in
Juvenile Delinquents194
10.1 & 17.3
average lengths of stay in
months in OCFS
placement for Juvenile
Delinquents and Juvenile
Offenders, respectively195
32
health, education, and ministerial services to youths in custody.201
In some cases, after the dispositional hearing, a juvenile will be detained at
detention awaiting transfer is counted towards the juvenile’s ordered placement
term.202
Adolescents age 16 and older, including Youthful Offenders (non-Juvenile
Offenders), sentenced to a term of incarceration are housed in New York State
Department of Correctional Services facilities. DOCS operates 68 correctional
facilities throughout New York State, including 6 facilities in New York City.203
Adolescents must be housed separately from adult inmates, except in limited
circumstances.
Alternatives to Placement
45%
of new admissions of
Juvenile Offenders
and Youthful Offenders
to DOCS were from
New York City
in CY2008204
Similar to alternatives to detention, alternatives to placement were developed
to address disparities in disposition decisions;211 negative impacts on youths;212 and
excessive costs.213 Alternatives to placement allow youths to remain in their
community under supervision during their sentence. These programs focus on
8
addressing the underlying issues that brought the youth into the justice system, such
admitted to DOCS were
Juvenile Offenders205
as substance abuse, mental illness, and/or family dynamics.iv
277
Aftercare
admitted to DOCS were
Youthful Offenders206
The transition back into the community after involvement with the justice
system can be stressful for youths. In addition, the progress made while under court
supervision can be lost if care is not continued in the community.214 For these
60.4 & 14.7
average length of stay in
months in DOCS custody
for Juvenile Offenders and
Youthful Offenders,
justice process.215 Many programs have acknowledged the need for sustained
respectively207
support and intervention post-discharge by implementing aftercare programs that
reasons, aftercare is considered to be one of the most important points of the juvenile
provide comprehensive plans and services for participants’ transition back into the
2,452
community. These programs offer the opportunity for continued treatment and
juveniles were sentenced
to probation in CY2008208
support services as well as referrals to community-based organizations that can be
accessed after court requirements have been fulfilled. Many community-based
650
organizations and state agencies offer aftercare services.v OCFS created an Intensive
juveniles entered
IAP in CY2008209
Aftercare Program (IAP) to assist youths who are returning to the community from
its custody. IAP offers a range of supervision levels and programs including
electronic monitoring, day placement programs, evening reporting centers, and
361
of the juveniles who
entered IAP were from
New York City210
evidence-based community therapy programs.216
iv For
v For
more information about alternative to placement programs see the Continuum of Services section.
more information about aftercare services see the Continuum of Services section.
33
Post-Dispositional Procedures
Probation, alternative-to-placement, and conditional discharge sentences
are conditional; if a juvenile violates one or more of the conditions, a violation
hearing may take place and the juvenile can be re-sentenced to a term of
placement.220 Juveniles who are sentenced to probation, alternative-to-placement
4,497
total number of Juvenile
Delinquents the
Department of Probation
supervised in FY2008,
including:217
programs, and conditional discharge, remain under the jurisdiction of the judge and
are supervised by the Department of Probation. The New York City Department of
Probation provides supervision services to individuals who live in the City sentenced
to probation, alternative-to-placement, and conditional discharge. Probation Officers
supervise juveniles, coordinate service delivery, and provide referrals to treatment
and programs. Probation Officers also periodically provide progress reports to the
2,216
in alternative programs
(e.g. Esperanza, and ACS
Juvenile Justice
Initiative)218
court.221
In the event a Probation Officer suspects a condition has been violated, s/he
will utilize discretion as to whether to apply a graduated sanction or recommend a
revocation of probation. The Officer may, as a graduated sanction, alter the services
749
juvenile probationers
were rearrested219
provided, increase the level of supervision, and/or impose another administrative
sanction, in an effort to address the violative behavior and protect public safety.222
If graduated sanctions are deemed inappropriate, the Department of Probation will
alert the court if a supervising officer finds evidence that a condition has been
violated. If a condition violation is suspected, the court may order a “search order,”
authorizing the Probation Officer to search the juvenile and his/her personal
property.223 If the Department of Probation finds reasonable cause that a violation
has occurred, the officer may file a petition of violation—describing in detail the
condition(s) violated.224 The judge will then issue a summons or warrant to bring
the juvenile before the court.225 Either an assistant corporation counsel or assistant
34
district attorney will present the petition. When the juvenile appears before the
court, s/he will be notified of the contents of the petition and will be given the
opportunity to make a statement responding to the allegations.226 The judge will
then decide if the juvenile will be detained pending the violation hearing.227 At
the hearing, the judge will hear evidence in support and defense of the petition.
At the conclusion of the hearing, the judge may revoke, or continue or modify
Exhibit 17:Indeterminate &
Determinate Sentences
the order of probation, alternative-to-placement, or conditional discharge.228
Indeterminate Sentence - A
court imposed sentence to
incarceration set as a minimum
and a maximum term.
Individuals serving this type of
sentence are eligible for Parole
release consideration.
The judge may not revoke an order unless “(a) the court has found that the
respondent [juvenile] has violated a condition of such order; and (b) the
respondent [juvenile] has had an opportunity to be heard.”229 If the judge revokes
the order, a different disposition will be ordered, such as OCFS placement. If
the order is continued, the petition of violation is dismissed.230 Juveniles have
the right to appeal the decision of the court.231
Determinate Sentence - A court
imposed sentence to
incarceration set as a maximum
term. The sentence includes a
mandatory term of post-release
supervision. Individuals serving
this type of sentence are eligible
for Conditional Release.
Early Release from Custody
Release Options
Juveniles who are sentenced to a term of placement may be eligible for
early release from custody through parole, conditional or presumptive release.232
Juvenile and Youthful Offenders who receive an indeterminate sentence are
eligible for parole or presumptive release; Juvenile and Youthful Offenders and
Juvenile Delinquents sentenced to either indeterminate or determinate terms
are eligible for conditional release (see exhibit 17).233 Upon completion of
serving the minimum term of an indeterminate sentence juveniles are eligible
for release consideration by the Board of Parole (Board) (see exhibit 18).234
Exhibit 18: Board of Parole
The Board of Parole is a 19member body who make
determinations for the
discretionary release of
incarcerated individuals serving
indeterminate sentences. When
a release is granted, the Board
sets conditions that must be
followed during the parole term.
Board members are appointed
by the Governor and confirmed
by the Senate to serve six-year
terms.
35
Juveniles may be eligible for consideration by the Board earlier if they meet
the criteria for Merit Time (see exhibit 19).236 If the juvenile meets all of the
criteria, s/he may be granted Merit Time equal to one-sixth of the minimum
sentence. The Merit Time credit is applied to the minimum term, when the
Exhibit 19: Merit Time Eligibility
juvenile reaches the end of the calculated term they will be eligible for Parole
To be eligible for Merit Time,
juveniles must:
Board Interview.237 The Parole Board Interview must take place at least one
1. Successfully complete a work or
treatment program;
2. Accomplish one of the following
while in custody:
a. earn a GED;
b. acquire an ASAT certificate;
c. earn a Vocational Trade
Certificate after six months of
vocational programming; or
d. perform 400 hours of
community service on a work
crew.
3. Not be serving a term for any of
the following offenses:
a. a non-drug A-1 felony offense;
b. violent felony offense;
c. manslaughter 2nd degree;
d. vehicular manslaughter 1st
degree;
e. criminally negligent homicide;
f. penal law articles 130 and 263
offenses; or
g. incest.
4. Have not:
a. received a serious disciplinary
infraction;
b. initiated a frivolous lawsuit; or
c. had sanctions impose against
him/her under Rule 11 of the
Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure for litigation that s/he
commenced against the state or
its employees.235
month prior to the expiration of the minimum term.238
If a juvenile meets the criteria for Merit Time and has not previously
been convicted for any of the disqualifying offenses, DOCS or OCFS may
grant him/her Presumptive Release.239 The juvenile may be entitled to
Presumptive Release after serving five-sixths of the minimum term.240
Juveniles do not have to appear before the Board for this type of early release.
However, the conditions of release are set by the Board of Parole and s/he
will be supervised by a Parole Officer.241
Juvenile and Youthful Offenders serving either an indeterminate or
a determinate sentence may be eligible for Conditional Release when the
total earned good time (earned credit for good institutional behavior) is equal
to the unserved portion of their maximum sentence.242 Juveniles serving an
indeterminate term, who have not been released by the Parole Board after
Table 4: Example Release Eligibility Calculation
Type of Release
Required Term
Eligible for Release
730 days to 1460 days
Indeterminate Sentence
(2 years to 4 years)
Parole Board Interview
Minimum Sentence
730 days
Merit Time 5/6 of Minimum Sentence
608 days
Presumptive Release 5/6 of Minimum Sentence
608 days
Conditional Release 2/3 of Maximum Sentence
973 days
Determinate Sentence
1460 days (4 years)
Conditional Release 6/7 of Maximum Sentence
36
1251 days
reaching their minimum term, are eligible for Conditional Release after serving
two-thirds of their maximum sentence. Juveniles serving a determinate term are
eligible after serving six- sevenths of the sentence. To receive Conditional Release
juveniles must request their release, agree in writing to all conditions set, and abide
by all conditions until they reach their maximum sentence date. Juveniles who
have lost any amount of good time credit are not eligible for Conditional Release.
Conditional Release is statutorily granted to inmates, therefore juveniles do not
need to appear before the Board of Parole.243
Juvenile Delinquents are eligible for Conditional Release when OCFS
deems it to be in the juvenile’s best interest and there is a reasonable probability
that public safety will not be jeopardized. If granted Conditional Release, juvenile
delinquents remain under OCFS supervision in aftercare programs until the
expiration of the term of ordered placement.244
For eligible juveniles, the Board of Parole makes release decisions based
on the severity of the crime and their past criminal history.245 The Board utilizes
guidelines, based on offense category and offender history, to determine the time
to be served before release.246 Each candidate for parole is scored based on the
crime of conviction and actual conduct to determine severity, and prior criminal
history.247 Using a matrix, the Board determines the total number of months to be
served indicated where severity (1-9) and prior criminal history (0-11) scores
intersect.248 For example, a juvenile whose offense severity score is 6 and prior
criminal history score is 1 would be required to serve 22 to 40 months prior to
eligibility.249 Guidelines are not binding to allow the Board to consider mitigating
and aggravating circumstances.250 In addition to the severity and history scores,
the Board considers institutional adjustment (i.e. training, therapy, and/or
37
educational program participation); performance in temporary release programs;
availability of release plan services;251 and victim impact statements.252 Based on
the guidelines, release will be granted if the Board determines that there is a
“reasonable probability” that upon release the juvenile will not re-offend, the release
will not jeopardize public safety; and release will not “deprecate the seriousness of
[the] crime as to undermine respect of the law.”253 Prior to release, the juvenile must
attempt to obtain employment or enroll in an education program or other program
recommended by the Board.254
Prior to release a parole decision may be reconsidered or rescinded in the
event new information is provided to the Board that would have influenced its
original decision; or significant case developments (i.e. escape, imposition of an
additional sentence).255 To reconsider a granted release date, the Board will hold a
recession hearing.256 If the Board finds the evidence forms a basis for rescinding the
grant of release, the Board may (i) rescind and set a reconsideration date; or (ii)
rescind and set a new release date.257 If parole is not granted, the Board must provide
in writing reasons for denial within two weeks following the hearing. The Board
will set a date for reconsideration within 24 months.258
Post-Release Supervision
Juvenile Offenders and Youthful Offenders
If a Juvenile or Youthful Offender is released under any of the early release
options, s/he will be supervised by a Parole Officer until s/he reaches the maximum
imposed sentence date.259 The New York State Division of Parole provides parole
supervision services throughout the state.260 The juvenile will be assigned a Field
38
Parole Officer who will act as a caseworker, assisting him/her with reintegration
into the community and coordinating service delivery. Parole Officers report parolee
progress to the Board of Parole.261
These release options are conditional, if a juvenile violates one or more of
the conditions, a violation hearing may take place and s/he can be re-sentenced to
a term of placement or prison.262 The juvenile must abide by all conditions, such
as: remaining in the state unless granted permission; residence and work inspections
by the Parole Officer; avoiding interaction with known convicted criminals; and
not using or possessing drugs.263 If the Parole Officer finds evidence that any
conditions may have been violated, a parole violation warrant will be issued, and
16
the juvenile will be apprehended and detained.264 The juvenile will be served a
total number of
parole violators admitted
to OCFS in CY2008275
Notice of Violation indicating the hearing process and his/her rights and a Violation
of Release Report detailing the condition(s) allegedly violated.265 The juvenile will
then appear for a Preliminary Hearing,266 within 15 days of execution of the
warrant,267 where a Preliminary Hearing Officer 268 will determine if there is
probable cause to believe a violation has occurred.269 If probable cause is found, a
Final Hearing will take place, within 90 days, 270 where the Division of Parole must
prove, to the presiding Parole Board Member or Final Hearing Officer,271 by a
preponderance of the evidence that the juvenile violated at least one of the conditions
in an important respect.272 The juvenile has the right to counsel273 at this point and
may present mitigating factors and evidence supporting alternatives to reincarceration.274 If the juvenile is convicted of a new crime while under parole
supervision, s/he loses the right to a Preliminary Hearing. If convicted of a
misdemeanor the juvenile will receive a Final Hearing. If the juvenile is convicted
39
of a felony, his/her parole will be revoked without a Final Hearing.276 At the
conclusion of the hearing, the Parole Board Member or Final Hearing Officer
will make a decision to either revoke or modify release, or dismiss the
violation.277
If parole is revoked, the Board will determine how long the violator will
be confined, and set a date for re-release consideration.278 For example, for a
category one (the most severe original crime) violator, the time assessment will
be a minimum of 15 months or the expiration date of the original maximum
sentence, whichever is less.279 Under certain circumstances, the Board may
restore a violator to supervision with special conditions.280
In the event of parole revocation, the parole violator may be eligible for
re-release after the completion of the delinquent time assessment imposed.281
The Board will re-consider the violator’s re-release in the event s/he violates
facility rules; experiences a significant change in his/her mental or emotional
state; was arrested or convicted of a new felony subsequent to the final
revocation hearing; or there is information indicating the juvenile is not suitable
for release (i.e. has demonstrated self-destructive or threatening behavior).282 If
not identified as presenting any of these exceptions, two months prior to the
expiration of the time assessment imposed, the Board will consider re-release
without a personal interview. At this time, the Board may order re-release to
supervision after the expiration date; after a satisfactory release program is
developed and approved; or conduct a personal interview.283 A juvenile may
appeal any Board of Parole decision.284
40
Juvenile Delinquents
Juvenile Delinquents are released to aftercare programs run by OCFS or contracted
agencies.285 If a youth worker from the aftercare program finds evidence that the juvenile
delinquent has violated a condition of release s/he may initiate release revocation proceedings
by documenting the reasons the juvenile should be returned to custody and details of what
condition(s) were violated.286 This report must be endorsed by the youth worker’s immediate
supervisor and forwarded to the OCFS director of community services bureau.287 Based on the
report, the director of community services bureau will determine if it is in the best interest of the
juvenile that the release program be continued or modified; the juvenile be referred to Family
Court for consideration of a new placement; or the juvenile should be returned to a state training
school.288 If the director determines that the juvenile be returned to an OCFS facility, s/he must
document the grounds the recommendation for revocation is based on and request the office of
the counsel hold a revocation hearing.289 At this point, the director of community services will
direct an employee to apprehend the juvenile and return him or her to custody. If the director
believes the juvenile does not require confinement to ensure appearance at the hearing the juvenile
may remain in the community.290
The revocation hearing must be held within 20 days of notice.291 An OCFS attorney will
act as the hearing officer.292 At the hearing both sides may present evidence in support and defense
of the allegations.293 At the conclusion of the hearing, the hearing officer will issue a decision
“determining whether the releasee has knowingly violated any of the conditions of his [or her]
release as alleged.”294 If the hearing officer finds substantial evidence supporting the allegations,
revocation of release will be ordered. If substantial evidence is not found, the juvenile will be
returned to aftercare supervision.295 In the event of revocation, notice must be sent to the Family
Court.296 A juvenile may waive the right to a hearing by voluntarily returning to custody.297
41
Exhibit 20: Alternative Courts
The New York State Unified Court System has collaborated with the Center for Court Innovation, a
nonprofit think tank, to create demonstration projects that test alternative approaches to criminal justice. This
collaboration has created several juvenile courts throughout New York City that address issues such as domestic
violence, low-level crime, and drug and property offenses. These courts work to hold youths accountable and
link them to services that address the underlying causes that brought them before the court.
Brooklyn’s Youthful Offender Domestic Violence Court298
Brooklyn Criminal Court, 120 Schermerhorn Street, Brooklyn, NY 11201
347-404-9400
Youths aged 16 to 19 charged with misdemeanor domestic violence in Brooklyn may have their cases
heard in the Youthful Offender Domestic Violence Court. Prior to arraignment, the District Attorney’s Office
screens cases to determine eligibility. Following arraignment, the case is adjourned to the Youthful Offender
Domestic Violence Court where a specialized judge, assistant district attorney, and court staff take over the
case proceedings. Offenders who appear in the court can be mandated by plea to social services including a
12-week program for teen batterers. Offenders report back to the court regularly for judicial compliance reviews.
In addition to providing services to offenders, a teen victim advocate, employed by the District Attorney’s
Office, works to link victims to social services.
Red Hook Community Justice Center299
88 Visitation Place, Brooklyn, NY 11231
718-923-8280
The Red Hook Community Justice Center operates a Youth Court for 10 to 18 year olds arrested for
low-level offenses including vandalism and fare evasion. Youths who are arrested and admit guilt in Brooklyn’s
72nd, 76th, and 78th precincts are referred to the Youth Court. The court is presided by local teenagers who
are trained to act as judge, jury, and attorneys. At the conclusion of the hearing, the judge and jury impose a
sanction such as community service, skill building workshops, and/or letters of apology. The court hears over
130 cases a year.
Staten Island Youth Justice Center300
120 Stuyvesant Place, Staten Island, NY 10301
718-679-9410
The Staten Island Youth Justice Center operates a Youth Court for youths under age 18 who commit
low-level nonviolent offenses. Cases are referred by the NYC Department of Probation or NYPD Officers as
42
a diversion from court or arrest. Youth receive an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal (ACD) and
participate voluntarily after acknowledging responsibility for the offense. Local teenagers serve as judge,
advocates and jurors and impose an appropriate sanction incorporating restorative justice principals. The
Youth Court trains 40 teens and handles 120 cases per year.
Harlem Community Justice Center301
170 East 121st Street, New York, NY 10035
212-360-4110
The Harlem Community Justice Center operates two alternative juvenile courts for youths engaged in
delinquent behavior in East and Central Harlem—the Youth Court and the Juvenile Intervention Court.
The Harlem Youth Court is a peer-led justice approach for juveniles that engage in low-level offenses
such as shoplifting, public drinking, and truancy, and are referred by the police, probation, or local schools.
The court is presided over by local teenagers who are trained to act as judge, jury, and attorneys. The youths
who serve on the Youth Court are articulating and enforcing standards of acceptable behavior for the juveniles
who appear before them. At the conclusion of the hearing, the judge and jury impose a sanction such as
community service, anger management, and/or letters of apology. The goal of the sanction is to encourage the
juvenile to take responsibility for their actions and to acknowledge how their behavior undermines the local
quality of life and their individual future.
The Harlem Juvenile Intervention Court is part of the New York City Family Court system. The Court
handles youths arrested for non-violent drug and property offenses. When a youth is arrested for one of these
offenses in the Harlem area, they may be interviewed by a Probation Officer at the Justice Center to determine
eligibility. If the Probation Officer determines the youth is eligible, a complete assessment is conducted by
Court staff gathering information on the youth’s history of drug use, school problems, peer and community
influences and family dynamics. The case is heard before a New York City Judge who may impose a sanction
including treatment or community service. On-site case managers work with the family and the court to provide
wrap-around services that address identified needs. Throughout the completion of the imposed sentence the
judge monitors the youth’s progress in an effort to increase accountability. The judge may respond to misconduct
or noncompliance or reward compliance by implementing a graduated sanction including increasing or
decreasing the frequency of court appearances or changing curfew times.
43
44
B. Continuum of Services
At each decision point of the juvenile justice system a variety of programs exist as either diversion
mechanisms or intervention options. This section highlights many of the available programs offered to courtinvolved youths throughout New York City.
FIGURE 3: Juvenile Justice System Continuum of Services
Pre-Adjudication
•
Adjustment
•
Release to Parent
•
Alternative-toDetention
Programs
•
Non-Secure
Detention
•
Least
Restrictive
Secure Detention
Most
Restrictive
•
ACD
•
Probation
•
Conditional
Discharge
•
Probation with
Intensive Services
•
Alternative-toPlacement
Programs
•
Placement
Dispositions
45
Pre-Adjudication
Intake
Adjustment
Program Description
The Department of Probation, at its discretion, may adjust a case after intake upon receiving consent from the
complainant. During the adjustment process, the Probation Officer works with the parties involved to resolve the
case outside of court. This process is authorized for a period of 60 to 120 days. During this period the Department
of Probation supervises the juvenile and ensures the juvenile adheres to certain requirements such as community
service and/or restitution.
Eligibility Requirements / Target Population
Arrested youths who are not a risk to public safety.
Counties / Courts Served
All NYC counties.
Program Capacity
No limit. In FY2009, 3,258 cases (28% of all intakes) were diverted from court through adjustment.302
Release to Parent Initiative
Program Description
The Department of Juvenile Justice’s (now ACS) Release-to-Parent Initiative seeks to divert low-risk youths from
further involvement with the justice system by releasing them to their families with a Family Court Appearance
Ticket.303
Youths who are brought to Bridges Juvenile Center for intake are assessed by intake staff. Staff review the
juvenile’s charges and prior court involvement to determine eligibility for release. If found eligible, intake staff
contact the youth’s guardian to coordinate their release.
All NYC counties.
Program Capacity
Between October 2007 and April 2008, 1,378 youths were screened for possible release, of those 256 were found
eligible. Of the 256 youths eligible for release, 31% were sent home. The most common reason eligible youths
were not released is that their parent or guardian could not be reached.304
Contact
Organization did not provide.
46
Detention305
New York City Secure Detention
Bridges Juvenile Center
1221 Spofford Avenue
Bronx, NY 10474
Donna Locke, Executive Director
718-764-2754
Horizon Juvenile Center
560 Brook Avenue, Bronx, NY 10455
Eduardo Marcial, Executive Director
718-292-0065 ext. 149
Crossroads Juvenile Center
17 Bristol Street, Brooklyn, NY 11212
Migdalia Aldea, Executive Director
718-495-8160 ext. 183
New York City Non-Secure Detention
Episcopal Social Services – New Bridge
2604 Davidson Avenue
Bronx, NY 10468
Jermaine Miller, Facility Director
718-329-9943
Episcopal Social Services – New View
3620 Marolla Place, Bronx, NY 10466
Jermaine Miller, Facility Director
347-920-4071
Girls/Boys Town – Bergen St
535 Bergen Street, Brooklyn, NY 11217
Prescott Benson, Facility Director
718-636-2130
Girls/Boys Town – Dean St
525 Dean Street, Brooklyn, NY 11217
Barbara Youyoute, Acting Facility Director
718-636-3110
Beach Avenue 1
1101 Beach Avenue, Bronx, NY 10472
John Brooks, Facility Director
718-597-3842
Girls/Boys Town – Marolla
3675 Marolla Place, Bronx, NY 10466
Carolyn Slade, Facility Director
718-653-9586
Beach Avenue 2
1103 Beach Avenue, Bronx, NY 10472
John Brooks, Facility Director
718-597-3842
Good Shepherd Services – Mandela House
2207 University Avenue
Bronx, NY 10453
Robert Taylor, Facility Director
718-561-0251
145th Street
419 W. 145th Street
New York, NY 10031
Janet Gordon-Small, Facility Director
212-690-0410
Good Shepherd Services – Barbara Blum
262 9th Street, Brooklyn, NY 11215
Angela Williams, Facility Director
718-832-5737
Catholic Guardian Society – Bronx
743 E. 243rd Street, Bronx, NY 10470
Michael Vaz, Facility Director
718-994-6545
Good Shepherd Services – Peter J Sharp House
1315 Plimpton Avenue
Bronx, NY 10452
Donald Cofield, Facility Director
718-293-9091
Catholic Guardian Society – Brooklyn
3402 Claredon Road
Brooklyn, NY 11203
Sekou Smith, Facility Director
718-856-3052
Lutheran Social Services – Clinton Ave
521 Clinton Avenue
Brooklyn, NY 11238
Lindsay Brown, Facility Director
718-789-2911
47
New York City Non-Secure Detention (continued)
Outreach Haven
4353 Robinson Street
Flushing, NY 11355
Geraldine Silva, Facility Director
718-358-6300
Salvation Army – Lenox House
131 W. 132nd Street
New York, NY 10027
Anisa Kline, Facility Director
212-926-1236
St. Johns Richmond Hill Residence
13020 107th Avenue
S. Richmond Hill, NY 11419
Michael Doctor, Facility Director
718-843-7455
48
Alternatives to Detention and Aftercare
Alternative-to-Detention Program
Program Description
The Department of Probation’s Alternative-to-Detention (ATD) Program offers three levels of supervision with
a focus on maintaining the youth’s ties to the community by utilizing local services and continuing school
enrollment. The ATD program provides a continuum of supervision consisting of community monitoring,
after-school supervision, and intensive community monitoring in which youths are placed based on performance.
The community monitoring and after-school supervision levels are provided by nonprofit agencies in each county
and the Department of Probation supervises youths on intensive community monitoring. Each level of supervision
consists of the following components:
x Community Monitoring
monitor school attendance and curfew;
home visits;
facilitation of attendance at court;
x After-School Supervision
the services provided under community monitoring; and
educational and counseling services for up to five days a week including:
x group and individual counseling;
x educational assistance;
x anger management;
x conflict resolution; and
x recreational activities.
x Intensive Community Monitoring
frequent school and home visits;
parental conferences;
telephone check-ins;
curfew monitoring;
counseling; and
referrals for court-ordered services.
Supervisors monitor the performance of each youth to determine if s/he is eligible to transition to a higher or lower
supervision level, or should be referred back to Family Court for reconsideration of detention.306 (see figure 4)
Youths are screened for the program by the Department of Probation who utilize the Risk Assessment Instrument
(RAI) developed by the Vera Institute of Justice. The RAI is an objective risk assessment tool that produces a
score to assess a youth’s risk of failure to appear in court and risk of re-arrest prior to court appearance. Based on
several factors including prior history, school engagement, and current offense, a risk-level score is generated of
low, moderate, or high. Youths who score in the ‘moderate-risk’ range are recommended for the ATD program.
Low-risk youths are recommended for release and high-risk youths are recommended for detention. The RAI
offers the judge objective information to assist in the detention decision. The results of the RAI are in no way
binding—the judge maintains full discretion over the placement of the youth.307
49
The ATD Program serves all NYC counties.
Program Capacity
It is anticipated that the program, which began in 2007, will serve up to 1,800 youths annually—approximately
600 youths on community monitoring and after-school supervision and 600 youths on intensive community
supervision.
Contact
Bronx County: Urban Youth Alliance – Bronx Connect
Patricia Riley, Director of Bronx Connect at 718-402-6872 or pat_bc@uyai.org
Kings County: Center for Community Alternatives – Choices Unlimited
Cadija Tibbs, Court Services Manager at 212-691-1911 or ctibbs@communityalternatives.org
Tiffany Sheriod, Project Director of After School Program at 718-858-9658 ext. 217 or
tsheriod@communityalternatives.org
New York County: CASES – Choices
Joseph McLaughlin, Director of Youth Programs at 212-553-6650 or jmclaughlin@cases.org
Richmond County: Center for Court Innovation – Project READY
Melissa Gelber, Project Director at 718-679-9410 or mgelber@courts.state.ny.us
Queens County: Center for Court Innovation – QUEST
David Long, Project Director at 718-233-4014 or longd@courtinnovation.org
NYC Department of Probation
Kings Juvenile Services 718-802-2556
Queens Juvenile Services 718-657-4385
Bronx Juvenile Services 718-590-3180
Manhattan Juvenile Services 212-676-8521
50
Target:
Low risk youth
Court appearance
notification and
an initial outreach
meeting with
parent/guardian to
explain the court
process and the
importance of
attendance at all
court dates
Appearance
Notification and
Family
Outreach Only
Expected Volume:
600 releasees
Target:
Moderate risk (mid
to high range)
Community-based
after -school
programs, on-site
services, and
service referrals
available
Target:
Moderate risk
(high range)
Expected Volume:
up to 150 releasees
per borough
Participant
authorized to
attend school and
court-ordered
programs; frequent
curfew checks,
home visits, and
phone check-ins;
"contract"
agreement with
parent/guardian
Juveniles can be moved up or down the continuum based on
performance
Expected Volume:
600 releasees
Target:
Moderate risk
youth (low to mid
range)
School attendance
monitoring, curfew
checks, home
check-ins
Community
Monitoring
After-School
Supervision
Intensive
Community
Monitoring
FIGURE 4: ATD Program Continuum of Supervision Services308
Target:
High risk (low
range)
A less restrictive
alternative to secure
detention, NSD
provides structured
residential care for
youth with cases in
Family Court .
Non-Secure
Detention
Target:
High risk (high
range)
Facilities serve both
alleged JDs and JOs
and provide a level
of security that
ensures the
juvenile's
appearance in court
and protects the
community from
reoffending
Secure
Detention
51
Youth Advocacy Project
Program Description
The Center for Community Alternatives offers the Youth Advocacy Project (YAP) a community-based intensive
supervision alternative-to-detention program for Juvenile Offenders. YAP provides supervision and case
management services for up to one year pending sentencing. Participants receive services including: monthly
progress reports; supervision of school attendance and school visits; curfew monitoring; referrals to communitybased services; home visits; random drug testing; HIV/AIDS prevention and education services; life skills
workshops; family therapy; parent support workshops; educational and vocational counseling; referrals to
community service placement; and transportation fare to-and-from the program.
YAP is available for youths ages 12 to 16 who have been charged with a felony offense committed prior to their
16th birthday and are detained at a juvenile detention center.
YAP serves all NYC counties.
Program Capacity
YAP serves approximately 60 youths per year.
Contact
Rukia Lumumba, Assistant Director of Youth Services at 718-858-9658 ext. 214 or
rlumumba@communityalternatives.org
http://www.communityalternatives.org/programs/YAP.html
52
Uth Turn Program
Program Description
The Fund for Community Leadership, Inc. operates the Uth Turn Program an alternative-to-detention program
for youths ages 13 - 21. The program seeks to improve school attendance and academic performance, improve
family relationships, and promote leadership. Uth Turn offers mentoring, group and individual counseling, family
involvement, and positive peer interaction and healthy personal associations, to achieve its objectives.
Uth Turn is available for pre-trial youths ages 13 to 21.
Uth Turn serves all NYC counties.
Program Capacity
Uth Turn plans to serve 300 youths in 2009-10.
Contact
Rev. Dr. C. Vernon Mason, Chief Executive Officer at 212-870-1237 or cvmason@nyts.edu
http://www.uth-turn.org/home.htm
53
Collaborative Family Initiative
Program Description
The Department of Juvenile Justice’s (now ACS) Collaborative Family Initiative provides discharge planning for
detained youths with mental health needs. The program assists youths with enrollment in community psychiatric
services prior to release from the detention facility. This voluntary program requires family consent and
participation. Staff work with the family to enroll the youth in the most appropriate community-based organization
(CBO) to acquire services. While the youth is still in detention the CBO assess the needs of the family and the
youth. Services are provided for up to 90 days and are not contingent on disposition of the case.
The Collaborative Family Initiative is available on a voluntary basis to youths detained in NYC secure or
non-secure detention facilities who have been identified as having mental health needs.
Collaborative Family Initiative serves all NYC counties.
Program Capacity
Contact
54
LIFE Transitions Program
Program Description
The LIFE Transitions Program is offered to youths who are returning to the community from detention. An aftercare
program, the LIFE Transitions Program provides life skills instruction inside Crossroads and Horizons detention
facilities and transitional planning services within the community upon release. This voluntary program provides
services for a minimum of 90 days including: school re-enrollment and engagement; continuation of all services
received within detention; mental health treatment referrals; substance treatment referrals; vocational training
referrals and placement assistance; educational support referrals; family reunification services; life skills
workshops; HIV/AIDS prevention and education services; referrals to community-based services; and
transportation fare to-and-from the program.
Youths returning to the community from Crossroads and Horizons detention facilities who have participated in
at least one workshop while detained.
LIFE Transitions serves all NYC counties.
Program Capacity
Transitional planning is provided to approximately 90 youths per year at each of the two sites.
Contact
Crossroads Juvenile Center Program
Center for Community Alternatives:
Delores Moody, Program Coordinator at 718-858-9658 ext. 213 or dmoody@communityalternatives.org
Rebekah Heilman, Director of Youth Services at 718-858-9658 ext. 215 or
rheilman@communityalternatives.org
http://www.communityalternatives.org/programs/lifeTransitions.html
Horizons Juvenile Center Program
Good Shepherd Services:
Kerrie Thompson, Group Living Director at 212-475-4245 ext. 710
http://www.goodshepherds.org/
55
Dispositions
Placement
OCFS RECEPTION CENTERS
Ella McQueen Reception Center for Boys
41 Howard Avenue
Brooklyn, NY 11221-4015
Rich Trudeau, Director
718-574-2060
Boys Facility, in Kings County
Tryon Girls Reception Center
881 County Route 107
Johnstown, NY 12095
Anita Sapio, Director
518-762-4681
Girls Facility, in Fulton County
OCFS SECURE FACILITIES
Brookwood Secure Center
PO Box 265 or
419 County Rt 29
Claverack, NY 12513-0265
E. Patrick Sullivan, Director
518-851-3211
Boys Facility, in Columbia County
Goshen Secure Center
97 Cross Road
Goshen, NY 10924-9998
Bobby Ray Smith, Director
845-615-3000
Boys Facility, in Orange County
Industry Secure Center
101 Ryder Hill Road
Rush, NY 14543-9535
Alvin Lollie, Director
585-533-2800
Boys Facility, in Monroe County
MacCormick Secure Center
300 South Road
Brooktondale, NY 14817-9723
Joseph Maffia, Director
607-539-7121
Boys Facility, in Tompkins County
56
Tryon Girls Center
881 County Highway 107
Johnstown, NY 12095-3771
518-762-2331
OCFS LIMITED SECURE FACILITIES
Highland Residential Center
629 North Chodikee Lake Road
Highland, NY 12528-2726
Farooq Mallick, Director
845-691-6006
Boys Facility, in Ulster County
Industry Residential Center
375 Rush-Scottsville Road
Rush, NY 14543-9504
Alvin Lollie, Director
585-533-2600
Boys Facility, in Monroe County
Finger Lakes Residential Center
250 Auburn Road
Lansing, NY 14882-9088
Rodney White, Director
607-533-5000
Boys Facility, in Tompkins County
Sgt. Henry Johnson Youth Leadership Academy
57081 State Highway 10
South Kortright, NY 13842-0132
Rueben Reyes, Director
607-538-1401
Boys Facility, in Delaware County
Taberg Residential Center
10011 Taberg-Florence Road
RR 1, Box 139
Taberg, NY 13471-7735
Richard Hogeboom, Acting Director
315-245-0084
Boys Facility, in Oneida County
Tryon Residential Center
Joseph Impicciatore, Director
518-762-4681
Boys Facility, in Fulton County
Harriet Tubman Residential Center
6706 Pine Ridge Road
Auburn, NY 13021-8781
315-255-3481
Brenda Aulbach, Director
Girls Facility, in Cayuga County
Tryon Girls Center
518-762-2331
Lansing Residential Center
270 Auburn Road
Lansing, NY 14882-8944
Annette Larrier, Director
607-533-4262
Girls Facility, in Tompkins County
OCFS NON-SECURE /
NON-COMMUNITY BASED FACILITIES
Allen Residential Center
56957 State Highway 10
South Kortright, NY 13842-0018
Ruben Reyes, Director
607-538-9121
Boys Facility, in Delaware County
Annsville Residential Center
Rural Route 1
10011 Taberg-Florence Road
Taberg, NY 13471-9735
Richard Hogeboom, Director
315-245-1720
Boys Facility, in Oneida County
Brentwood Residential Center
1230 Commack Road
Dix Hills, NY 11746-8215
Sandra Bryce, Director
631-667-1188
Girls Facility, in Suffolk County
Brooklyn Residential Center
1125 Carroll Street
Valerie Fitts, Director
718-773-2041
Girls Facility, in Kings County
Middletown Residential Center
393 County Road 78
Middletown, NY 10940-6842
Stephen Langbein, Acting Director
845-342-3936
Boys Facility, in Orange County
Red Hook Residential Center
531 Turkey Hill Road
Red Hook, NY 12571-9440
Edward Figueroa, Director
845-758-4151
Boys Facility, in Dutchess County
Southern NY Residential Center
170 East 210th Street
Bronx, NY 10467-9995
Joesph Dennison, Director
718-798-6660
Boys Facility, in Bronx County
Staten Island Residential Center
1133 Forest Hill Road
Staten Island, NY 10314-6396
Faye Lewis, Director
718-761-6033
Girls Facility, in Richmond County
57
OCFS NON-SECURE FACILITIES
COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL HOMES
Staten Island Community Residential Home
211 Holden Boulevard
Staten Island, NY 10314-6313
Faye Lewis, Director
718-773-2043
Girls Facility, in Richmond County
58
OCFS NON-RESIDENTIAL
Sgt. Henry Johnson City Challenge
272 Jefferson Avenue
Ruben Reyes, Director
718-638-2525 or 2510
Co-Ed Facility, in Kings County
Alternatives to Placement and Aftercare
Conditional Discharge
Program Description
A judge may sentence a juvenile to Conditional Discharge for up to one year, if the court finds “neither the public
interest nor the ends of justice would be served by a placement and that probation supervision is not
appropriate.”309 The court may order conditions including but not limited to: “(a) attend school regularly and obey
all rules and regulations of the school; (b) obey all reasonable commands of the parent or other person legally
responsible for the respondent’s [juvenile] care; (c) abstain from visiting designated places or associating with
named individuals; (d) avoid injurious or vicious activities; (e) cooperate with a mental health, social services or
other appropriate community facility or agency to which the respondent [juvenile] is referred; (f) make restitution
or perform services for the public good…; (g)…attend and complete an alcohol awareness program…; (h) comply
with such other reasonable conditions as the court shall determine to be necessary or appropriate to ameliorate the
conduct which gave rise to the filing of the petition or to prevent placement…”310
Low or moderate risk juveniles or those deemed appropriate by the court are eligible for conditional discharge.
All NYC counties.
Program Capacity
No limit.
Adjournment in Contemplation of Dismissal
Program Description
At any time prior to the entering of a finding and with consent of the juvenile, the court may order the proceeding
be adjourned in contemplation of dismissal for up to six months.311 The court will release the juvenile with terms
and conditions to follow to achieve dismissal of the case. Such terms and conditions may include: probation
supervision; and/or cooperation with a mental health, social services or other appropriate community facility or
agency.312
Low-risk juveniles or those deemed appropriate by the court.
All NYC counties.
Program Capacity
No limit.
59
Probation Supervision
Program Description
The Department of Probation provides supervision and case management for juvenile delinquents for up to two
years. Each youth is assigned a Probation Officer who develops a reporting schedule and a treatment plan based
on their individualized needs, which may include referrals to community-based treatment. Probation Officers
monitor the youth at home, school and in the community to ensure compliance with the conditions of probation.
If a youth does not comply with the conditions of probation, a violation will be filed and the youth is returned to
court.
All court-involved youths are eligible.
Probation serves all NYC counties.
Program Capacity
In FY2008, 2,281 juveniles were on probation supervision. Caseloads are capped at 55 cases per officer.
Contact
Staten Island Juvenile Services 718-556-4000
http://www.nyc.gov/html/prob/html/programs/juvenile_services.shtml
60
Enhanced Supervision Program
Program Description
The Department of Probation’s Enhanced Supervision Program (ESP) provides intensive community-based
family-centered supervision to juvenile delinquents. This program is intended to divert from placement youths
who do not pose a threat to community safety. Probation Officers maintain low caseloads to allow for frequent
supervision and communication with the youth’s school and family. The program focuses on the development of
the youth’s sense of accountability and responsibility through participation in community service. Each youth is
required to perform 60 hours of community service. Youths on ESP may be transitioned to traditional probation
supervision based on performance. A typical term of ESP is nine months.
Youths who do not pose a threat to community safety but require more intensive supervision than traditional
probation.
ESP serves all NYC counties.
Program Capacity
In CY2008, 633 juveniles were sentenced to ESP. Caseloads are capped at 25 cases per officer.
Contact
Staten Island Juvenile Services 718-556-4000
http://www.nyc.gov/html/prob/html/programs/juvenile_services.shtml
61
Esperanza
Program Description
Esperanza is a multi-faceted organization dedicated to youths, families, and communities. In partnership with the
NYC Department of Probation, and other agencies involved with the juvenile justice system, Esperanza is exploring
ways to safely reduce reliance on out-of-home placement for youths who are adjudicated delinquent in the family
court system.
Esperanza provides comprehensive services to youths and their families during the four to six months that they
are in the program. This includes an intensive treatment intervention that provides therapeutic services in the home,
including individual and family counseling, as well as ongoing case and crisis management.
From the start of the program, the young person and family members work with Esperanza staff to develop goals
that build on personal and family strengths, as well as addressing areas they would like to change.
Youths are referred to the program directly by Family Court as part of the Exploration of Placement process.
Esperanza serves all NYC counties.
Program Capacity
Esperanza has capacity to serve 216 youths per year.
Contact
646-278-2000
Jenny Kronenfeld, Executive Director
Patricia Ortiz, Clinical Director
Casey Eiseman, Project Manager
http://www.esperanzany.org/
62
Bronx Juvenile Accountability Court
Program Description
Bronx Community Solutions operates the Juvenile Accountability Court as an alternative-to-placement program
for placement-bound juvenile delinquents adjudicated in Bronx Family Court. Juveniles are mandated to 12 to 24
months of intensive probation supervision and participate in the Court program. Through the program the juvenile
participates in community service projects (i.e. graffiti removal) and educational workshops over 10 week cycles.
The Court links the juvenile and his/her family to community-based services and monitors compliance through
frequent court appearances.
Bronx Family Court placement bound juvenile delinquents
Bronx Family Court
Program Capacity
Contact
http://courtinnovation.org/
63
Juvenile Justice Initiative
Program Description
The Administration for Children Services’ provides the Juvenile Justice Initiative as an alternative-to-placement
and aftercare service for juvenile delinquents. The Initiative is comprised of two programs: the Alternative-toPlacement Program and Intensive Preventive Aftercare Services. These programs operate to reduce the number
of youths in placement facilities; decrease lengths of stay for youths in placement; reduce recidivism; and improve
individual and family functioning. Through the program, youths are diverted to evidence-based family therapy
programs including Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care, Functional Family Therapy, and Multisystemic
Therapy. These therapeutic models focus on engaging the entire family to address the issues that brought the
youth into the juvenile justice system and strengthen the family’s capacity to support positive changes.
The Juvenile Justice Initiative is available for placement-bound juvenile delinquents with prior ACS involvement.
The Juvenile Justice Initiative serves all NYC counties.
Program Capacity
The Juvenile Justice Initiative will serve approximately 350 youths in the Alternative-to-Placement Program and
150 youths in the aftercare program per year.
Contact
Schanequa Knight at 212-341-0978 or schanequa.knight@dfa.state.ny.us
http://www.nyc.gov/html/acs/html/support_families/juvenile_justice.shtml
64
Adolescent Portable Therapy
Program Description
Adolescent Portable Therapy (APT) is an intensive in-home treatment program designed to provide substance
abuse and mental health services for system-involved adolescents. APT is licensed by the NYS Office of
Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Services as an outpatient provider. The program typically lasts about four
months, during which Masters level therapists make weekly visits to the home, providing a combination of
individual and family counseling sessions, as well as supportive case management.
The target population of APT is system-involved youths who have substance abuse and/or mental health
treatment needs. There are no age or charge restrictions. APT currently accepts referrals from:
y the Bronx and Brooklyn Family Assessment Program (FAP) offices;
y Brooklyn Family Court as a PINS diversion option; and
y the Office of Children and Family Services for youths re-entering their communities after an out-of-home
placement for a Family Court offense.
Referrals must be made by the staff of these various agencies, with the exception of the Brooklyn PINS project.
Any party involved in a Brooklyn PINS court case can make a referral to APT.
APT serves all NYC Family Courts.
Program Capacity
APT maintains an average capacity of 50 clients at a time. During FY2008, APT served 208 clients.
Contact
Krista Larson, Associate Director at 212-376-3110 or klarson@vera.org
http://www.vera.org/project/adolescent-portable-therapy
65
Smart Choices
Program Description
The Center for Community Alternatives offers the Smart Choices Program, a community-based leadership
development training program for youths under probation supervision. The program runs from September through
June and tracks with the school year. Participants are selected through a referral and application process. Services
include: weekly workshops to teach communication, conflict resolution, and leadership skills; supervision and
coordination of monthly “service learning;” and transportation fare to-and-from the program.
Youths under the supervision of the NYC Department of Probation are eligible for the program.
Smart Choices serves all NYC counties.
Program Capacity
Smart Choices serves approximately 30 youths per year.
Contact
Rebekah Heilman, Director of Youth Services at 718-858-9658 ext. 215 or
rheilman@communityalternatives.org
http://communityalternatives.org/programs/smartChoices.html
66
Family Court Client Specific Planning
Program Description
The Center for Community Alternatives offers the Family Court Client Specific Planning (CSP) Program, a
community-based alternative-to-placement for juvenile delinquents. Upon referral, staff work with the youth and
the youth’s family to develop a plan that is submitted to the Court advocating for his/her release. Upon release,
CSP provides supervision and case management services for up to one year, offering services including: monthly
progress reports; supervision of school attendance and school visits; curfew monitoring; referrals to communitybased services; home visits; random drug testing; HIV/AIDS prevention and education services; life skills
workshops; family therapy; parent support workshops; educational support and referrals; referrals for 10 hours of
mandated community service; and transportation fare to-and-from the program.
Youths age 15 and under with a pending delinquency case or who have been adjudicated delinquent may be referred
to CSP. Upon referral, staff conduct an investigation, including interviews with the youth and relevant family
members, to determine if the youth would benefit from program services.
CSP serves all NYC counties.
Program Capacity
CSP provides services to approximately 28 youths per year.
Contact
Rukia Lumumba, Assistant Director of Youth Services at 718-858-9658 ext. 214 or
rlumumba@communityalternatives.org
http://www.communityalternatives.org/programs/familyCourt.html
67
Andrew Glover Youth Program
Program Description
The Andrew Glover Youth Program provides an alternative-to-incarceration program for youthful offenders from
the Lower East Side and East Harlem. Youths are screened at the Manhattan Criminal Court where staff assess
cases and when a youth is selected, the staff member will appear before the judge to advocate for the youth’s
assignment to the program. The Andrew Glover Youth Program offers a personalized rehabilitation plan including
educational, job-readiness and recreational programs, referrals, and court monitoring.
Youthful offenders from the Lower East Side and East Harlem who meet the program risk standards.
New York County / Manhattan Criminal Court
Program Capacity
In 2008, the Andrew Glover Youth Program served 208 youthful offenders.
Contact
Angel Rodriguez, Executive Director at 212-349-6381 ext. 12 or arodriguez@agyp.org
Judith Smith, Associate Director at 212-349-6381 ext. 13 or jsmith@agyp.org
http://agyp.org
68
The Dome Project’s Juvenile Justice Program
Program Description
The Dome Project’s Juvenile Justice Program is an alternative-to-incarceration program for youthful offenders.
The program consists of three workshops series—consequential thinking, cognitive development, and creative
expression—over a twelve-week cycle. Each workshop seeks to assist the youth develop life skills and attainable,
positive educational and vocational goals. Youths are referred to the program by court staff including social
workers, attorneys, probation officers and judges.
Youthful offenders, juvenile offenders, and youths on probation are eligible for the Juvenile Justice Program.
The Juvenile Justice Program serves New York, Kings, Bronx and Queens counties.
Program Capacity
The program serves approximately 120 to 140 youths per year. Each workshop cycle has 30 to 35 slots
available.
Contact
Richard Celestin, Director of Advocacy and Education at 212-724-1780 or Richard@domeproject.org
Elizabeth Walker, Director of Social Services at 212-724-1780 or beth@domeproject.org
http://domeproject.org/programs_jj.html
69
BronxConnect
Program Description
The Urban Youth Alliance operates the BronxConnect program an alternative-to-incarceration program for
court-involved youth ages 12 to 18 from the Bronx. The program is focused on mentoring services within the
community, each youth is matched with an adult mentor from a local church. BronxConnect also links participants
with local community-based services through referrals. Youths are referred by the Bronx District Attorney’s Office,
Supreme Court, Criminal Court, Family Court, Legal Aid Society, Defenders Office, and the Department of
Probation.
Youthful and Juvenile Offenders from the Bronx are eligible for BronxConnect.
BronxConnect serves Bronx County / Bronx Supreme, Criminal, and Family Courts
Program Capacity
Contact
http://www.uyai.org/
70
Court Employment Project (CEP)
Program Description
CASES offers the Court Employment Project (CEP) for felony offenders ages 16 to 21 in Supreme Court. CEP
provides case management and support services for six months, including on-site education classes and GED
testing; employment-readiness training, job placement assistance and paid internship opportunities; substance
abuse and mental health counseling; and assistance securing long-term services in the community.
CEP serves youths ages 16 to 21 facing felony charges in NYC Supreme Courts. CEP’s eligibility requirements
are intended to target defendants who would receive a jail or prison sentence without the intervention of an
alternative to incarceration program.
CEP serves Criminal Supreme Courts in Bronx, Kings, New York, and Queens counties.
Program Capacity
CEP serves 350 youths annually.
Contact
For more information about eligibility or to refer a youth to CEP:
Email cepref@cases.org or call:
Bronx 718-537-8330
Brooklyn 718-222-1585
Manhattan 212-553-6313
Queens 718-537-8330
For general information contact:
http://www.cases.org/cep_sub.html
71
Youth and Congregations in Partnership (YCP)
Program Description
The Kings County District Attorney’s Office operates YCP as a one year alternative-to-incarceration program,
which combines mentoring with intensive comprehensive services. Each participant is assigned a social worker
who coordinates services such as counseling, educational and vocational services, anger management, independent
living skills, and referrals to outside service providers if necessary. In addition, YCP engages family members
through ongoing workshops and referrals. The mentoring component of YCP unites court-involved youths with
mentors drawn from a broad range of faith based institutions throughout the community. The juvenile is mentored
individually or by a committee of 2-3 mentors who work with him/her for one year. Juveniles are initially
interviewed and screened by a Kings County District Attorney’s Office social worker, after screening the juvenile
can be referred to the program by the judge, defense attorney or prosecutor. YCP’s intake process includes a review
of the referred juvenile’s involvement with the criminal justice system as well as a thorough psychosocial
assessment of both the juvenile and their parent/guardian.
Young men and women, 13-22 years-old with open cases in Kings County Family, Criminal or Supreme Court,
who have no history of mental illness or a pattern of violent offenses are eligible for YCP.
YCP serves Kings County.
Contact
Joan Gabbidon, Executive Director at 718-250-2267 or gabbidoj@brooklynda.org
Deborah Lashley, Program Manager at 718-250-3804 or lashleyd@brooklynda.org
http://www.brooklynda.org/YCP/YCP.htm
72
Community Prep High School
Program Description
CASES, in partnership with the NYC Department of Education, offers Community Prep High School, a transitional
academy for court-involved youths. Community Prep provides a structured and supportive environment for youths
to develop academic and literacy skills and facilitates their transition to a diploma-granting high school, GED
program, or employment.
Community Prep is available for youths between the ages of 14 and 17 who are currently court-involved or recently
released from detention or placement.
Community Prep High School serves all NYC counties.
Program Capacity
Community Prep maintains a capacity of 100 active students.
Contact
http://www.cases.org/cps.html
73
Learning to Work/GED
Program Description
CASES, in partnership with the NYC Department of Education, offers the Learning to Work/GED program to
youths ages 17½ to 20 with current or previous court-involvement. The Learning to Work/GED program provides
a combination of GED instruction, employment-readiness workshops, paid internships, job placement assistance,
and college application and financial aid application assistance.
Learning to Work/GED serves youths between the ages of 17½ and 20, including those with current or previous
court-involvement.
Learning to Work/GED serves all NYC counties.
Program Capacity
Learning to Work/GED maintains a capacity of 50 active participants.
Contact
http://www.cases.org
74
Girls Re-entry Assistance Support Program (GRASP)
Program Description
The Kings County District Attorney’s Office operates GRASP for females returning to the community from prison,
placement, detention centers or jail. GRASP provides comprehensive services and mentoring to aid reentry. The
program offers case management, educational support, career exploration, job development, anger management,
crisis counseling, and referrals for additional services. Participants remain active in GRASP for six months to one
year after their release from confinement. Eligible women may refer themselves or can be referred by any facility
or counselor.
GRASP is available for females ages 13 to 25 who are presently incarcerated or recently released from a prison,
placement, detention center or jail. Young women with a predatory sexual offense, arson, murder, or a persistent
pattern of violent felony offenses are not eligible.
Youths from Brooklyn or youths with Brooklyn cases receive priority. Youths from all other boroughs are
considered on a case by case basis.
Program Capacity
Contact
Joan Gabbidon, Executive Director at 718-250-2219 or gabbidoj@brooklynda.org
Deborah Lashley, Program Manager at 718-250-3804 or lashleyd@brooklynda.org
http://www.brooklynda.org/grasp/grasp.htm
75
OCFS Intensive Aftercare Program313
Program Description
OCFS provides counseling and monitoring for up to six months after youths are released from custody. The
Intensive Aftercare Program consists of agency operated and contracted Day Programs providing various
supervision levels and services. Programs include:
x City Challenge – serves youths released from the Sergeant Henry Johnson Youth Leadership Academy in
Brooklyn.
x Evening Reporting Centers – provide evening and weekend residential supervision and services operated
to complement day programs. Participation is contingent on school or work attendance.
x Multisystemic Therapy & Functional Family Therapy – engages the entire family to strengthen the family’s
capacity to support positive changes. Aftercare services are provided by the Administration for Children
Services’ Juvenile Justice Initiative.
x Electronic Monitoring – monitoring of youth’s adherence to curfew requirements during the first four to
eight weeks after release.
Juvenile Delinquents released from OCFS custody are eligible for IAP.
x
x
x
x
City Challenge – All NYC counties
Evening Reporting Centers – Albany, Bronx, Kings, Buffalo, Rochester, and Syracuse
Multisystemic Therapy & Functional Family Therapy – All NYC counties
Electronic Monitoring – All NYC counties, and Capital District, Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse/Utica,
and Newburgh
Program Capacity
In 2008, 650 youths entered Day Programs (of those 361 were from New York City). Program participation in
2008 (total and (NYC total)):
x City Challenge – 78 (77)
x Evening Reporting Centers – 218 (118)
x Multisystemic Therapy & Functional Family Therapy – 24 (19)
x Electronic Monitoring – 330 (147)
Contact
OCFS 518-473-7793
http://www.ocfs.state.ny.us/main/rehab/
76
Youth Represent
Program Description
Youth Represent is a holistic legal representation organization for court-involved youths ages 24 and under. Youth
Represent provides criminal defense representation and civil legal representation when a young person is denied
employment, suspended from school, or threatened with eviction from or denied public housing due to court
involvement.
Youth Represent serves court-involved youths ages 24 and under.
Youth Represent serves New York County Family Court and Bronx, New York, and Kings County Criminal
Courts.
Program Capacity
Contact
212-553-6421 or info@youthrepresent.org
http://youthrepresent.org/
77
78
APPENDIX
A. New York Juvenile Justice Statistics
B. National Juvenile Justice Statistics
79
80
A. New York Juvenile Justice Statistics
New York City Mayor’s Management Reportvi
Citywide Juvenile Indicators
Juvenile Arrests for major felonies
Juvenile probationers rearrested
Juvenile probationer re-arrest rate (monthly average)
Juveniles referred to Intake by Dept of Probation
Juvenile delinquency cases diverted from court through adjustment
Adjusted cases as percent of all cases
Percent of Intakes Filed for Prosecution
Youths enrolled in Esperanza (monthly average)
Total probationers supervised in Enhanced Supervision Program
Average Daily Population in Secure Detention at DJJ
Average Length of Stay in Secure Detention at DJJ (days)
Average Daily Population in Non-Secure Detention at DJJ
Average Length of Stay in Non-Secure Detention at DJJ (days)
Total admissions to DJJ
Youths with Previous Admission(s) to Detention
Average Length of Stay (days)
Average Daily Population
Average Daily Cost Per Youth Per Day
General Healthcare Cost Per Youth Per Day
DJJ Total Expenditures (millions)
Law Department Juvenile Conviction Rate
FY07
4,469
596
1.6%
10,673
2,797
26%
66%
79
988
291.8
20
148.6
33
5,886
45.9%
27
440.5
$520
$73
$127.7
70%
FY08
4,373
749
2.1%
11,939
3,554
30%
62%
51
1,083
289.7
21
136.7
33
5,489
47.5%
28
426.4
$588
$83
$131.5
70%
FY09
4,207
N/A
2.5%
11,846
3,258
28%
59%
67
1,197
278.6
20
151
32
5,833
49.4%
26
429.6
$620
$95
$138.3
71%
vi
City of New York. (200x). Mayor’s Management Report. New York: City of New York Mayor’s Office of Operations.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/ops/html/mmr/mmr.shtml
81
New York City Department of Juvenile Justicevii
DJJ Admissions
Admissions to Secure Detention
Admissions to Non-Secure Detention
Average Daily Population Secure Detention
Average Daily Population Non-Secure Detention
Admissions by Borough of Court
Brooklyn
Bronx
Manhattan
Queens
Staten Island
Outside NYC
Admissions by Gender
Male
Female
Age at Admission
12 or under
13
14
15
16
17 or over
Admissions to Detention by Charge
Juvenile Delinquent
Juvenile Offender
Other
Top 15 Neighborhood Total Admissions
East New York
South Jamaica
Bedford-Stuyvesant
Brownsville
Soundview
Morris Heights
Saint George
Harlem
East Harlem/Upper East Side
South Bronx
East Flatbush
University Heights
Bushwick
Tremont
Eastchester
Bedford Park
Far Rockaway
vii
FY07
5,172
712
292
149
FY08
N/A
N/A
289.7
136.7
30.1%
24.6%
16.5%
20.9%
5.3%
2.7%
27.5%
28.6%
18.1%
19.9%
5.1%
0.8%
81%
19%
80%
20%
4%
9%
24%
43%
14%
6%
3%
11%
23%
45%
12%
6%
92%
8%
N/A
85%
7%
8%
218
207
180
169
158
158
155
146
135
134
122
121
121
117
108
N/A
N/A
175
176
171
144
134
138
138
165
135
125
N/A
152
N/A
152
139
131
121
New York City Department of Juvenile Justice. (n.d.). By the numbers . http://nyc.gov/html/djj/html/numbers.html
82
New York City Department of Correctionviii
DOC Population
Total Population
Male
Detained
Sentenced
Female
Detained
Sentenced
11/7/2008
855
813
754
59
42
33
9
Felony Charges
Adolescent Male
Adult Male
Adolescent Female
Adult Female
Robbery
Murder or Manslaughter
Assault
Weapons
Average Length of Stay – Detainee (days)
Male
Female
Average Length of Stay – City Sentence (days)
93%
76%
78%
67%
44%
13%
8%
7%
25
25
18
98
First Admission to DOC
Adolescent
Adult
60%
20%
Black
Latino
65%
30%
Adolescent Race
viii
Horn, M. Commissioner. (2008, November 24). Special needs of adolescents in New York correctional facilities. Testimony of
Martin F. Horn, Commissioner, NYC Department of Correction to the New York City Council Committees on Juvenile Justice, Fire
and Criminal Justice Services, and Youth Services. http://www.nyc.gov/html/doc/html/news/special_needs_adolescents_testimony.pdf
83
New York City Department of Correctionix
Robert N Davoren Complex
Serious Injuries to Adolescents
2008
2007
Percent
Change
27
33
-18%
48
Serious Injury Population
Total Security Cameras in Complex
336
New York City Department of Correctionx
ix
Adolescents 16 to 18 on Rikers Island As of 11/8/08
Robert N Davoren Complex (male)
Rose M Singer Center (female)
Eric M Taylor Center (male)
Otis Bantum Correctional Center
North Infirmary Command
Detained
669
32
0
68
17
NYC DOC Total Admissions FY08
Average Daily Inmate Population
107,516
13,850
Sentenced
18
9
41
0
0
Capacity
2,238
1,139
2,351
0
0
Horn, M. Commissioner. (2008, November 24). Special needs of adolescents in New York correctional facilities. Testimony of
Martin F. Horn, Commissioner, NYC Department of Correction to the New York City Council Committees on Juvenile Justice, Fire
and Criminal Justice Services, and Youth Services. http://www.nyc.gov/html/doc/html/news/special_needs_adolescents_testimony.pdf
x New York City Council. (2008). Oversight: Special needs of adolescents in New York City Correctional facilities. Briefing Paper of
the Governmental Affairs Division. http://legistar.council.nyc.gov/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=448911&GUID=7703458E-5B31-41589BAD-F33C1F5C8E31&Options=&Search=
84
New York State Office of Children and Family Servicesxi
OCFS Youths in Custody
Total Youths Served
Total OCFS New Admissions
CY2006
5,000
2,000
CY2007
4,417
1,680
New York City Youths in OCFS Custody
Total New Admissions
1,210
963
Percent of All OCFS New Admissions
61%
57%
Gender
Male
1,048
811
Female
279
152
Age at Admission
Under 12
6
3
12
15
8
13
81
47
14
227
155
15
435
328
16
357
298
17
68
98
Over 18
25
26
Race
African American
777
607
Asian
14
13
Native-American
17
3
White
223
30
Latino not collected
293
Other
191
20
Not Specified by Youth
23
not collected
Adjudication
Juvenile Offender
28
25
JO/Youthful Offender
77
80
Restrictive JD
5
3
Ltd. Secure JD 60-day Option
4
3
Limited Secure JD
1,042
807
Non-Secure JD
48
49
Parole Violator
6
22
Prior Custody Status
First OCFS Custody
1,137
891
Prior OCFS Custody
73
72
CY2008
Not collected
1,632
1,009
62%
877
132
4
12
63
162
341
293
100
34
633
13
2
20
317
20
4
38
82
1
2
833
50
3
930
79
xi
New York State Office of Children and Family Services. (200x). Youth in care: 200x annual report division of juvenile justice and
opportunities for youth. Rensselaer, NY: New York Officer of Strategic Planning and Policy Development.
http://www.ocfs.state.ny.us/main/reports/
85
OCFS Youths in Custody (continued)
Most Serious Adjudicated Offense
Crimes Against Persons
Crimes Against Property
Other Crimes
None/Status Offense
Service Needs
Health
Limited English
Mental Health
Mental Retardation
Sex Offender
Special Education
Substance Abuse
Total Discharges
Percent of youths discharged in year
Percent of youths in custody at end of year
CY2006
CY2007
CY2008
495
392
321
2
450
290
218
5
452
323
232
2
278
69
324
13
32
99
512
1,398
61%
61%
203
33
211
15
26
70
324
1,275
61%
57%
198
43
208
23
16
81
326
1,004
56%
59%
New York State Office of Children and Family Services Per Diem Chargeback Rates for
OCFS Operated Facilities and Programsxii
OCFS Service / Per Diem Cost
Secure residential services
Limited secure residential services
Non-community based residential services
Community residential services
Family Foster care
Evening reporting centers
CY2007
$391.85
$346.00
$284.47
$300.77
$97.71
$241.70
CY2008
$426.74
$475.48
$521.00
$648.26
$103.64
$253.22
CY2009
$537.64
$584.26
$615.88
$648.08
$115.94
$253.18
xii New York State Office of Children and Family Services. (200x). Per Diem Chargeback Rates for OCFS-Operated Facilities and
Programs—Interim Calendar Year 200x Rates for January 1, 200x, through December 31, 200x. New York: Author.
Administrative Directive 09-OCFS-ADM-13. http://www.ocfs.state.ny.us/main/policies/external/OCFS_2009/ADMs/09-OCFSADM-13%20Per%20Diem%20Chargeback%20Rates%20for%20OCFS-Operated%20Facilities%20and%20Programs%20%202009%20Interim%20Rates.pdf
Administrative Directive 09-OCFS-ADM-02. http://www.ocfs.state.ny.us/main/policies/external/ocfs_2009/adms/09-ocfs-adm02%20per%20diem%20chargeback%20rates%20for%20ocfs-operated%20facilities%20and%20programs.pdf
Administrative Directive 07-OCFS-ADM-08.
http://www.ocfs.state.ny.us/main/rates/adm/07-ocfs-adm08%20calendar%20year%202007%20interim%20per%20diem%20chargeback%20rates%20for%20ocfsoperated%20facilities%20and%20programs%20-%20effective%2001-01-07%20to%2012-31-07.pdf
86
New York City Criminal Justice Agencyxiii
Juvenile Offender Adult Court Processing
CY2005
CY2006
CY2007
A Felonies
B Felonies
C or D Felonies
1,953
11
559
1,383
1,887
14
481
1,392
1,995
3
385
1,607
CY2008xiv
2,223
9
443
1,771
Robbery 2
Robbery 1
Weapon Poss. 3
Burglary 2
Assault 1
Weapon Poss. 2
Sodomy 1
Att. Murder 2
Murder 2
Burglary 1
Other (A & B Felonies)
58.8%
20.4%
5%
4.7%
3.5%
2.3%
1.8%
1%
0.5%
0.5%
1.5%
60.8%
19%
5.7%
3.1%
2.6%
4.2%
1.3%
0.8%
0.7%
0.4%
1.4%
66.8%
13.3%
4%
5.1%
2.6%
4.7%
1.8%
0.5%
0.2%
0.1%
0.9%
67.3%
12.8%
2%
4.5%
3.7%
5.8%
1.2%
1.2%
0.4%
0.3%
0.8%
13
14
15
2
732
1,219
4
727
1,156
0
778
1,217
1
891
1,331
Male
Female
1,703
250
1,665
222
1,751
244
1,895
328
661
333
20
289
14
644
164
364
116
353
63
98
11
23
153
5
635
265
28
324
15
617
119
400
98
481
91
180
9
39
154
8
541
285
11
230
10
546
151
335
60
320
36
95
4
32
148
5
660
324
21
302
13
642
149
406
87
429
24
156
10
15
219
5
Juvenile Offender Arrests
Arrest Charge JO Arrests
Arrest by Age
Arrest by Sex
Case Volume / Status
Criminal Court Arraignments
ROR
Bail Set and Made
Bail Set and Not Made
Remand
Criminal Court Dispositions
Dismissed
Transfer to SC
Transfer to Family Court
Supreme Court 1st Appearances
Pled Guilty
Pled Not Guilty
Dismissed
Continued
Bench Warrant
xiii
Gewirtz, M. (200x). Annual report on the adult court case processing of juvenile offenders in New York City, January through
December 200x. New York: New York City Criminal Justice Agency, Inc. http://www.cjareports.org/index8.htm
xiv In 2007, the New York City Criminal Justice Agency (CJA) changed the methodology in which arrests are tallied, therefore
CY2007 and 2008 arrests are not comparable with previous years. In addition, in 2008 CJA excluded cases docketed in Staten Island
due to the small number of cases prosecuted in that county.
87
Juvenile Offenders Adult Court Processing (continued)
Supreme Court Dispositions
Conviction
Dismissed
(or acquitted or abated by death)
CY05
317
219
41
CY06
373
257
65
CY07
309
235
46
CY08
315
236
33
57
51
28
46
Youthful Offender
Not Youthful Offender
203
88
23
90
2
202
157
45
233
84
40
106
3
228
186
42
265
113
19
108
25
265
226
39
225
111
22
85
7
225
176
49
Criminal Court
Supreme Court
14
17
4
16
8
17
14
27
Supreme Court Sentence
Imprisonment
Imprisonment & Probation
Probation
Other
Conditions of Sentence
Failure to Appear
88
New York State Division of Probation and Correctional Alternativesxv
Probationers Supervised 12/31/2007 12/31/2008
Age at Sentence < 16
Total Supervised Cases
Race
American Indian
Asian
Black
Hispanic
Other
Unknown
White
County
Bronx
Kings
New York
Queens
Richmond
388
351
1
6
220
79
19
33
30
1
4
208
76
12
26
24
29%
33%
15%
22%
1%
30%
35%
13%
21%
2%
Probationers Supervised
Age at Sentence 16-18
Total Supervised Cases
Race
American Indian
Asian
Black
Hispanic
Other
Unknown
White
County
Bronx
Kings
New York
Queens
Richmond
12/31/2007 12/31/2008
7,271
6,836
2
79
3,825
2,031
376
268
690
2
81
3,626
2,000
274
216
637
28%
25%
19%
25%
3%
27%
26%
18%
24%
4%
xv
New York State Division of Probation and Correctional Alternatives. (2008). Probationers Supervised December 31, 2007.
http://dpca.state.ny.us/pdfs/iprsreports/2007reports/adultprobationcasessupervisedasof123107.pdf
(2009). Probationers Supervised December 31, 2008.
http://dpca.state.ny.us/pdfs/iprsreports/2008reports/adultprobationcasessupervisedasof12312008.pdf
89
90
White Hispanic
White Non-Hispanic
0
1
3
3
47
124
382
638
962
2160
5
13
24
19
61
1
1
2
14
41
64
115
238
0
0
1
1
2
19
54
88
134
299
3
18
46
85
104
256
14
37
110
209
342
713
1
0
0
1
0
17
55
156
294
446
969
1
6
10
18
42
78
1
1
1
8
23
60
151
244
1
0
0
1
2
14
33
78
193
322
Total Female Male Total Female Male Total Female Male Total
1
1
1
1
2
2
8
1
1
2
1
1
24
2
2
4
4
2
2
71
1
9
10
4
12
16
4
4
209
1
17
18
7
48
55
1
13
14
498
7
48
55
31
117
148
1
35
36
916
12
108 120
53
273
326
12
74
86
1468
25
141 166
83
440
523
10
114
124
3196
47
325 372
179
897 1076
24
243
267
Black Hispanic
11
11
9
32
1
8
10
6
24
Female
Total
1
19
36
57
113
0
0
0
0
1
1
30
47
66
145
1
17
65
212
324
451
1071
1
1
1
1
5
5
4
5
52
69
148 213
443 655
821 1145
1350 1801
2824 3895
Male Total Female Male Total
0
1
1
0
1
3
4
0
3
8
11
0
2
30
32
3
3
12
92
104
7
7
52
251 303
15
23
125
635 760
52
62
223
1287 1510
81
87
317
2051 2368
158
182
736
4357 5093
Unknown / Other
New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services. (2005). Three-Year Comprehensive State Plan for the Juvenile Justice & Delinquency Prevention
Formula Grant Program Years 2006 – 2008. Albany, NY: Author. http://criminaljustice.state.ny.us/ofpa/pdfdocs/jjstateplan07.pdf
xvi
Defendant
Age
Black
/ Race
Felony
/ Gender Female Male
7
1
8
1
9
2
6
10
2
22
11
7
64
12
43
166
13
78
420
14
136
780
15
193
1275
Total
462
2734
Misdemeanor
7
8
1
9
3
10
1
2
11
12
35
12
36
88
13
132
250
14
186
452
15
277
685
Total
644
1516
New York City Juvenile Arrests by Category, Age, Gender and Race, 2003xvi
2
2
2
12
18
1
15
84
218
317
435
1,070
0
0
0
2
1
11
27
41
61
143
2
1
9
25
39
49
125
1
3
7
45
135
365
359
815
6
15
46
146
459
925
1,404
3,001
Male
5
8
13
38
92
249
639
1,434
2,171
4,649
Female Male Total
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
8
9
4
17
21
3
37
40
6
58
64
14
121
135
Female
Total
Unknown / Other
xvii
Defendant Age
Black
Black Hispanic
White Hispanic
White Non-Hispanic
/ Race
Felony / Gender Female Male Total Female Male Total Female Male Total Female Male Total
7
2
2
0
2
2
1
1
8
5
5
1
1
2
2
0
9
1
10
11
1
1
2
2
0
10
2
29
31
2
2
1
4
5
2
2
11
4
60
64
6
6
2
18
20
1
8
9
12
35
162
197
2
20
22
5
46
51
2
13
15
13
86
408
494
8
63
71
33
122
155
4
29
33
14
170
845 1,015
14
125 139
53
338
391
25
89
114
15
224
1,291 1,515
26
194 220
78
484
562
25
144
169
Total
522
2,812 3,334
50
412 462
172
1,018 1,190
57
286
343
Misdemeanor
7
8
9
6
6
10
1
9
10
1
1
3
3
11
10
28
38
3
3
4
10
14
1
4
5
12
51
88
139
6
8
14
23
27
50
2
14
16
13
136
225
361
14
41
55
53
119
172
13
49
62
14
195
485
680
21
73
94
82
217
299
17
111
128
15
228
703
931
28
116 144
129
372
501
38
164
202
Total
621
1,544 2,165
69
242 311
291
748 1,039
71
342
413
New York City Juvenile Arrests by Category, Age, Gender and Race, 2004xvii
6
16
61
230
677
1,242
1,839
4,071
Total
5
8
14
41
99
294
774
1,699
2,530
5,464
91
92
3
1
7
7
50
154
422
862
1,234
2,740
Total
0
3
11
18
62
184
577
1,100
1,699
3,654
White Hispanic
2
6
25
34
36
104
1
1
3
21
56
117
167
365
1
1
5
27
81
151
203
469
6
19
59
107
142
333
1
3
13
59
153
268
489
987
1
1
3
19
78
212
375
631
1,320
1
Female Male Total Female Male Total
0
0
0
0
1
1
2
2
1
1
5
5
1
8
9
3
18
21
2
19
21
7
44
51
8
66
74
27
150
177
17
122
139
57
316
373
22
213
235
92
536
628
50
430
480
186
1,071 1,257
Black Hispanic
1
1
14
29
36
81
3
3
24
59
132
235
456
3
4
25
73
161
271
537
Female Male Total
0
0
1
1
2
2
3
3
1
11
12
8
27
35
10
72
82
23
146
169
42
262
304
White Non-Hispanic
0
0
0
0
0
3
6
17
15
41
0
0
0
0
2
3
15
53
84
157
0
0
0
0
2
6
21
70
99
198
Female Male Total
0
0
0
0
1
1
2
5
7
7
21
28
12
42
54
17
85
102
38
154
192
Unknown / Other
2
2
23
77
231
448
567
1,350
7
46
141
247
376
819
2
Female
xviii
Defendant Age
Black
/ Race
Felony / Gender Female Male
7
8
3
9
2
9
10
18
11
3
59
12
34
150
13
91
486
14
151
949
15
222
1,477
Total
503
3,151
Misdemeanor
7
3
8
1
9
1
6
10
2
5
11
14
36
12
48
106
13
127
295
14
261
601
15
338
896
Total
791
1,949
New York City Juvenile Arrests by Category, Age, Gender and Race, 2005xviii
4
4
1
1
7
9
12
14
57
80
213
290
578
809
1,171 1,619
1,871 2,438
3,914 5,264
3
3
13
15
26
26
89
96
229
275
750
891
1,501 1,748
2,457 2,833
5,068 5,887
Male Total
Total
New York City Admissions to Juvenile Detention by Race and Gender, 2003-2005xix
2003
White
Male
%
Female
%
Total
%
136
4.5%
28
3.6%
164
4.3%
57.5%
485
61.9%
2,210
58.4%
Black 1,725
Hispanic
890
29.7%
192
24.5%
1,082
28.6%
Other
67
2.2%
10
1.3%
77
2%
Unknown
181
6%
69
8.8%
250
6.6%
2,999
100%
784
100%
3,783
100%
Male
%
Female
%
Total
%
118
3.9%
41
5%
159
4.1%
57%
457
55.5%
2,181
56.7%
Total
2004
White
Black 1,724
Hispanic
869
28.7%
224
27.2%
1,093
28.4%
Other
81
2.7%
11
1.3%
92
2.4%
Unknown
263
8.7%
94
11.4%
357
9.3%
3,023
100%
824
100%
3,847
100%
Male
%
Female
%
Total
%
154
4.4%
35
4.2%
189
4.4%
56.9%
476
57.2%
2,463
57%
Total
2005
White
Black 1,987
Hispanic
987
28.3%
204
24.5%
1,191
27.5%
Other
56
1.6%
20
2.4%
76
1.8%
Unknown
308
8.8%
97
11.7%
405
9.4%
3,492
100%
832
100%
4,324
100%
Total
xix
New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services. (2005). Three-Year Comprehensive State Plan for the Juvenile Justice &
Delinquency Prevention Formula Grant Program Years 2006 – 2008. Albany, NY: Author.
http://criminaljustice.state.ny.us/ofpa/pdfdocs/jjstateplan07.pdf
93
New York State Gang Assault Arrests and Dispositions by Region, 2003-2005xx
Percentage Change
New York State
Total Arrests
Total Dispositions
Convictions
Conviction Rate (% of dispositions)
Sentences To:
Prison
Jail
Jail + Probation
Probation
Other
New York City
Total Arrests
Total Dispositions
Convictions
Sentences To:
Prison
Jail
Jail + Probation
Probation
Other
Non-New York City
Total Arrests
Total Dispositions
Convictions
Sentences To:
Prison
Jail
Jail + Probation
Probation
Other
xx
2003-04 2004-05
4.4%
19.9%
6%
8.2%
3.2%
0%
-1.8%
-7.6%
2003-05
25.2%
14.7%
3.2%
-9.3%
-16.3%
2.9%
18.2%
-8.3%
11.1%
22.6%
-31.7%
1.4%
-20.5%
-19.5%
19.2%
31.6%
-42.9%
4.3%
-6.1%
-26.2%
32.4%
61.3%
2003-04 2004-05
5.9%
13.4%
1%
9%
-15.9%
10.6%
-16.7%
1.4%
2003-05
20.2%
10.1%
-7%
-15.5%
-52.6%
0%
-18.2%
-25.6%
-1.2%
0%
-27.8%
26.9%
-22.2%
0%
16.9%
41.7%
-65.8%
26.9%
-36.4%
-25.6%
15.5%
41.7%
2003-04 2004-05
1.7%
31.3%
5%
15.1%
18.8%
-1.6%
13.1%
-14.6%
2003-05
33.6%
20.9%
16.9%
-3.4%
2003
795
750
374
49.5%
2004
830
795
386
48.6%
2005
995
860
386
44.9%
49
69
33
84
108
31
41
71
39
77
120
38
28
72
31
62
143
50
2003
506
497
214
43.1%
2004
536
502
180
35.9%
2005
608
547
199
36.4%
38
26
11
43
84
12
18
26
9
32
83
12
13
33
7
32
97
17
2003
289
258
160
62%
2004
294
271
190
70.1%
2005
386
312
187
59.9%
11
43
22
41
24
21
40
26
42
33
15
39
24
30
46
90.9%
-7%
18.2%
2.4%
37.5%
-28.6%
-2.5%
-7.7%
-28.6%
39.4%
36.4%
-9.3%
9.1%
-26.8%
91.7%
19
28
33
47.4%
17.9%
73.7%
New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services. (2005). Three-Year Comprehensive State Plan for the Juvenile Justice &
Delinquency Prevention Formula Grant Program Years 2006 – 2008. Albany, NY: Author.
94
B. National Juvenile Justice Statistics
Percent Change in Arrests 1999-2008xxi
Most Serious Offense
Juvenile Adult
Violent Crime Index
-9%
-4%
Murder
-9%
-5%
Forcible Rape -27%
-18%
Robbery
25%
19%
Aggravated Assault -21%
-8%
Property Crime Index
-20%
12%
Burglary -14%
19%
Larceny-theft -17%
13%
Motor Vehicle Theft -50%
-13%
Simple Assault
0%
4%
Weapons Law Violations
-2%
8%
Drug Abuse Violations
-7%
15%
Juvenile Most Serious Offense Female
Violent Crime Index
-10%
Robbery
38%
Aggravated Assault -17%
Simple Assault
12%
1%
Burglary
-3%
Larceny-theft
4%
Motor Vehicle Theft -52%
Vandalism
3%
Weapons
-1%
-2%
Liquor Law Violations
-6%
DUI
7%
Disorderly Conduct
18%
xxi
xxii
Male
-8%
24%
-22%
-6%
-28%
-16%
-29%
-50%
-9%
-3%
-8%
-29%
-34%
-5%
Black Portion of Juvenile Arrestsxxii
Murder
Forcible Rape
Robbery
Aggravated Assault
Simple Assault
Burglary
Larceny-theft
Motor Vehicle Theft
Weapons
Vandalism
Liquor Laws
2006
59%
34%
67%
42%
39%
32%
30%
43%
37%
30%
19%
5%
2007
57%
37%
68%
41%
40%
33%
31%
42%
38%
30%
19%
5%
2008
58%
37%
67%
42%
39%
35%
31%
45%
38%
27%
19%
6%
Crime in the United States 2008, tables 32 and 33
Crime in the United States 2006, 2007 & 2008, table 43
95
2008 Estimated Number of Juvenile Arrests by Most Serious Offensexxiii
Total
Violent Crime Index
Murder and
nonnegligent
manslaughter
Forcible Rape
Robbery
Aggravated Assault
Burglary
Larceny-theft
Motor Vehicle Theft
Arson
Nonindex
Other Assaults
Forgery and
Counterfeiting
Fraud
Embezzlement
Stolen Property (buying,
receiving, possessing)
Vandalism
Weapons (carrying,
possessing, etc.)
Prostitution and
Commercialized Vice
Sex Offense
(except forcible rape and
prostitution)
Gambling
Offenses Against the
Family and Children
Driving Under the
Influence
Liquor Laws
Drunkenness
Disorderly Conduct
Vagrancy
All Other Offenses
(except traffic)
Suspicion
(not included in totals)
Curfew and Loitering
Runaways
xxiii
2008
Estimated
Number of
Juvenile
Arrests
2,111,200
96,000
Percent of Total
Juvenile Arrests
Female
Percent of Total
Juvenile Arrests
Under 15
Percent
Change
1999-2008
Percent
Change
2004-2008
Percent
Change
2007-2008
30%
17%
27%
27%
-16%
-9%
-4%
5%
-3%
-2%
1,280
7%
8%
-9%
19%
-5%
3,340
35,350
56,000
439,600
84,100
324,100
24,900
6,600
2%
9%
24%
36%
12%
44%
16%
12%
34%
20%
31%
29%
29%
29%
20%
56%
-27%
25%
-21%
-20%
-14%
-17%
-50%
-24%
-21%
46%
-9%
-2%
4%
0%
-33%
-16%
-2%
2%
-4%
5%
3%
8%
-17%
-8%
231,700
34%
37%
0%
-5%
-3%
2,600
33%
12%
-64%
-48%
-15%
7,600
1,300
35%
43%
16%
3%
-18%
-31%
0%
19%
3%
-19%
20,900
19%
23%
-23%
-10%
-6%
107,300
13%
40%
-8%
3%
-4%
40,000
10%
31%
-2%
-4%
-7%
1,500
76%
11%
20%
-14%
-1%
14,500
10%
47%
-18%
-22%
-5%
180,100
1,700
15%
2%
15%
14%
-7%
-51%
-5%
-12%
-7%
-19%
5,900
36%
28%
-38%
-14%
-2%
16,000
24%
2%
-27%
-19%
-14%
131,800
15,400
187,600
4,000
38%
24%
33%
29%
9%
11%
36%
29%
-22%
-24%
2%
-29%
1%
-3%
-7%
-3%
-7%
-8%
-5%
6%
363,000
26%
23%
-19%
-3%
-3%
300
22%
24%
-86%
-74%
-29%
133,100
109,200
31%
56%
26%
32%
-27%
-33%
5%
-12%
-7%
-5%
Crime in the United States 2008 (Washington, D.C.: Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2008), tables 29, 32, 34, 36, 38, and 40.
Arrest estimates were developed by the National Center for Juvenile Justice.
96
2008 Juvenile Arrest Rate by Statexxiv
State
United States
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
xxiv
Reporting
Coverage
82%
81%
97%
99%
84%
99%
88%
92%
100%
100%
62%
89%
94%
23%
73%
92%
68%
15%
56%
100%
99%
90%
87%
97%
45%
94%
96%
92%
98%
78%
96%
73%
47%
72%
91%
60%
100%
96%
97%
100%
98%
78%
80%
96%
87%
82%
97%
73%
61%
98%
99%
Crime in the United States 2008, tables 5 and 69.
Violent Crime
Index
306
176
272
228
180
414
199
337
630
471
278
264
136
1066
290
252
163
402
603
66
608
333
225
208
145
274
112
139
337
84
332
278
260
305
117
160
202
192
426
186
192
79
318
181
122
91
142
248
72
279
132
Property Crime
Index
1,398
924
1,655
1,558
1,460
1,153
1,853
1,163
1,778
2,062
1,343
1,405
1,764
1,850
1,734
1,792
1,109
2,182
1,564
1,622
2,073
578
1,067
1,884
1,483
1,928
1,831
2,013
1,724
771
925
1,537
1,141
1,615
2,107
1,088
1,335
1,914
1,106
1,097
784
1,640
1,348
1,182
2,125
569
865
1,760
577
2,588
1,977
Drug Abuse
Weapons
560
242
340
762
365
523
763
456
774
731
465
375
468
1,843
460
396
472
729
580
428
1,272
358
337
511
454
566
305
657
618
580
642
580
536
458
477
360
479
614
486
397
388
590
574
566
563
274
351
507
204
780
910
121
47
42
76
62
196
123
90
169
104
198
22
101
334
57
52
59
84
116
35
226
45
85
145
124
121
21
112
159
12
158
133
60
197
70
79
83
87
119
129
94
83
115
61
120
29
72
126
25
238
83
97
98
ENDNOTES
11
New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services. (2005).
Three-year comprehensive state plan for the Juvenile Justice &
Delinquency Prevention Formula Grant Program years 2006 –
1 Loeber, R., Farrington, D.P., & Petechuk, D. (2003). Child
2008. Albany, NY: Author.
delinquency: Early intervention and prevention. Child
Delinquency Bulletin Series. Washington, DC: U.S. Department 12
National Center for Juvenile Justice. (2006). New York. State
of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice
Juvenile Justice Profiles. Pittsburgh, PA: Author.
and Delinquency Prevention.
http://70.89.227.250:8080/stateprofiles/profiles/NY06.asp?stat
http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojj dp/186162.pdf
e=%2Fstateprofiles%2Fprofiles%2FNY06.asp&topic=
2 New York State Senate Committee on the Judiciary. (2009).
13 City of New York Mayor’s Office of Operations. (2009).
Kids and families still can’t wait: The urgent case for new
Mayor’s Management Report. New York: Author.
Family Court judgeships. Albany, NY: New York State Senate.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/ops/downloads/pdf/2009_mmr/0909_
http://www.nysenate.gov/files/pdfs/Family%20Court%20Report
mmr.pdf
.pdf
14 Carrión, G. Commissioner. (2008). Empty beds, wasted
3 U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division. (2009).
dollars: Transforming juvenile justice. New York: New York
Investigation of the Lansing Residential Center, Louis Gossett,
State Office of Children and Family Services.
Jr. Residential Center, Tryon Residential Center, and Tryon
http://www.ccf.state.ny.us/Initiatives/CJRelate/CJResources/Fe
Girls Center. Washington, DC: Author.
b28Summit/EmptyBeds.pdf
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/split/documents/NY_juvenile_facilitie
15 The Correctional Association of New York. (2007). Juvenile
s_findlet_08-14-2009 .pdf
justice update. New York: Author.
4 Governor Paterson’s Task Force on Transforming Juvenile
http://www.correctionalassociation.org/publications/download/
Justice. (2009). Charting a new course: A blueprint for
jjp/factsheets/detention_fact_2007.pdf
transforming juvenile justice in New York State. New York:
Vera Institute of Justice.
http://www.vera.org/paterson-task-force-juvenile-justic-report
5 Carrión, G. Commissioner. (2008). Empty beds, wasted dollars:
mmr.pdf
Transforming juvenile justice. New York: New York State
17 New York State Offices of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse
Office of Children and Family Services.
Services, and Children and Family Services. (2008). Plan of
http://www.ccf.state.ny.us/Initiatives/CJRelate/CJResources/Feb
Cooperation—Working together: Improving the lives of New
28Summit/EmptyBeds.pdf
York’s children and families. Albany, NY: Author.
http://www.oasas.state.ny.us/pio/collaborate/documents/OASA
S-OCFSPOC2008.pdf
18 New York City Department of Juvenile Justice. (2008). Top 15
Residential Community Districts for Youth Admitted to
Detention in Fiscal 2008.
7 City of New York Office of the Mayor. (2010, January 20).
http://nyc.gov/html/djj/pdf/adm_by_community_district_of_res
Mayor Bloomberg delivers 2010 State of the City Address
idence.pdf
Detailing His Plans for the Recovery Ahead and the Strategy
19 New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene.
Behind It. Press Release.
(2004). Health disparities in New York City. New York:
http://www.nyc.gov/portal/site/nycgov/menuitem.c0935b9a57b
Author.
b4ef3daf2f1c701c789a0/index.jsp?pageID=mayor_press_releas
http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/downloads/pdf/epi/disparitiese&catID=1194&doc_name=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nyc.gov%2
2004.pdf
Fhtml%2Fom%2Fhtml%2F2010a%2Fpr029-10.html&cc=unuse
20
d1978&rc=1194&ndi=1
Wong, M., & Spitzer, K. (2008). Fiscal brief: The rising cost of
8 Lippman, J. Chief Judge. (2010, March 16). Address to the
the city’s juvenile justice system. New York: New York City
Independent Budget Office.
Citizens Crime Commission of New York City.
http://www.ibo.nyc.ny.us/iboreports/JJpath.pdf
http://www.nycrimecommission.org/pdfs/lippman100316.pdf
21
9 Stanfield, R. (1999). Pathways to juvenile detention reform: The
NY CLS Family Court Act § 301.2(8)
22 NY CLS Family Court Act § 301.2(1)
JDAI Story – Building a better juvenile detention system.
Baltimore, MD: The Annie E. Casey Foundation.
23 NY CLS Family Court Act § 353.3(5); 353.5(4)
http://www.aecf.org/upload/publicationfiles/jdai%20story.pdf
10 Child Welfare Watch. (2009). A need for correction: Reforming
25 NY Criminal Procedure Law § 1.20(42)
New York’s juvenile justice system. New York: City Futures,
26 NY Penal Law § 70.05
Inc.
http://www.newschool.edu/Milano/nycaffairs/documents/CWW 27 NY Criminal Procedure Law § 725
18Final_006.pdf
28 NY Criminal Procedure Law § 720.10
29 NY Criminal Procedure Law § 720.10 (2&3)
99
30
Cox, S., Conrad, J., & Allen, J. (2003). Juvenile justice: A
guide to theory and practice (5th ed., p. 3). New York:
McGraw-Hill.
31 Siegel, L.J., Welsh, B.C., & Senna, J.J. (2003). Juvenile
delinquency: Theory, practice, and law (8th ed.) Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
32 Roffe, S. (n.d.). The history of New York City Department of
Juvenile Justice.
http://correctionhistory.org/html/chronicl/djj/djj20yrs3.htm
33 Sobie, M. (1981). The Juvenile Offender Act: Effectiveness and
impact on the New York juvenile justice system. New York
Law School Law Review, 26, 677-722.
Juvenile Justice.
35 Snyder, H.N., & Sickmund, M. (2006). Juvenile offenders and
victims: 2006 national report (Publication No. NCJ 212906).
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention.
http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/ojstatbb/nr2006/downloads/NR2006.pdf
36 Siegel, L.J., Welsh, B.C., & Senna, J.J. (2003). Juvenile
delinquency: Theory, practice, and law (8th ed.) Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
Juvenile Justice.
39 Task Force on the Future of Probation in New York State.
(2008). Report to the Chief Judge of the State of New York:
Phase II.
http://www.courts.state.ny.us/whatsnew/pdf/ProbationReport11
.08web.pdf
Juvenile Justice.
41 People v. Fitzgerald 244 NY 307 (1927)
42 People v. Lewis 260 NY 171 (1932)
43 People v. Lewis 260 NY 171 (1932)
Juvenile Justice.
46 Sobie, M. (2003). The Family Court: A short history.
http://courts.state.ny.us/history/family_ct/History_fam_Ct.htm
47 Kent v. United States 383 U.S. 541, 86 S.Ct. 1045 (1966).
48 In re Gault 387 U.S. 1, 87 S.Ct. 1428 (1967).
49 In re Winship 397 U.S. 358, 90 S.Ct. 1068 (1970).
50 McKeiver v Pennsylvania 403 U.S. 528, 91 S.Ct. 1976 (1971).
100
51
Raley, G.A. (1995). The JJDP Act: A second look. Juvenile
Justice 2(2) (Publication No. NCJ 152979). Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office
of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/jjjf95.pdf
52 1976 NY Laws Chapter 878
53 1976 NY Laws Chapter 878 (amended 1978)
54 1978 NY Laws Chapter 478
Juvenile Justice.
56 New York City Department of Juvenile Justice. (n.d.). History
of Juvenile Detention in New York City: 1979 – Present.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/djj/html/1979.html
57 New York City Department of Juvenile Justice. (n.d.). DJJ’s
Programmatic Initiatives.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/djj/html/programmatic.html
58 Schall v. Martin 467 U.S. 253, 104 S. Ct. 2403 (1984).
59 New York City Department of Juvenile Justice. (n.d.). DJJ’s
Capacity Issues.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/djj/html/capacity.html
60 Krisberg, B. (2006). Rediscovering the juvenile justice ideal in
the United States. In J. Muncie & B. Goldson. (Eds.),
Comparative youth justice (pp. 6–18). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications Inc.
61 Snyder, H.N., & Sickmund, M. (2000). Challenging the myths.
1999 National Report Series: Juvenile Justice Bulletin
(Publication No. NCJ 178993). Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/178993.pdf
64 U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention. (2010). Final Plan Fiscal Year 2010
[OJP (OJJDP) Docket No. 1521]. Federal Register 75 (97), pp.
28287-28294. Washington, DC: Office of the Federal Register,
National Archives and Records Administration.
http://ojjdp.ncjrs.gov/funding/FY10OJJDPFinalPlan.pdf
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/split/documents/NY_juvenile_facilitie
s_findlet_08-14-2009.pdf
66 The Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2007). Detention reform: An
effective public safety strategy. Detention Reform Brief.
Baltimore, MD: Author.
http://www.aecf.org/upload/PublicationFiles/jdai_facts2.pdf
67
New York State Executive Office of the Governor. (2008,
September 10). Governor Paterson announces task force on
transforming New York’s juvenile justice system. Press Release.
http://ny.gov/governor/press/press_0910081.html
“Taking the Next Step.” Press Release.
http://home2.nyc.gov/portal/site/nycgov/menuitem.c0935b9a57
bb4ef3daf2f1c701c789a0/index.jsp?pageID=mayor_press_relea
se&catID=1194&doc_name=http%3A%2F%2Fhome2.nyc.gov
%2Fhtml%2Fom%2Fhtml%2F2007a%2Fpr01407.html&cc=unused1978&rc=1194&ndi=1
69 City of New York Office of the Mayor. (2008, May 12). Mayor
Bloomberg announces new weekend court processing so youth
who present low risk to the community can be returned home
swiftly. Press Release.
http://www.nyc.gov:80/portal/site/nycgov/menuitem.c0935b9a5
7bb4ef3daf2f1c701c789a0/index.jsp?pageID=mayor_press_rele
ase&catID=1194&doc_name=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nyc.gov
%3A80%2Fhtml%2Fom%2Fhtml%2F2008a%2Fpr17908.html&cc=unused1978&rc=1194&ndi=1
70 Wong, M., & Spitzer, K. (2008). Fiscal brief: The rising cost of
Detailing His Plans for the Recovery Ahead and the Strategy
Behind It. Press Release.
http://www.nyc.gov/portal/site/nycgov/menuitem.c0935b9a57b
b4ef3daf2f1c701c789a0/index.jsp?pageID=mayor_press_releas
e&catID=1194&doc_name=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nyc.gov%
2Fhtml%2Fom%2Fhtml%2F2010a%2Fpr02910.html&cc=unused1978&rc=1194&ndi=1
73 NY CLS Family Court Act § 305.2
74 Faruqee, M. (2002). Rethinking juvenile detention in New York
City: A report by the Juvenile Justice Project of the
Correctional Association of New York. New York: Correctional
Association of New York.
http://www.correctionalassociation.org/publications/download/j
jp/rethinking_detention.pdf
75 Child Welfare Watch. (2009). A need for correction: Reforming
New York’s juvenile justice system. New York: City Futures,
Inc.
http://www.newschool.edu/Milano/nycaffairs/documents/CWW
18Final_006.pdf
76 Gewirtz, M. (2009). Annual report on the adult court case
processing of juvenile offenders in New York City, January
through December 2008. New York: New York City Criminal
Justice Agency, Inc.
http://www.cjareports.org/reports/jo2008color.pdf
77
City of New York Mayor’s Office of Operations. (2009).
mmr.pdf
78 NY CLS Family Court Act § 308.1; 320.6
82 Wong, M., & Spitzer, K. (2008). Fiscal brief: The rising cost of
mmr.pdf
mmr.pdf
mmr.pdf
86 Vera Institute of Justice. (2009). Juvenile detention risk
assessment instruments: New York State models.
http://criminaljustice.state.ny.us/ofpa/jj/docs/nys_juvdet_risk_a
ssmt_insts.pdf
Phase II.
.08web.pdf
88 Deane, J. (2007, October 23). The role of probation in Family
Court. Testimony of Jacqueline Deane, Director of
Delinquency Practice, The Legal Aid Society to the Task Force
on the Future of Probation in New York State.
http://www.legal-aid.org/media/29596/102307_probation_task_
force_final.pdf
Phase II.
.08web.pdf
92 National Center for Juvenile Justice. (2006). New York. State
http://70.89.227.250:8080/stateprofiles/profiles/NY06.asp?state
=%2Fstateprofiles%2Fprofiles%2FNY06.asp&topic=
101
93
111
94
112
NY CLS Family Court Act
100 Joint Committee of the Association of the Bar of the City of
New York and the New York County Lawyers' Association.
(n.d.). Criminal justice system handbook.
http://www.courts.state.ny.us/litigants/crimjusticesyshandbk.sh
tml
101 Faruqee, M. (2002). Rethinking juvenile detention in New York
City: A report by the Juvenile Justice Project of the
Correctional Association of New York. New York:
Correctional Association of New York.
http://www.correctionalassociation.org/publications/download/
jjp/rethinking_detention.pdf
http://www.nyc.gov/html/ops/downloads/pdf/2009_mmr/0909
_mmr.pdf
103 New York City Criminal Court Office of the Administrative
Judge. (2007). Criminal Court of the City of New York 2006
annual report. New York: Author.
http://courts.state.ny.us/courts/nyc/criminal/Annual%20Report
%20Final%20052207.pdf
109 NY Criminal Procedure Law § 725
110 Wong, M., & Spitzer, K. (2008). Fiscal brief: The rising cost
of the city’s juvenile justice system. New York: New York City
102
Wong, M., & Spitzer, K. (2008). Fiscal brief: The rising cost
114 New York State Office of Children and Family Services.
(2008). County Directory of Juvenile Detention Facilities in
New York State. New York: Author.
http://www.ocfs.state.ny.us/main/publications/detention_direct
ory.pdf
117 New York City Department of Juvenile Justice. (n.d.).
Resident Guide [Brochure].
http://www.nyc.gov/html/djj/pdf/resident_guide.pdf
122 New York City Department of Juvenile Justice. (n.d.).
Resident Guide [Brochure].
http://www.nyc.gov/html/djj/pdf/seed_resident_guide.pdf
_mmr.pdf
_mmr.pdf
_mmr.pdf
_mmr.pdf
_mmr.pdf
128 National Youth Screening Assistance Project. (n.d.) MAYSI-2.
http://www.maysiware.com/MAYSI2.htm
129
National Center for Juvenile Justice. (2006). New York. State
http://70.89.227.250:8080/stateprofiles/profiles/NY06.asp?stat
e=%2Fstateprofiles%2Fprofiles%2FNY06.asp&topic=
130 9 NYCRR § 180
131 Aledort, N. (2009, January 29). Oversight: Core services for
remanded youth. Testimony of Nina Aledort, Assistant
Commissioner for Program Services, New York City
Department of Juvenile Justice to the New York City Council
Committee on Juvenile Justice.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/djj/pdf/juvenile_justice_commitee_h
earing_oversight.pdf
133 New York City Department of Juvenile Justice. (n.d.)
Education in Detention.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/djj/html/education.html
136 Lubow, B. (2009, May 7). JDAI: Juvenile Detention
Alternatives Initiative (Annie E. Casey Foundation).
Presentation by Bart Lubow, Director of Juvenile Justice
Strategy Group, The Annie E. Casey Foundation to the New
York State Division of Criminal Justice Services Symposium
on Juvenile Justice Reform.
http://criminaljustice.state.ny.us/ofpa/jj/docs/lubowmay7.ppt
137 Holman, B., & Ziedenberg, J. (2006). The dangers of
detention: The impact of incarcerating youth in detention and
other secure facilities. Washington, DC: Justice Policy
Institute. http://www.justicepolicy.org/images/upload/0611_REP_DangersOfDetention_JJ.pdf
144 NY CLS Family Court Act § 345.1; 351.1
151 Brennan, P. (2009). The NYC story: NYC Department of
Probation Project Zero. Presentation by Patricia Brennan,
New York City Department of Probation to Juvenile Detention
Alternatives Initiative.
http://www.jdaihelpdesk.org/Docs/Documents/Reducing%20C
ommitments%20and%20Out-of-Home%20Placements%20(Br
ennan).pdf
152 New York State Unified Court System. (n.d.). New York City
Family Court: Family Court terms.
http://www.nycourts.gov/courts/nyc/family/glossary1007.sh
tml
153 NY CLS Family Court Act § 353.3(5); 353.5(4)(i)
157 Deane, J. (2007, October 23). The role of probation in Family
Court. Testimony of Jacqueline Deane, Director of
Delinquency Practice, The Legal Aid Society to the Task
Force on the Future of Probation in New York State.
http://www.legal-aid.org/media/29596/102307_probation_task
_force_final.pdf
159 NY CLS Family Court Act § 352.2(2)@
_mmr.pdf
161 New York State Unified Court System Office of Court
Research. (2009). Count of D (Juvenile Delinquency) and E
(Designated Felonies) Filings (2008) and Dispositions (2008)
and Count of Final Dispositions for D and E Cases Not
Acquitted or Dismissed (2008).
103
163
New York State Unified Court System Office of Court
169 NY Criminal Procedure Law § 210.15; 220.10
171 NY Criminal Procedure Law § 380.30; 390.20
173 Joint Committee of the Association of the Bar of the City of
http://www.courts.state.ny.us/litigants/crimjusticesyshandbk.s
html
104
182
Gewirtz, M. (2009). Annual report on the adult court case
186 New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services. (2009).
New York City Sentences for Youth Offenders (16-17 Year
Olds) 2008 data from the Computerized Criminal History
system as of 9/09.
187 NY Penal Law § 70.05
New York City Sentences for Juvenile Offenders Convicted in
Adult Court 2008 data from the Computerized Criminal
History system as of 9/09.
New York City Sentences for Juvenile Offenders Convicted in
Adult Court 2008 data from the Computerized Criminal
History system as of 9/09.
(2009). Youth in care: 2008 annual report—Youth placed in
OCFS Custody Tables 1-12, Division of Juvenile Justice and
Opportunities for Youth. Rensselaer, NY: New York Office of
Strategic Planning and Policy Development.
http://www.ocfs.state.ny.us/main/reports/asr08.pdf
194
New York State Office of Children and Family Services.
(2008). Youth in care: 2007 annual report Division of Juvenile
Justice and Opportunities for Youth. Rensselaer, NY: New
York Office of Strategic Planning and Policy Development.
http://www.ocfs.state.ny.us/main/reports/Youth%20In%20Car
e%20Report.pdf
198 New York State Department of Correctional Services. (n.d.).
Inmate Lookup.
http://www.docs.state.ny.us/univinq/fpmsovrv.htm
(2008). Youth in care: 2007 annual report Division of Juvenile
Justice and Opportunities for Youth. Rensselaer, NY: New
York Office of Strategic Planning and Policy Development.
http://www.ocfs.state.ny.us/main/reports/Youth%20In%20Car
e%20Report.pdf
200 9 NYCRR § 180
(2009). Division of Juvenile Justice and Opportunities for
Youth. http://www.ocfs.state.ny.us/main/rehab/
203 New York State Department of Correctional Services. (n.d.).
Facility Listing. http://www.docs.state.ny.us/faclist.html
204 New York State Department of Correctional Services. (2009).
Statistical overview year 2008 court commitments. Albany:
Author.
http://www.docs.state.ny.us/Research/Reports/2009/Court_Co
mmitments_2008.pdf
Author.
mmitments_2008.pdf
Author.
mmitments_2008.pdf
Statistical overview year 2008 discharges. Albany: Author.
http://www.docs.state.ny.us/Research/Reports/2009/Statistical
_Overview_2008_Discharges.pdf
208
Child Welfare Watch. (2009). A need for correction:
Reforming New York’s juvenile justice system. New York: City
Futures, Inc.
http://www.newschool.edu/Milano/nycaffairs/documents/CW
W18Final_006.pdf
Phase II.
1.08web.pdf
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/split/documents/NY_juvenile_faciliti
es_findlet_08-14-2009.pdf
214 The National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice.
(2007). Blueprint for change: A comprehensive model for the
identification and treatment of youth with mental health needs
in contact with the juvenile justice system. Delmar, NY: Policy
Research Associates, Inc.
http://www.ncmhjj.com/Blueprint/pdfs/Blueprint.pdf
(2009). Division of Juvenile Justice and Opportunities for
Youth.
http://www.ocfs.state.ny.us/main/rehab/
217 New York City Department of Probation. (n.d.). Juvenile
Services.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/prob/html/programs/juvenile_service
s.shtml
218 New York City Department of Probation. (n.d.). Juvenile
Services.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/prob/html/programs/juvenile_service
s.shtml
_mmr.pdf
105
220
Joint Committee of the Association of the Bar of the City of
http://www.courts.state.ny.us/litigants/crimjusticesyshandbk.sh
tml
221 New York City Department of Probation. (n.d.). Programs and
Services.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/prob/html/programs/programs_servi
ces.shtml
222 9 NYCRR § 352.4
227 NY CLS Family Court Act § 360.3(2)(b)
232 NY CLS Correction Law Article 24
233 New York State Division of Parole. (2007). New York State
Parole handbook: Questions and answers concerning parole
release and supervision. New York: Author.
https://parole.state.ny.us/Handbook.pdf
234 9 NYCRR § 8001.1
235 NY CLS Correction Law § 803.1(d)
238 9 NYCRR § 8002.2(a)
239 NY CLS Correction Law § 806
240 NY CLS Correction Law § 806.2
242 NY CLS Penal Law § 70.40(1)(b)
244 NY CLS Executive Law § 510-a
245 9 NYCRR § 8001.3(a)
246 9 NYCRR § 8001.3(b)(1)
247 9 NYCRR § 8001.3(b)(1)
248 9 NYCRR § 8001.3(b)(3)
249 9 NYCRR § 8001.3(b)(3)
250 9 NYCRR § 8001.3(c)
251 9 NYCRR § 8001.3(b)(3)
252 9 NYCRR § 8002.4(b)
253 9 NYCRR § 8002.1(a)
254 9 NYCRR § 8002.3 (e)
255 9 NYCRR § 8002.5
106
256
9 NYCRR § 8002.5(b)(5)
9 NYCRR § 8002.5(d)(1)
258 9 NYCRR § 8002.3(d)
259 9 NYCRR § 8003.1(a)
260 9 NYCRR § 8003.1(a)
263 9 NYCRR § 8003.2
264 9 NYCRR § 8004.2
265 9 NYCRR § 8005.3
266 9 NYCRR § 8005.7
267 9 NYCRR § 8005.6(a)
268 9 NYCRR § 8005.4
269 9 NYCRR § 8005.7
270 9 NYCRR § 8005.17(a)
271 9 NYCRR § 8005.15
272 9 NYCRR § 8005.19(e)
273 9 NYCRR § 8005.16
274 9 NYCRR § 8005.19(d)
277 9 NYCRR § 8005.20
278 9 NYCRR § 8002.6
279 9 NYCRR § 8005.20(c)(1)
280 9 NYCRR § 8005.20(c)(4)
281 9 NYCRR § 8002.6(a)
282 9 NYCRR § 8002.6(c)(1)
283 9 NYCRR § 8002.6(d)(2)
284 9 NYCRR § 8006.1
285 NY CLS Executive Law § 510-a
286 9 NYCRR § 169.3(a)
287 9 NYCRR § 169.3(b)
288 9 NYCRR § 169.3(c)
289 9 NYCRR § 169.4(a)
290 9 NYCRR § 169.4(d)
291 9 NYCRR § 169.5(a)
292 9 NYCRR § 169.5(b)
293 9 NYCRR § 169.6(e)
257
294
311
295
312
9 NYCRR § 169.8(a)
9 NYCRR § 169.8(a)
296 9 NYCRR § 169.8(d)
297 9 NYCRR § 169.10
298 Center for Court Innovation. (n.d.). Youthful Offender
Domestic Violence Court.
http://courtinnovation.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.ViewPa
ge&PageID=608&currentTopTier2=true
299 Center for Court Innovation. (n.d.). Red Hook Youth Court.
300 Center for Court Innovation. (n.d.). Staten Island Youth Justice
Center.
http://www.courtinnovation.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.vi
ewPage&pageID=673&nodeID=1
301 Center for Court Innovation. (n.d.). Harlem Youth Justice
Center.
_mmr.pdf
303 Dawson, H.L. (2008, April 28). Oversight: Implementation of
DJJ’s Release to Parent Initiative. Testimony of Herman L.
Dawson, Deputy Commissioner for Legal Affairs and General
Counsel, New York City Department of Juvenile Justice to the
New York City Council Committee on Juvenile Justice.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/djj/pdf/rtp_4_28_08_testimony.pdf
304 Dawson, H.L. (2008, April 28). Oversight: Implementation of
DJJ’s Release to Parent Initiative. Testimony of Herman L.
Dawson, Deputy Commissioner for Legal Affairs and General
Counsel, New York City Department of Juvenile Justice to the
New York City Council Committee on Juvenile Justice.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/djj/pdf/rtp_4_28_08_testimony.pdf
(2008). County Directory of Juvenile Detention Facilities in
New York State. New York: Author.
http://www.ocfs.state.ny.us/main/publications/detention_direct
ory.pdf
307 Salsich, A. (2008, April 28). Juvenile Risk Assessment
Instrument. Testimony of Annie Salsich, Associate Director,
Center on Youth Justice, Vera Institute of Justice to the New
York City Council Committee on Juvenile Justice.
308 Brennan, P. (2009). The NYC story: NYC Department of
Probation Project Zero. Presentation by Patricia Brennan,
New York City Department of Probation to Juvenile Detention
Alternatives Initiative.
http://www.jdaihelpdesk.org/Docs/Documents/Reducing%20C
ommitments%20and%20Out-ofHome%20Placements%20(Brennan).pdf
107
DESIGNER
Ashley Cannon
PHOTOGRAPHY
Photographs do not depict individuals or locations discussed in this report
(with the exception of images of the New York County Family Court on pages 11 and 41).
Julia Freeman-Woolpert: front cover
Ashley Cannon: Acknowledgments page, pages 12, 38, 41
Jason Staten: page 4
Cyan Li: page 8
Miguel Saavedra: pages 10, 80
Andrew Beirne: page 11
Charlie Pineda: page 21
Manohar Dasari: page 37
Marco Giampaolo: pages 40, 44, 48
Tomasz Kobosz: page 58
Nicolas Hennette: page 78
© Citizens Crime Commission of New York City 2010. All rights reserved.
Additional copies are available from the Citizens Crime Commission of New York City, 212-608-4700.
An electronic version is available on the Crime Commission’s website: www.nycrimecommission.org
For more information about the Crime Commission’s juvenile crime initiatives, contact Ashley Cannon at
cannon@caasny.com.
The Citizens Crime Commission is an independent nonprofit organization working to make criminal justice and
public safety policies and practices more effective through innovation, research, and education.
p: 212.608.4700 • f: 212.350.2701 • e: info@nycrimecommission.org
www.nycrimecommission.org

Guide To Juvenile Justice In Nyc

Transcription

Similar documents

Colloquies Skit

VDOE State Operated Programs: Northern Virginia Juvenile

Strategies to Reduce Unnecessary Detention for

our product portfolio in PDF format

New Fiction Titles for K-5

DCF - Attendance Services - Miami

An Evaluation of Ohio`s Behavioral Health/Juvenile Justice Initiative

ARC factsheet Special Research Initiative for Type 1 Juvenile

New Authentic Spanish Titles for Teens

March 14, 2006 - Fontana North