HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 12-16-1997 - 10e 1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Action Agenda
Item No. !�-
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: December 16, 1997
SUBJECT: Report on Teen Court
DEPARTMENT: County Manager PUBLIC HEARING: YES: NO: X
BUDGET AMENDMENT: YES: NO: X
ATTACHMENT(S): Report on the Teen Court INFORMATION CONTACT: Sharron Siler
Programs in NC (March 15, 1995)
TELEPHONE NUMBERS: ext. 2302
Hillsborough -732-8181
Chapel Hill -968-4501
Durham -688-7331
Mebane -227-2031
PURPOSE: To provide information regarding the Teen Court Programs in North Carolina and the
feasibility of establishing a program in Orange County.
BACKGROUND: Due to the sponsorship of Representatives Verla Insko and Joe Hackney, Orange
County has been appropriated$15,000 by the legislature to develop a Teen Court.
In 1993,North Carolina appropriated money to develop a pilot program in Fayetteville. Since then,
over 10 additional communities have developed Teen Court Programs.
Teen Court focuses on youthful first-time offenders charged with a misdemeanor offense or infraction
receiving judgment from their peers. During Teen Court hearings, teenage volunteers serve as court
clerks, bailiffs,jurors, defense attorneys, and prosecuting attorneys. Defendants must plead guilty in .
order to participate in the program. Therefore, the primary debate centers on sentencing.
Volunteer adult attorneys often assist the youth attorneys in case preparation. An adult, often a
retired judge or attorney,presides at the hearing. Defendants may receive a wide range of sentences
including community service,restitution to victims, curfews, counseling, and other options also used
by the District Court for community sentencing. Defendants generally must complete these terms
within 30 days and may be remanded to Juvenile Court or District Court if they do not comply. In
addition, they must later serve in some capacity on the Teen Court.
r
Z r
On December 8, 1997 several interested parties, including representatives from county government,
non-profit agencies, and the judicial system, attended an informational meeting to discuss the
feasibility of developing a Teen Court in Orange County. A core group of individuals are planning to
convene in order to develop a proposal for implementation.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board receive the report as
information.
3
REPORT ON THE TEEN COURT PROGRAMS
IN NORTH CAROLINA
Administrative Office of the Courts
Submitted to the North Carolina General Assembly
March 15, 1995
4
STATE
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS
JUSTICE BUILDING
P 0 W,-2448
RALEIGH N C 27602
DALLAS A.CAMERON. JR
JAMES C DRENNAN ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
DIRE 1,ilk
DANIEL J BECKER
DEi-i t oaq:c toll
March 15, 1995
The Honorable Frank W. Ballance, Jr.
Chair, Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Justice and Public Safety
The Honorable Larry T. Justus
The Honorable Gregg Thompson
Co-Chairs, House Appropriations Subcommittee on Justice and Public Safety
North Carolina General Assembly
State Legislative Building
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2808
Dear Senators and Representatives:
We are pleased to transmit to the General Assembly our report on the Teen Court
programs in North Carolina, pursuant to Chapter 561, Section 80 of the North Carolina Session
Laws, 1993, and pursuant to Chapter 24, Section 40 of the North Carolina Session Laws, 1993
(Extra.Session 1994). The report reviews the history of the establishment of the three Teen
Court programs operating during Fiscal Year 1994-95, identifies goals of the programs,
describes their operation, provides data on the juveniles processed and the cases handled, and
examines certain measures relevant to an evaluation of effectiveness. As two of the three
programs were established during Fiscal Year 1994-95, analysis relating to measures of these
programs' effectiveness is necessarily limited at this time. The report does address issues of
effectiveness relevant to the Teen Court program in Cumberland County, since this program has
been in operation since October 1993. We hope that you find the report helpful in your
discussions concerning the future of Teen Court programs in North Carolina.
Respectfully submitted,
James C. Drennan
PC: The Honorable Marc Basnight
The Honorable Harold J. Brubaker
James Mills, Fiscal Research Division
5
INTRODUCTION
Legislation creating the Teen Court program in the 12th Judicial District (Cumberland
County) was introduced in the General Assembly in May 1993, and was enacted and became
effective in July 1993 (1993 Session Laws, Chapter 561, Section 80, copy attached). The
legislation appropriated $30,000 to the Judicial Branch for Fiscal Year 1993-94 to be used by
the Cumberland County Dispute Resolution Center for development and implementation of a
Teen Court program, as well as certain other programs and activities. During the 1993
General Assembly, Extra Session 1994, legislation was passed that appropriated $75,000 for
the 1994-95 fiscal year for development and implementation of Teen Court programs in
selected judicial districts (1993 Session Laws, Extra Session 1994, Chapter 24, Section 40,
copy attached, hereinafter "the 1994 legislation"). Pursuant to the 1994 legislation, the
Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) submitted an interim report to the General .
Assembly on the effectiveness of the Cumberland County Teen Court program in May 1994.
Pursuant to both the 1993 and the 1994 legislation, the current report addresses the three Teen
Court programs operating during the 1994-95 fiscal year. Teen Court programs are currently
operating in Cumberland County (District 12), Buncombe County (District 28), and Durham
County (District 14).
This report reviews the history of the establishment of the three Teen Court programs,
identifies goals of the programs, describes their operation, provides data on the juveniles
processed and the cases handled, and examines certain outcome measures relevant to an
evaluation of effectiveness. Since the Cumberland County program has been in operation
much longer than the other two programs (since October 1993), and therefore has had
sufficient time to resolve many of the issues that follow initial.implementation, substantially
more information and data are available relevant to the Cumberland County Teen Court
program. Measures addressed in this report for all three programs include the total number of
hearings held to date, the number of juveniles who did not appear for their hearings, the types
of sentences that were ordered, and the completion and failure rates for sentences. In addition,
possible future directions and program enhancements that are being considered by each of the
three programs are discussed. Finally, this report provides information relevant to other
potential measures of effectiveness for the Cumberland County program, including the
program's potential impact on the recidivism rate for these juveniles.
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE TEEN COURT PROGRAMS
The implementing legislation specifies that Teen Court is to be a community resource
in which juvenile offenders are "sentenced by a jury of the juvenile's peers." This section
discusses the philosophy, goals, and objectives of each of the three Teen Court programs.
Cumberland County. A primary goal of Teen Court in Cumberland County is to offer
the community a positive, alternative approach to disciplining youths who commit non-violent
misdemeanors or who present disciplinary problems at school. This alternative can be used in
Report on the Teen Court Programs
b
lieu of the traditional methods of diversion, adjudication, and suspension,.expulsion, or
alternative school placement. The intent of the teen court process is to offer juveniles
consequences that allow them to take responsibility for their actions in a beneficial, educational
manner. The teen court process involves positive peer pressure by having a teen's peers serve
as prosecutor, defense counsel, and ultimate judge of the offender's actions. The underlying }?`
philosophy is that an offender's peers can more effectively develop appropriate and effective
ways of redirecting the offender's behavior and attitudes. Thus, it is believed that
participating in the teen court process helps build the teen's sense of pride and responsibility,
and may help to prevent community and school misbehavior and future illegal behavior.
Buncombe County. The purposes of Teen Court in Buncombe County are to require p
young people to take responsibility for their actions, to provide restitution to the victims and
the community, and to allow the community an active role in addressing juvenile crime. It is
designed to provide a community-based alternative to the formal court process for youthful
offenders. The program embraces a youth development approach in that it attempts to address
the conditions that underlie and contribute to unlawful behavior by providing youth with
avenues for positive development and personal success. It also embraces an accountability
approach that encourages a sense of responsibility on the part of the juveniles and the
community. Thus, offenders are not only held responsible for unlawful acts by the application
of logical and consistent consequences, but are also held accountable to the community for that
behavior by the involvement of the community in the teen court process. Accountability
extends not only to traditional adult review of their conduct, but also to scrutiny and evaluation
of their behavior by their peers. The program also educates youth about the criminal justice
system and illustrates to them the need for citizens to participate in addressing the problems
and needs of the community. Use of the teen court alternative also permits redirection of the
available juvenile court time and resources to focus on more dangerous juvenile offenders. In
addition, it is hoped that these approaches will reduce the likelihood of juveniles re-offending
and minimize negative labeling of referred youth.
Durham County. The Teen Court program in Durham County was developed to offer '?
Durham's students in middle school and high school a "hands-on" experiential opportunity to
participate in an alternative system of justice. The underlying premise of the program is that
peer pressure to "do the right thing" offers a more meaningful and effective approach than
traditional court procedures to alter juveniles' negative and unlawful behavior. This program
is viewed as a preventive effort to stem the rising number of juveniles who are involved in
delinquent behavior. It is believed that the teen court process requires juvenile offenders to
accept responsibility for their actions, and, that through future jury duty service, these
juveniles apply their experience to promote responsibility and respect for others. Teen Court
also allows participants -- both offenders and non-offender volunteers -- to become more
familiar with the judicial system.
Report on the Teen Court Pr 7 c
HISTORY OF THE TEEN COURT PROGRAMS
Cumberland County. Early in 1993, District Court Judge Andrew Dempster of the
12th District became interested in the idea of implementing a teen court program in
Cumberland County, based on information about the program in Odessa, Texas. He explored
whether there was community interest in such a concept and, finding that there was,
approached the Cumberland County Dispute Resolution Center about the possibility of the
Center establishing and administering such a program. In April 1993, Pamela Sherman of the
Center spent one week visiting the teen court program in Odessa. She was favorably
impressed and recommended that the Center establish such a program if authorized by the
General Assembly; the Board of Directors adopted this recommendation in May 1993.
After the Teen Court legislation was enacted in July 1993, the Center's Board of
Directors approved the Teen Court Administrator position, and Ms. Sherman was hired in that
capacity. During August and September 1993, she worked on formalizing policies and
procedures, developing training manuals,-recruiting and training volunteers, and discussing the
program with junior and senior high schools in Cumberland County. The first session of Teen
Court was held on October 26, 1993.
Pursuant to the 1993 legislation (1993 Session Laws, Chapter 561, Section 80), state
funds of$30,000 were made available to the Cumberland County Dispute Resolution Center
for implementation of Teen Court during Fiscal Year 1993-94. This level of state funding was
continued for Fiscal Year 1994-95 by a grant award pursuant to the 1994 legislation. The
Center receives an equal level of funding from the United Way of Cumberland County and the
City of Fayetteville, as well as significant contributions of staff time for training from the
Cumberland County Mental Health Center and use of courthouse space from Cumberland
County.
Buncombe County. District Court Judge Rebecca Knight of the 28th District provided
the primary impetus for the establishment of a teen court program in Buncombe County. She
prepared guidelines for the operation of a teen court program and shared her ideas with, and
received encouragement from, other judges in the district. The teen court program in
Buncombe County was established in July 1994, with the first session being held on July 7,
1994. Until the fall of 1994, the program operated on a part-time basis and was conducted
with volunteers. Buncombe Alternatives, Inc., applied for and received a grant from the
AOC, pursuant to the 1994 legislation. The grant, for $25,000, was awarded in the fall of
1994. Joseph Elliott was hired as the full-time Teen Court Coordinator in January 1995.
AOC-administered grant funds available to Buncombe Alternatives, Inc., for operation
of Teen Court are matched by over$19,000 from Community Based Alternatives, and by a
contribution of office space by Buncombe County.
Durham County. Assistant District Attorney Marcia Morey of the 14th District became
interested in Teen Court as a potential alternative to the traditional juvenile system, and as a
Report on the Teen Court Prom_. ,„,c
0
U
possible approach to help stem the tide of juvenile delinquency in Durham County. In the
summer of 1994, with the strong support and endorsement of District Attorney Jim Hardin,
Jr., she approached the Durham Public Schools' Safe Schools Office about cooperatively
developing a grant proposal to establish a teen court program. The Safe Schools Office
heartily endorsed the idea, and together they prepared the grant application. The AOC
approved the application, and a grant of$20,000 was awarded to the Durham Public Schools
in the fall of 1994, pursuant to the 1994 legislation. Soon thereafter, a Teen Court Advisory
Board was established, comprising school officials,juvenile services officials, a member of the
Durham Police Department, a member of the Sheriffs Department, attorneys, a city
councilman, a representative from the Durham Dispute Settlement Center, and the Durham
Community Service Coordinator.
The Board chose Attorney Timothy W. Morse to serve as the Teen Court Coordinator.
Mr. Morse began in October 1994, serving under contract with Durham Public Schools. He
immediately began to formulate policies and procedures, develop training manuals, discuss the
program with school principals, enlist support from attorneys to train students, and recruit and
train volunteer student attorneys. The first Teen Court session was held in December 1994.
Y.
OPERATION OF THE TEEN COURT PROGRAMS
.w
Overview of the Process
Cumberland County. The Teen Court program in Cumberland County accepts referrals
from juvenile intake, juvenile court, the police, the sheriff, the schools, and district court.
Juveniles referred to Teen Court are generally first-time offenders who are at least 10 years old
and who allegedly misbehave at school or commit a nonviolent offense that would be a
misdemeanor or an infraction if committed by an adult. If the juvenile admits guilt, the
referral source may refer the case to Teen Court, thus offering the offender its constructive
sentencing opportunity. If the juvenile chooses this opportunity, and Teen Court staff
determine that the offense is appropriate for Teen Court, the offender and parent/guardian
meet with Teen Court staff for an interview, during which they receive more information, sign ;
a contract and complete paperwork (including an indication of interest in specific types of
community service), and receive a court date. Participation is voluntary, and the juvenile may
decide to withdraw at any stage, in which case the referral source is so notified. ,
The offender and parent/guardian appear for court as scheduled, and discuss the case
with the defense attorney. When the case is called, the juvenile is sworn in, tells what
happened, and answers questions asked by the defense attorney and prosecutor. The attorneys
present closing arguments and sentence recommendations to the jury, which generally
comprises four to eight members. Since the offender admits guilt, the jury's duty during
deliberations is to arrive at a unanimous verdict on a "Constructive Sentence," which must fall
Report on the Teen Court Pro----v
9
within the recommended guidelines for the specific offense. The offender must complete the
sentence within 90 days, and is given specific deadlines for completion of the separate
components of jury service, community service, and educational seminars. After completing
the sentence, the offender provides proper documentation to the Teen Court Administrator,
who closes the case and notifies the referral source of completion. If the sentence is not
completed, the Administrator reports this fact to the referral source, who takes whatever action
it deems appropriate.
Buncombe County. At present, Buncombe County Teen Court accepts referrals only .
from the Juvenile Division of the District Attorney's office. Any cases in which juvenile
services intake counselors have approved the filing of a juvenile petition for undisciplined or
delinquent behavior may be reviewed by the Chief Court Counselor (or designee not involved
in intake) and the Assistant District Attorney who handles juvenile matters to determine
whether a referral to Teen Court would be appropriate. Cases that are generally considered
inappropriate for Teen Court are those involving sexual assaults, violent assaults or acts that
result in serious injury, sale or delivery of controlled substances, and gang violence or hate
crimes. Juveniles who are generally considered inappropriate for Teen Court are those with
serious mental or emotional disabilities, those charged with adult defendants for committing
serious offenses against property or persons, and those who previously failed to complete a
teen court sentence. However, referral in any of the above situations may occur if approved
by a district court judge. After a referral to Teen Court is made and the case is deemed
appropriate by the Teen Court Coordinator, the juvenile and parent/guardian are offered the
opportunity to participate in Teen Court as an alternative to the traditional juvenile court
procedure. If they are interested in the teen court option, they are provided with a written
summary and explanation of the process and are shown a videotape about the program.
To participate in Teen Court,juvenile offenders must prepare a written statement
admitting the underlying offense that would otherwise be the basis of the juvenile petition.
The Coordinator then schedules the juvenile for a court appearance, assigns the offender a
student attorney, and informs both the offender and the attorney of this assignment. The
offender and attorney may meet to discuss the case before the hearing; otherwise, they discuss
the case on the night of the hearing, prior to the case being called. When the offender and
parent/guardian appear for court as scheduled, the juvenile offender reviews the jury pool list
and may, with a written explanation, exclude anyone listed from his or her specific jury.
Similarly, the jury pool members review the list of offenders scheduled for hearing and may,
with a written explanation, excuse themselves from the jury for certain offenders. When the
judge calls a case for hearing, the juvenile offender may question the prospective jurors about
their qualifications and about any bias that may prevent them from serving in a fair and
impartial manner. The juvenile offender may then excuse two jurors from the panel (thus far,
however, no one has exercised this right).
The juvenile is sworn in, tells what happened, and answers questions asked by the
defense attorney and prosecutor. The prosecution and defense may call other witnesses, such
as the victim or character witnesses, although as yet this option has not been used very often.
Report on the Teen Court Pry 10'
Written evidence relevant to the case may also be introduced. At the conclusion of evidence,
the attorneys present closing arguments and sentence recommendations to the jury, which
generally comprises four to eight members. Since the offender admits guilt, the jury's duty '
during.deliberations is to arrive at a unanimous verdict on a "Constructive Sentence." In the
event the jury is unable to reach a unanimous decision on one or more portions of the
sentence, the judge decides the punishment for that item, within the minimum and maximum
range in which the jury was unable to compromise.
Juveniles who accept the decision of Teen Court (see description of appeal process,
below) must complete all requirements within four months. One fourth of the total community
service and restitution amounts must be completed each month. Cases are reviewed at least
monthly for compliance, but the burden is on the juveniles to document their compliance (e.g.,
juveniles are required to present proof of community service work or school attendance).
Upon sentence completion, the Coordinator reports the case closed to the District Attorney.
Those cases in which juveniles fail to comply with the terms of the sentence are returned to the
district attorney's office for prosecution, and the underlying offense is adjudicated de novo.
Juveniles who do not wish to accept the decision of the teen court jury may file an
appeal with the juvenile clerk within five working days. The juvenile and parent/guardian
appear before the juvenile clerk the day following filing of the appeal and are served with a
copy of the juvenile petition and summons. The preliminary juvenile court appearance is set .
for the next available juvenile court date. Neither the juvenile's written admission for Teen
Court nor the jury's sentence is admissible, and no reference is made to Teen Court in any
subsequent proceeding.
e�.
Durham County. The Teen Court program in Durham County accepts referrals from
juvenile intake, law enforcement,juvenile court, the district attorney, and school
administrators. Juveniles referred to Teen Court are generally first-time offenders in middle
school or high school. If the Coordinator feels that the case might be appropriate for Teen
Court, he contacts and arranges to meet with the juvenile. During this meeting, the juvenile is
interviewed, and the Coordinator determines whether the case is appropriate for Teen Court.
If so, the juvenile may choose to voluntarily admit responsibility for the offense and submit it
to Teen Court. If the juvenile and parent/guardian choose this option, they are provided with
R
more information about the responsibilities and requirements of the program. The Coordinator
then sets the case for a hearing, and assigns attorneys for the case.
Prior to the hearing date, offenders meet with the peer attorneys at a Saturday
workshop session, at which adult volunteer attorneys are present to assist and advise. The case
is prepared at this time, and a brief "dry run" is held for each case, during which the attorneys
have the opportunity to improve their skills and the offender has an opportunity to become `
more familiar with the conduct of and expectations for the Teen Court proceeding.
The juvenile and parent/guardian appear for court as scheduled. When the case is
called, the juvenile is sworn in, tells what happened, and answers questions asked by the
Report on the Teen Court Pry
11
defense attorney and prosecutor. The attorneys present evidence relevant to whether the
elements of the offense are met, and the jury considers such evidence when deciding on the
appropriate sentence. The attorneys present closing arguments and sentence recommendations
to the jury, which comprises six members. Since the offender admits guilt, the jury's duty
during deliberations is to arrive at a unanimous verdict on a "Constructive Sentence," using
the recommended guidelines for the specific offense, and considering what the evidence shows
the offense to be. Offenders are generally expected to complete the sentence within two
months. However, no fixed time limit has been established, and the time frame for
completion varies with the sentence requirements. Performance of jury duties is monitored by
the Teen Court Coordinator, and progress on community service work and tutorial sessions is
monitored by Durham's Community Service Coordinator. If the sentence is not completed,
the Teen Court Coordinator reports this fact to the referral source.
Participants
Cumberland County. All non-offender participants in Teen Court hearings are
volunteers who undergo training or instruction prior to serving. Currently, seven attorneys
and three district court judges volunteer their time to serve as judges for Teen Court hearings.
In addition, 12 adult volunteers serve as adult bailiffs and monitors. All of the remaining
participants are juveniles: the prosecutor, the defense attorney, the jurors, the court clerk, and
the student bailiff. The extent to which student volunteers have become involved with the
program is evidenced by the numbers of juveniles who have been trained for the non-offender
roles. To date, approximately 300 students have been trained as jurors. Of these,
approximately 90 have received additional training as attorneys (students are trained to assume
both prosecutor and defense attorney roles, and are encouraged to serve in both capacities),
and 40 have been instructed as court clerks and bailiffs.
Buncombe County. To date, approximately three district court judges and four
attorneys have volunteered to preside over Teen Court proceedings. Students who volunteer to
serve as jurors receive over four hours of training. In addition, those who serve as prosecuting
or defense attorneys receive over four more hours of training for those roles. One student has
been trained as a bailiff, and works with an adult bailiff in the courtroom during teen court
sessions. The Teen Court program has generated substantial interest on the part of students,
with approximately 200 students so far having been trained as jurors. By the end of January
1995, over ten students had received additional training as attorneys, and many more had been
scheduled for attorney training.
Durham County. Thus far, three district court judges have volunteered to serve as
Teen Court judges. All other participants, including a bailiff and clerk, are peers, and efforts
are made to ensure that Teen Court participants are representative of the diversity in the
Durham Public School system. Approximately 30 members of the Durham County Bar have
volunteered their time and expertise to assist with training for Teen Court. Prior to
participation, volunteer jurors receive training, and those who volunteer to serve as attorneys,
Report on the Teen Court Pre--v
12
clerks, and bailiffs receive subsequent training of ten hours or more. The training sessions are
conducted by local educators, volunteer attorneys, and court employees. The training includes
issues such as courtroom procedure, basic legal concepts, mediation, and public speaking.
Thus far, 84 students have been trained as jurors. Of these, about 30 have also been trained as
attorneys, and 14 have been trained to serve in the bailiff and clerk roles.
Teen Court Sessions
Cumberland County. Teen Court sessions are held every other Monday night. -From
October 26, 1993, to January 30, 1995, there have been 27 sessions of Teen Court. The
hearings are generally held from 6:30-8:30 p.m., although Teen Court staff, student
volunteers, and offenders arrive early to prepare. From October 1993 through March 1994,
two courtrooms operated during each session, and since April 1994, three courtrooms have
operated during each session. Currently, four cases per courtroom -- twelve cases total -- are
heard during each session of Teen Court. On average, each case involves about 15 minutes of
in-court case presentation time, about 10 minutes of deliberation by the jury, and another 10
minutes or so of in-court time when the sentence is delivered and the judge discusses the result,
with the juvenile. Each courtroom has two juries hearing alternate cases. The calendar
process for each courtroom involves rotation of cases in the following manner until all cases
are heard: (1) presentation of the first case; (2) the jury on the first case retires to deliberate;
(3) while the first jury deliberates, the next case scheduled for that courtroom is heard; (4) the
jury for the second case retires to deliberate; and (5) while the second jury deliberates, the
constructive sentence verdict for the first case is presented.
Buncombe County. Teen Court sessions are generally held every other Thursday
evening from 5:30-7:00 p.m. From July 1994 through January 1995, five sessions have been
held, with the January 12, 1995, session being the first in which the new Teen Court
Coordinator was involved. Hearings generally take about 30 minutes, including deliberation
time of about 10 minutes. One courtroom has been used for these sessions, and generally,
four cases are heard per session. The calendar process is similar to that used in the
Cumberland County program, with two juries hearing alternate cases.
Durham County. Teen Court sessions are generally held the second Tuesday of each
month from 6:30-8:00 p.m. So far, there have been two sessions (December 6, 1994, and
January 10, 1995). Teen Court staff, student volunteers, and offenders arrive early to prepare.
Hearings generally take about 30 minutes, including approximately 10 minutes of jury
deliberation time. One courtroom has been used for these sessions, and the calendar process is
similar to that used in the Cumberland and Buncombe programs.
Report on the Teen Court Pry
13
Juries
Cumberland County. Juries are composed of a combination of volunteer jurors and
jurors who are performing jury service as part of their constructive sentences. Teen Court
staff assign the volunteer jurors randomly to juries as they arrive for the night's session.
However, efforts are made to pre-assign the "offender" jurors by distributing them across the
six juries, taking into account factors such as gender, race, and attitude toward jury service.
In addition, if companion offenders are present, they are placed on different juries. The
average jury size is six members, although juries have ranged from four to twelve members.
Buncombe County: Juries are composed of a combination of volunteer jurors and
jurors who are performing jury service as part of their constructive sentences. On a typical
night, 16 to 20 jurors arrive, and are divided into two juries at that time. Certain prospective
jurors may be excluded from serving in particular cases either at their request or at the request
of the offender, as discussed above. Thus,juries generally consist of 4 to 8 students. Efforts
are made to ensure that jury panels are composed of a variety of students, are racially
balanced, and reflect different socioeconomic backgrounds.
Durham County. Juries for the two Teen Court sessions held so far have been
composed of volunteer jurors. Subsequent juries will include persons performing jury service
as part of their constructive sentences. Teen Court staff assign the jurors to the scheduled
hearings at random as they arrive for the night's session, except that jurors do not generally
hear cases involving students from their own schools. The jury size has been limited to six
members.
Constructive Sentences
Cumberland County. Constructive sentences include the following components:
performance of jury service in future Teen Court sessions, performance of community service,
and participation in educational seminars. For offenders under the age of 14, the jury service
requirement takes the form of observing a session of Teen Court and participating in
discussions about the cases, facilitated by an adult monitor. At an early stage in the Teen
Court process, offenders indicate their interests in specific types of community service, and
assignments are matched to the juvenile's interests to the extent possible. The educational
seminars that are currently available are a two-hour seminar called "Making Good Decisions,"
a two-hour "Drug and Alcohol Awareness Education" seminar, an eleven-hour "Violence
Reduction Workshop" (assignment to this workshop is limited to youths referred from district
court who are 16 years old or older and are sentenced for violent offenses), and a twelve-hour
seminar entitled "Managing Anger." All four seminars were developed by and are offered
free of charge by educational consultants working with the Cumberland County Mental Health
Center.
Report on the Teen Court Pry ---
F 14
Offenses eligible for Teen Court processing have been classified into categories
depending on the seriousness and severity of the offense. For each category, the Center has
established a constructive sentencing range within which the jury's verdict should fall.
Category A includes offenses such as communicating threats against or assault on a school
official, serious driving offenses, possessing weapons other than firearms on school property,
misdemeanor larceny, misdemeanor drug or alcohol possession, and making a false 911 call.
The sentencing range for these offenses is: 3 to 5 jury terms, 20 to 30 hours of community
service, and 1 to 2 educational seminars. Category B includes offenses such as communicating
threats, simple assault with no serious injury, damage to property, shoplifting, and less serious
driving offenses. The sentencing range for these offenses is: 2 to 4 jury terms, 15 to 25 hours
of community service, and 1 to 2 educational seminars. Category C includes offenses such as
trespass, with the following sentencing range: 1 to 3 jury terms, 10 to 15 hours of community
service, and 1 educational seminar.
Buncombe County. Juries have a wide range of sentencing options from which to
choose, and may impose any of the following requirements: performing school service of 10
to 30 hours (work is performed at the student's school as assigned by the principal); paying
restitution to the victim; writing a letter of apology; surrendering one's driver's license for a
period of six weeks to six months; staying away,from certain locations; observing sessions of
adult superior court; touring Buncombe County Jail, Craggy Prison, or the Juvenile Detention
Center; obtaining Drug/Alcohol Assessment and following treatment; writing a term paper on
a related topic (e.g., effects of alcohol); improving one's grade point average; attending school
every day; or watching a movie or video program on a specific topic. In addition, sentenced
offenders must perform two jury duties in future Teen Court sessions. The jury may also
impose a unique sentence (involving sentence conditions that are not on the sentencing form).
The judge may veto any such unique sentence that is found to be unreasonable, excessive,
burdensome, or humiliating. Otherwise, the court is bound by the jury's decision.
Durham County. Constructive sentences may include community service, tutorial
sessions to assist with academic problems, and jury service in future Teen Court sessions
(offender jurors must participate in a training session prior to serving). Approximately fifty
students from Duke University and North Carolina Central University have been recruited to
serve as tutors.
Offenses eligible for Teen Court processing have been classified into categories
depending on the seriousness of the offense, and offenders are sentenced based on the
sentencing grid appropriate to the offense. The following sentencing guidelines are currently
in place. Sentencing Grid 1 is used for school rule violations, such as cheating and smoking
on campus, and for other offenses such as certain thefts while on school grounds and
trespassing on school grounds. Sentences for these offenses may include up to six days of
community service, up to four hours of tutorial sessions, and up to two jury duties.
Sentencing Grid 2 is used for offenses such as certain thefts while on school grounds,
disorderly conduct, certain intimidation or harassment, shoplifting, possession of alcoholic
beverages, and certain motor vehicle offenses. Sentences for these offenses may include up to
Report on the Teen Court Pro---- ,z
1 15
nine days of community service, up to six hours of tutorial sessions, and up to two jury duties.
Sentencing Grid 3 is used for offenses such as vandalism, certain intimidation or harassment,
simple assault involving no serious injury, and certain motor vehicle offenses. Sentences for
these offenses may include up to twelve days of community service, up to eight hours of
tutorial sessions, and up to two jury duties.
I
i
Teen Court Caseload
Cumberland County. From October 1993 through January 1995, the Teen Court
program had processed approximately 334 referrals. However, the juveniles in some 42 cases
were not accepted for participation, and Teen Court staff so notified the referral source. Many
of these rejections occurred because the juvenile did not respond to phone calls and/or an
introductory letter describing the Teen Court option. Other reasons for juveniles not being
accepted to Teen Court include: the case was inappropriate due to the nature of the offense
(e.g., involving violence); the juvenile declined to participate, either by indicating a lack of
interest, an attitude of non-cooperation, or by denying guilt; the juvenile was too young, was
not remaining in the area, or could not arrange transportation; and the juvenile previously
participated in Teen Court but failed to complete the constructive sentence.
Ages of the 286 offenders who have had Teen Court hearings (excluding the six
offenders who were called and failed) range from 7 to 19 years, with an average age of 14.1
years. Males comprised 64.6%, and 35.4% were female. Black offenders comprised 58.4%
of these cases, Whites represented 35.3%, Hispanic offenders represented 5.2%, Asians
represented 0.7%, and one offender (0.3%) was Native American. The offenders have been
in grades 2 through 12, with the majority being in the 8th or 9th grades.
The following table shows the referral sources for these 286 students:
Referral Source Number of Juveniles Percent of Total
Juvenile Intake 94 32.9%
Police 65 22.7%
Juvenile Court 53 18.5%
District Court 43 15.0%
School Administrator 16 5.6%
Sheriff 14 4.9%
School Resource Officer 1 0.3%
Total 286 100%
Report on the Teen Court Pro------
p 16
The following table shows the offenses for which these juveniles were referred:
Number of Percent
Type of Offense* Juveniles of Total
Shoplifting, larceny, breaking/entering and
larceny, concealment, stealing 94 32.9%
Minor assault, affray, fighting (usually at school) 50 17.5%
Weapon offense (e.g., weapon at school) 28 9.8%
Damage/injury to property, vandalism,
shooting at property 20 7.0%
Driving offense (e.g., no operator's license,
hit and run, unauthorized use of vehicle) 16 5.6%
Disorderly conduct, school misbehavior 15 5.2%
Minor controlled substance (e.g., possession
of marijuana) 13 4.5%
Alcohol at school,juvenile intoxication 10 3.5%
Communicating threats against school official
or SRO, other communicating threats 10 3.5%
Firecrackers at school, selling firecrackers 10 3.5%
Misdemeanor riot, public disturbance 7 2.4%
Trespassing 6 2.1%
False 911 call 2 0.7%
Resist, delay, and obstruct 2 0.7%
Runaway, skipping school 2 0.7%
Defraud innkeeper 1 0.3%
Total 286 100%
* This table lists the primary charges; 17 offenders were charged with multiple offenses.
Report on the Teen Court Pro---l7
P
Buncombe County. From July 1994 through January 1995, 20 cases were referred
from the District Attorney, and all were accepted into the Teen Court program. Of the 19
offenders who had hearings (excluding the one offender who was called and failed), ages have
ranged from 12 to 15 years, with an average age of between 13 and 14 years. Of these 19
offenders, 68% were male, and 32% were female. White offenders represented 47%, Black
offenders represented 42%, and other racial or ethnic backgrounds represented 11% of these
cases.
The following table shows the offenses for which these 19 students were referred:
Number of Percent
Tyne of Offense Juveniles of Total
Shoplifting, larceny, breaking/entering,
concealment, stealing 13 68.4%
Concealed weapon at school 2 10.5%
Inciting a disturbance 2 10.5%
Minor assault, affray, fighting (usually at school) 1 5.3%
Hazing
1 5.3%
Total 19 100%
Durham County. From mid-October 1994 through early February 1995, the Teen
Court program received 25 referrals. However, the juveniles in 15,cases were not accepted
for participation, and the Teen Court Coordinator so notified the referral source. Six of these
were not accepted because they failed to respond favorably to communications about the Teen
Court program.
Of the 10 offenders accepted in the Teen Court program to date, ages have ranged from
12 to 17 years, with an average age of 14.6 years. Of the offenders accepted, 90% were
male, and 10% were female; 40% were Black, and 60% were White.
The following table shows the referral sources for these 10 juveniles:
Referral Source Number of Juveniles Percent of Total
i Juvenile Intake 5 50.0%
Law Enforcement 3 30.09o'
District Attorney 2 20.0%
Total 10 100%
i
Report on the Teen Court Pro----
F lE
The following table shows the offenses for which these 10 juveniles were referred:
Number of Percent
Tyne of Offense Juveniles of Total
Larceny, shoplifting 2 20.0%
Breaking and entering 2 20.0%
Driving offenses (i.e., no operator's license) 2 20.0%
Disorderly conduct 2 20.0%
Possession of stolen property 1 10.0%
Damage to real property 1 10.0%
Total 10 100%
Outcomes
Cumberland County. The average time that elapses from the Teen Court staff's
interview with a referred juvenile and the date the juvenile's case is heard is about two weeks.
In the 27 sessions held from October 26, 1993, to January 30, 1995, about 286 cases were
heard. (An additional six juvenile offenders, or 2.1% of the total 292 juveniles scheduled for
hearing, failed to appear at their hearings.) The constructive sentences ordered to date in the
286 cases heard include a total of approximately 740 jury duties, 4,950 community service
hours, and 300 educational seminars.
Of the 286 cases heard to date, 64 juveniles are currently working on their sentences,
and the 90 days allowed for sentence completion has expired in 222 cases. Of these 222
offenders, 170 (77%) successfully completed their sentences. These 222 juveniles served a
total of 510 jury duties, participated in a total of 170 educational seminars, and performed
3,060 hours of community service work. Teen Court participants have performed community
service at several libraries, schools, churches, fire departments, day care centers, and
museums, as well as a host of other agencies and organizations, including Grove View Terrace
Boys and Girls Club, the Fayetteville-Cumberland County Youth Council, Hope Mills Parks
and Recreation, Cape Fear Botanical Garden, the Cape Fear Regional Theater, the,Bonnie
Doone BRIDGES Project, the American Cancer Society, the SPCA, the March of Dimes,
Adopt A Highway, SHARE/Food Bank, the Women's Center, the Community Action
Program, the Boy Scouts, Fayetteville Airport, and Habitat for Humanity. In several
instances, youths have continued volunteering their time to these agencies and organizations
even after completion of their constructive sentences. Similarly, several offenders have
returned to volunteer as jurors or attorneys after completing their sentences.
Report on the Teen Court Pr( 19
P,
Of the 222 offenders for whom the 90 days allowed for sentence completion has
expired, 52 did not ultimately complete their sentences, for th'e following reasons: 3 (1.4%)
were unable to complete due to moving from the area; 30 (13.5%) did not fulfill all of their
constructive sentence requirements within the time allotted, and did not appear to be
attempting to do so; 4 offenders (1.8%) displayed inappropriate behavior at the hearing and
were therefore dropped from the program, and 15 offenders (6.8%) committed new offenses,
thus making themselves ineligible for satisfactory completion. Reports indicating whether
offenders successfully completed their constructive sentences were sent to the referral sources
in all cases.
Buncombe County. The average time from when a case is accepted for Teen Court and
the date the case is heard is about two weeks. Of the 20 juveniles who had Teen Court
hearings scheduled, 1 (5.0%) failed to appear at the hearing. In only one of the 19'cases heard
(5.3%) was the Teen Court sentence appealed. Of the 18 juveniles for whom sentences were
imposed, 16 (88.9%) have successfully completed their sentences, and the remaining 2
(11.1%) are progressing toward sentence completion. So far, these juveniles have worked a
total of 335 community service hours. The community service agencies for which they work
include: Solutions Unlimited, Parks and Recreation, Salvation Army, courthouse departments,
and various community centers of Asheville. The Teen Court program reports that in their
seven months of operation, no sentenced juveniles have committed new offenses while under
their Teen Court contracts.
Durham County. The average time from when a case is accepted for Teen Court and
the date the case is heard is about two weeks. In the two sessions held so far, 7 cases were
heard. The constructive sentences ordered in these 7 cases include 171 hours of community
service, 20 jury duties, and 183 hours of tutorial session participation. At this time, all 7
students are making progress on their constructive sentences (e.g., these students have
completed 110 hours of community service so far).
FUTURE DIRECTIONS AND ENHANCEMENTS
Cumberland Couq_y. The Cumberland County Teen Court program, in operation since
October 1993, has had a chance to solve most of the start-up problems encountered after a new
program is implemented. The program is now in a position to explore ways in which it may
enhance its services and improve upon the means by which it meets the needs of juveniles, the
criminal justice system, and the community. Several enhancements have been made recently,
and others are being considered.
The options available for constructive sentences have recently been expanded through
the addition of a new educational seminar on anger management. In.addition, Teen Court staff
i
Report on the Teen Court Prr--_ - ,
1 20
would like to add juvenile mediation and Victim Offender Reconciliation Mediation to the
menu of sentencing options.
The referral source of "School Resource Officer" was added in February 1995 in
response to several requests from School Resource Officers to refer criminal offenses
committed on school grounds directly to Teen Court. Teen Court staff also hope that the
junior and senior high schools in Cumberland County will make greater use of the Teen Court
resource. In addition, efforts are being made to effect some changes in the way the teen court
opportunity is used by the schools. Usually, for offenses occurring on school property, the
school suspends the student and may file charges. In addition to these actions, they may refer
the student to Teen Court if they feel the teen court process is appropriate in the specific
circumstances. However, Teen Court staff believe that for those situations in which schools
have determined that the teen court process would be a beneficial option, it may be more
appropriate for schools to allow the full constructive sentence opportunity, by not suspending
the student and/or filing charges before referring the student to Teen Court. Teen Court staff
are currently working with School Resource Officers and making a concerted effort to
encourage the practice of keeping students referred to Teen Court in school and out of court.
The Center is also exploring ways in which the Teen Court program may be expanded.
One expansion that was recently made is an adaptation of the teen court concept to an age- .
relevant peer sentencing hearing for younger offenders. This process developed in response to
requests from law enforcement for a diversion alternative that would offer educational
consequences for offenders between the ages of 7 and 11. It also serves as an alternative
diversion resource for juvenile intake counselors. A grand jury, composed of 11- to 13-year-
olds, fills the role of attorney and questions the offender. The sentence rendered by the grand
jury includes "Good Deeds" to be performed by the offender for family members and close
friends, a letter of apology to the victim,and a four-hour Saturday workshop on making good
decisions. Other expansion issues that may be investigated include whether the program could
receive referrals for a wider range of driving offenses and whether the process may be
appropriate for certain other categories of offenses, such as truancy, running away, or less
serious nonviolent felonies.
Finally, the Cumberland County Teen Court program is interested in ensuring that the
process of establishing and implementing new teen court programs across North Carolina is a
collaborative effort that involves a sharing of ideas and experiences. They believe that
community involvement is essential to successful programs, that a great deal of background
work and preparation must precede establishment of new programs, and that development of
new programs should involve learning about, and from, the experiences of existing programs.
As the first teen court program in North Carolina, they are interested in developing a "model
program" that may be shared with other jurisdictions through informational materials and other
means of communication throughout the planning and development process. When a few teen
court programs are operating, they feel that it may be appropriate and beneficial to develop an
association of Teen Court Administrators within the state, and to hold a conference of the
programs periodically to promote mutual learning and sharing of experiences.
Report on the Teen Court Pre
P 21
Buncombe County. As discussed previously, the Buncombe County Teen Court
program operated prior to AOC grant funding on a volunteer, part-time basis. As a result,
court referrals were relatively infrequent. However, the program is now in a position to gain
some momentum, since their full-time Teen Court Coordinator, Joe Elliott, was hired in
January 1995. Mr. Elliott is working closely with the district attorney's office, with the
objective of increasing the rate and volume of referrals, and is recruiting students to serve in
the various court-related roles.
The program may also try to broaden the types of referrals to Teen Court, such as for
truancy and conflict resolution cases. They are also considering the addition of a substance
abuse component, in which all juveniles accepted to Teen Court would receive an assessment
aimed at identifying substance-abusing, at-risk youth. For those so identified, the Teen Court
program could work with the mediation center, schools, and other resources in the community
to attempt to ensure that these juveniles are given the opportunity to receive counseling.
Finally, the program envisions that the teen court concept could be broadened such that middle
and high schools could operate "in-house" Teen Court programs to address certain problems
originating at school.
Durham County. The Durham Teen Court program hopes to expand its caseload,
which they feel will occur as knowledge and visibility of the program increases. They hope to
eventually increase the frequency of sessions, perhaps to two per month. In addition, they are
considering the possible future expansion of the program to the elementary school level, so
that the chances for middle school and high school delinquency are reduced.
Durham Teen Court is also investigating other sources of funding, in addition to that
provided by the General Assembly. For example, the Coordinator is currently trying to enlist
support from the Durham Exchange Club. Those involved in Teen Court feel that with the
wealth of resources in the Research Triangle area, additional funding sources should be
available for the program. Provided that additional funding can be found, one goal is to
employ a full-time coordinator, which could make the program more effective.
Finally, the Durham Teen Court program reports that an endowment, the Gail Tyre
Donovan Teen Court Fund, has been established. Attorney Donovan enthusiastically
supported the establishment of a Teen Court program, and participated in training students to
serve as jurors and attorneys. The endowment has received several donations, and has over
$950 in it at present.
{
E
Report on the Teen Court Pre
p 22
FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF EFFECTIVENESS:
THE CUMBERLAND COUNTY TEEN COURT PROGRAM
Measurement of the success or effectiveness of programs such as the Teen Court
program is problematic in part because there are a number of ways to define "success" and
"effectiveness," all of which may be regarded as valid depending on the perspective that is
adopted. This section explores some of the issues that may be considered in an evaluation of
effectiveness, beyond the data on number of participants, sentences ordered, and sentences
completed that were outlined previously. In an attempt to provide further evaluative
information about the possible benefits of participation in the Teen Court process, we
conducted a more detailed analysis on juveniles who were referred to the Cumberland County
Teen Court program during its first eight months of operation, and interviewed some people
involved with Teen Court to get their perspectives.
Recidivism Study
This section describes data collection and analysis relevant to an evaluation of the
extent to which juvenile offenders who are referred to Teen Court are involved in future
unlawful behavior.
Data Collection. We decided to focus on two referral sources for these analyses:
juvenile intake (Intake) and the Fayetteville Police Department (Police). These two sources
were chosen because of the availability of data from which to form a comparison (i.e., non-
Teen Court) group, and because, as itemized earlier, these two referral sources accounted for
56% of all referrals to Teen Court since its inception. We therefore collected data on all
juveniles referred to Teen Court from Intake or Police during the 8-month period of October
1993 through May 1994. The cases for these juveniles formed the Teen Court sample.
Demographic information was collected, such as age, sex, race, and school attended. In
addition, we coded the referred offense and tracked each juvenile's participation in Teen Court
to identify whether a hearing was held, and whether the juvenile completed the sentence that
was imposed. Finally, pursuant to a.court order, we were permitted access to Cumberland
County's juvenile services intake files to determine whether these juveniles had any subsequent
juvenile court involvement. For those juveniles who turned 16'(i.e., became adults in the
criminal justice system) since the Teen Court referral, we also searched the North Carolina
Court Information System for adult criminal records.
Because it was not feasible to use an experimental approach involving cases actually
referred to Teen Court but excluded for purposes of research, we developed a Pre-Program
group of cases for comparison purposes. These cases involved juveniles who were diverted by
Police and by Intake during the period of October 1992 through May 1993. Thus, they
represent cases handled by Police and by Intake shortly before the implementation of the Teen
Court program, and during the same time of year as the Teen Court sample. From lists of
cases diverted during this time frame, we asked Police and Intake to review and screen cases to
Report on the Teen Court Pro- 23
A
identify those that they would have referred to Teen Court had it been an available resource at
that time. To do this, they considered the age of the juvenile, the nature of the offense,
whether the juvenile had a prior record, and whether information in the file suggested whether
the juvenile would have been amenable to a Teen Court referral (e.g., the juvenile admitted
guilt). For those cases identified as being appropriate for Teen Court referral, data on
demographic factors, the nature of the offense, and future intake involvement or adult
criminal record was collected as for the Teen Court sample.
Comparison of the Samples. The Teen Court sample comprised 95 juveniles, and the
Pre-Program sample comprised 97 juveniles. The ages of the Teen Court sample ranged from
11.9 years to 16.2 years, with an average age of 14.5 years; the ages of the Pre-program
sample ranged from 9.8 years to 16.1 years, with an average age of 14.1 years. (This
difference in average age was statistically significant.) The samples were similar in terms of
racial makeup: the Teen Court sample contained 54.7% Black, 42.1% White, 2.1% Hispanic,
and 1.1% Asian offenders; the Pre-program sample contained 51.5% Black, 41.2% White,
and 7.2% Hispanic offenders. The Teen Court sample comprised 64.2% males and 35.8%
females; the Pre-program sample comprised 68.0% males and 32.0% females.
Comparison of the samples based on the offense for which the juvenile was referred (or
would have been referred, for the Pre-program sample) indicated some differences. Offense
type was originally coded using 12.offense categories; for the regression analyses described
below, these offense codes were collapsed into 3 primary offense types -- Property Offenses,
Minor Assaults, and Other Offenses. The following table shows the frequency of the-various
offense types (for the juvenile's primary offense if there were multiple offenses) for each
sample. (Note the larger numbers of driving, weapon, controlled substance, and alcohol
offenses in the Teen Court sample. This difference illustrates one of the primary drawbacks of
j using a non-contemporaneous comparison sample: substantive changes in policy and
j procedure may affect the composition of the samples, making them different on significant
i
characteristics. In this case, at least two reasons can be offered for the difference in the types
of offenses in the two groups. First, the greater number of weapon offenses can be explained
in large part by a legislatively mandated change in how juveniles who bring weapons onto
school property are handled. During the period of the Teen Court sample, schools were
required to report these cases to law enforcement, whereas previously, they had the discretion
to handle them through other procedures. Second, the greater number of alcohol offenses can
largely be explained by a group of students from one school who repeatedly gathered and
drank alcohol; this misbehavior received media attention, and the school decided to report
these incidents to law enforcement, whereas the more typical response to alcohol offenses on
the part of school administrators would be to handle the juveniles through school disciplinary
procedures.)
Report on the Teen Court Prv-------
F 24
Teen Court Sample Pre-program Sample
Type of Offense # of Juveniles (%) # of Juveniles (%)
Larceny/stealing, shoplifting, concealment 39 (41.1%) 41 (42.3%)
Trespassing 4 (4.2%) 2 (2.1%)
Damage/injury to property, vandalism 6 (6.3%) 6 (6.2%)
Breaking/entering, BE&L. 0 (0.0%) 4 (4.1%)
Total "Property" Offense Type 49 (51.6%) 53 (54.6%)
Minor assault, affray, fight 9 (9.5%) 30 (30.9%)
Total "Minor Assault" Offense Type 9 (9.5%) 30 (30.9%)
Driving offense 9 (9.5%) 3 (3.1%)
Weapon offense 8 (8.4%) 1 (1.0%)
Minor controlled substance (e.g., possession
of marijuana) 7 (7.4%) 1 (1.0%)
Alcohol offense 8 (8.4%) 0 (0.0%)
Disorderly conduct, public disturbance,
school misbehavior I (1.I%) 3 (3.1%)
Firecrackers, pyrotechnics 2 (2.1%) 4 (4.1%)
Other 2 (2.1%) 2 (2.1%)
Total "Other" Offense Type 37 (38.9%) 14 (14.4%)
For the Teen Court sample, the following table shows the outcomes of their participation:
% of Teen % of Those
Outcome of Teen Court Number Court Sample With Hearings
Had hearing, completed sentence 63 66.3% 76.8%
Had hearing, did not complete sentence* 19 20.0% 23.2%
No hearing held** 13 13.7% N/A
*This outcome category includes juveniles dropped after hearing due to a new offense (3),
removed from the program due to reasons beyond their control (e.g., a move to another state)
(2), and those who simply did not complete the sentence (14).
**This outcome category includes juveniles referred but not accepted to the program due to
their failure to pursue the Teen Court option (11), dropped from the program before hearing
due to a new offense (1), and called and failed at the Teen Court hearing (1).
Report on the Teen Court Pro-----
-
Analyses Relating to Future Court Involvement. For both samples, we included-as
future involvement with juvenile intake any new presentation by the juvenile to Intake,
including undisciplined consultations and other status offenses. For adult record checks, we
excluded any infraction-level offenses. Because the minimum period for which we were able
4 to follow-up Teen Court participants was 7.4 months, we truncated our comparative recidivism
f analysis at 7.4 months for each individual in both samples. In addition, for the comparative
analysis, the entire Teen Court sample was used, regardless of the outcome of their Teen Court
participation, since we could not know what the outcomes of the individual Pre-program
juveniles would have been if they had actually been referred to Teen Court.
t
First, we conducted a logistic regression analysis to determine the association of
variables we measured that are often found to be significant predictors of recidivism. We had
€ sketchy data on the prior record for these juveniles (if the referral source indicated that there
was a prior record, we were fairly confident of the accuracy of this information; however, we
were not confident that the absence of such a notation accurately reflected that the individual
had no prior record), but using the data available, prior record was not significantly associated
with recidivism within the 7.4-month follow-up period. Similarly, neither race nor sex was
significantly associated with recidivism. The age of the juvenile at the time of the offense
showed a strong trend toward older individuals tending to recidivate, although it did not reach
conventional levels of statistical significance. Finally, using the three categories of offense
type outlined above (Property, Minor Assault, and Other), we found that current offense type .
was significantly related to recidivism, with the tendency being for offenders whose primary
offense was "Other" (which included driving, weapon, minor controlled substance, alcohol,.
public disturbance, pyrotechnic, and other non-property and non-assaultive offenses) being
more likely to recidivate. Note that these offenses; especially driving, drug, and alcohol
offenses, are also those more likely to be committed by older teens, and as noted, age was
positively correlated with recidivism.
At a gross level of analysis, without taking into account any of the common predictors
of recidivism discussed above, 19 individuals (20.0%) in the Teen Court sample and 9
individuals (9.3%) in the Pre-program sample recidivated within the 7.4 month follow-up
period. However, because of the differences in the samples noted above, and the association
between age and offense type that existed in our data, our statistical analysis needed to control
for age and type of offense. We conducted a logistic regression analysis to predict recidivism
(within 7.4 months) based on membership in either the Teen Court or the Pre-program sample,
while controlling for age and type of offense. Results indicated no significant relationship
with recidivism beyond that accounted for by the differences in age and current offense type
between the samples. For those who re-offended during the 7.4 month follow-up, the average
time from the initial processing of these individuals for their current offenses and the date of
their new offense did not significantly differ between the two samples, with the average for
Teen Court participants being 4.1 months and the average for the Pre-program individuals
being 4.6 months.
Report on the Teen Court Pr- 25 W-v
1
These results suggest that, at least for the 7.4 months for which these juveniles were
tracked, there was no difference in the tendency to recidivate for the Teen Court and the Pre-
program group that was not accounted for by the factors of age and type of offense. Further
analysis of the longer-term recidivism rate for the Pre-program sample was possible, however,
since these juveniles were diverted between October 1993 and May 1994. This allowed us to
track their recidivism for a substantial period -- well beyond the 7.4 months we were limited to
for the recidivism comparison. With a minimum individual follow-up period of 20.2 months
and a maximum of 28.1 months for the Pre-program sample, we found that 37 individuals, or
38.1%, had re-offended at least once. The average time to recidivate was 13.5 months.
In addition, we can examine the recidivism results for the Teen Court sample in terms
of their level of participation, as categorized earlier (i.e., the juvenile had a hearing and
completed the sentence, the juvenile had a hearing but did not complete the sentence, and the
juvenile did not have a hearing). It can be argued that a minimum level of participation --
perhaps that the juvenile remained in the program long enough to have a hearing -- is required
before any beneficial effects of Teen Court can be expected. Therefore, we conducted the
regression analyses as discussed above, but limiting the Teen Court sample to only those
juveniles who had hearings (82 juveniles). The results were similar to those discussed above,
although this analysis showed age to be a stronger predictor of recidivism, and it became even
clearer that offense type is significantly related to whether juveniles re-offend. Finally, we.
also examined the pattern of recidivism in the Teen Court sample for each of the three teen
court outcomes discussed above. Of the 63 juveniles who had hearings and completed their
sentences, 7 (11.1%) were found to recidivate during the 7.4 month follow-up period. As
might be expected, a substantially higher percentage of the 19 juveniles who had hearings but
did not complete their sentences were found to recidivate during this period -- 8 of 19, or
42.1%. The recidivism rate for the 13 juveniles who did not have hearings fell between these
two figures, with 4 juveniles, or 30.8%, recidivating during the follow-up period. While these
differences are notable, interpreting them is difficult because we cannot know the degree to
which fuller participation in the Teen Court program is the causative factor in explaining the
lower recidivism rate or, alternatively, whether the juveniles who dedicated themselves to
completing the Teen Court process are those who would tend not to re-offend anyway.
One common-sense conclusion is echoed by these findings: juveniles who commit
certain types of offenses are more likely to re-offend. Therefore, a Teen Court program's
application of stringent offense-related criteria for acceptance into the program will
substantially influence'the degree to which the program appears to be "successful," at least in
terms of its potential impact on recidivism. However, the experience with Cumberland
County's Teen Court program is that it is not always feasible to strictly apply acceptance
criteria such as "first-time" offender or to unconditionally reject juveniles with certain types of
offenses. This issue and others relating to possible ways of viewing the effectiveness of these
programs are addressed below, based on interviews with persons in Cumberland County who
are familiar with the Teen Court program.
Report oil the Teen Court Pro-27
Lrterview Results
We conducted interviews with the following people associated with the Cumberland
County Teen Court program to solicit their ideas about and views of the program: Joy
Downing and Joan Blanchard, intake counselors who refer cases to Teen Court; Sergeant
Ronald Snyder, with the Youth Services Division of the Fayetteville Police Department, who
also makes many referrals to Teen Court; Peggy Marchant, Community Resource Officer at
Reid Ross Junior High in Fayetteville, who makes referrals to Teen Court and who has the
opportunity to interact with students in school and community settings following the students'
participation in Teen Court; Pamela Sherman, Teen Court Administrator of the Cumberland
County Teen Court program; and Chief District Court Judge Elizabeth Keever and District
j Court Judge Andrew Dempster, both of the 12th District, who are familiar with the program
i and who, at times, make referrals to the program for youth appearing before them. In
particular, we asked these people about what they believe the advantages or disadvantages of
the program to be, many of which may not be amenable to direct measurement. Two central
themes emerged from these interviews.
i
Availability as a Community Resource. All of the respondents stress the importance of
having the teen court alternative available as a community resource to ensure that juveniles are
processed in a manner that demonstrates to them that there are consequences to their
misbehavior. Ms. Sherman and Ms. Marchant, in particular, suggest that there is substantial
interest and support of the program in both the criminal justice community and the community
at large. They, as well as Sergeant Snyder, also stress the fact that the teen court process
requires the involvement of parents, who tend to become enthusiastic about the process, and
are able to contribute in a constructive manner to the juvenile's successful completion, by
overseeing their progress. In fact, Judge Keever cites as one advantage of the program that
this process better ensures that it is the ' venile, rather than the parent, who bears the
consequences of the juvenile's misbehavior (e.g., the ultimate result of juvenile court
processing may be that the parent "pays" for the misbehavior through fines and costs
i imposed).
I The intake counselors, Ms. Sherman, and Sergeant Snyder feel that in many cases
juveniles participating in Teen Court would otherwise have no formal court action .taken (i.e.,
they would be diverted and experience virtually no ramifications for their offense), and that
this community resource provides a substantial, positive alternative to "doing nothing." The
intake counselors point out that diversion is the outcome of nearly all first-offense
concealment/shoplifting cases. Judge Dempster stresses that the juvenile court system has seen
substantial increases in violent, felony-level crime committed by juveniles, and the appropriate
handling of these cases requires significant juvenile court resources. Unfortunately, this can
lead to lower-level or "petty" crime by juveniles not receiving the attention that it deserves.
Judge Dempster believes that while juvenile court resources may be directed toward more
serious crime, the availability of the Teen Court option ensures that juveniles committing
minor offenses are handled in a manner that "stops them in their tracks" and requires them to
take the offense seriously. As Sergeant Snyder suggests, juveniles may be referred to law
Report on the Teen Court Prp--- -c
enforcement or intake three or more times, being diverted each time, under the traditional
system. The Teen Court resource allows an effective mechanism by which to "get their
attention," while still achieving a primary goal of the juvenile code -- to divert juvenile
offenders from the juvenile system and treat them through community-based services. All
respondents point out that the Teen Court process demonstrates to these youth, before they
enter the adult system, that citizens must take responsibility for and accept the consequences of
their actions.
This desire on the part of law enforcement and the court community to have a positive
diversion alternative has resulted in the Teen Court program's feeling a certain pressure to
accept "marginal" cases that may fall outside the scope of the criteria originally adopted for
acceptance to the program. For example, the adaptation of the teen court concept to younger
offenders discussed previously represents one attempt on the part of the program to better meet
the needs of the referral sources they serve. In addition, because of this need for a community
resource, they sometimes accept youth who have committed prior offenses, whose current
offense may be more serious than they ordinarily accept, or whose attitudes are not as positive
as Teen Court staff would like. In fact, the program has begun including in their record-
keeping process a notation on such cases that they were accepted "with reservation," so that
they can more readily determine and understand the potential "successes" of the program.
Teen Court as a Learning and Behavior Modification Experience. Involvement in Teen
Court, both by offenders and by volunteers, has often been an "eye opening" experience for
these juveniles. Participants have been enthusiastic about their involvement, and, as all
respondents point out, offenders often learn new, positive patterns of behavior, and benefit
from their participation in a program that focuses on the development of constructive
behaviors. They stress the significance of having peers judge the juvenile's behavior, and
believe that sanctioning of a youth's actions by his or her peers creates positive peer pressure
and helps to establish a model of acceptable conduct for youth. Ms. Marchant, in particular,
interacts with students at school and in the community, and has noted improvements in
attitudes and behaviors of students who have been involved in Teen Court. Ms. Sherman also
stresses the significance of the experience to the non-offender students who volunteer as
attorneys and jurors. Often, they gain direct exposure for the first time to the difficulties
encountered by youth of different cultures and socioeconomic backgrounds, and many
volunteers have shared with her their perceptions of this experience, including a better
understanding of the complexity of "how the real world" operates and a re-evaluation of their
personal value system. Ms. Sherman has also received substantial positive feedback from
parents, particularly those of the offender participants, and several have written, praising the
program.for providing a "sobering" experience for their children, and one that encouraged
them to accept responsibility for their actions.
However, two weak links in the Teen Court process were identified. First, there is no
strong mechanism for ensuring that offenders actively participate in the program or complete
their sentences. While referral sources are notified of such outcomes, in reality, there is little
thAt can be done in such cases, except that the unsuccessful Teen Court student would
Report on the Teen Court Pre 29
P
generally not be given another chance at Teen Court. There is also no effective mechanism for
identifying these juveniles ahead of time, and, as both judges point out, there will always be
some juveniles who do not take the program seriously. The second issue relates to the fact that
Y
there is no effective mechanism to ensure that the parents of the participants become involved
and assist the child in fulfilling the sentence requirements. Although at the time of accepting
the Teen Court opportunity, parents agree to assist the juvenile in meeting the obligations of
t'
the program, there is little that can be done if they do not.
#:
"q In summary, our investigation into the effectiveness of the Cumberland County Teen
Court program leads to the following conclusions. First, in terms of the program's potential
impact on recidivism, our analyses of short-term recidivism patterns (i.e., recidivism within
1 7.4 months) suggested no significant difference between the Teen Court and Pre-program
samples in the tendency to recidivate that was not accounted for by the factors of offender age
and nature of offense. For the Teen Court sample, fuller participation in the Teen Court
process seemed to be associated with lower recidivism rates, although interpreting these data as
indicating that the Teen Court process causes decreased recidivism is not possible. The results
indicated that 11.1% of the Teen Court participants who had hearings and completed their
constructive sentences recidivated, compared to 30.8% of those who did not have hearings,
and to 42.1% of those who had hearings but failed to complete their sentences. Our interviews
with individuals familiar with the Teen Court program pointed to several perceived benefits of _
the Teen Court alternative: that Teen Court allows peers, parents, and the community to be
active participants in fashioning a constructive response to juvenile crime; that Teen Court
sends a message to juveniles at an early stage of unlawful behavior (i.e., before misbehaviors
escalate in seriousness) that they must accept the responsibility for and consequences of their
actions; and that the program enables students to become involved in broadening, positive, and
character-building activities and promotes development of constructive patterns of behavior.
f
e
z
S
30
TEEN COURT LEGISLATION:
1993 Session Laws, Chapter 561, Section 80
and
1993 Session Laws, Extra Session 1994, Chapter 24, Section 40
31
Chapter 561, Section 80, 1993 Session Laws
Requested by: Representatives Richardson, Nesbitt, Diamont, Senators Daniel,
`p. Plyler, Kaplan
r` JUVENILE JUSTICE PILOT PROGRAM
e Sec. 80. (a) Of the funds appropriated to the Judicial Department in this act, the
? sum of thirty thousand dollars($30,000) for the 1993-94 fiscal year shall be used by
the Cumberland County Dispute Resolution Center for the development and imple-
mentation of the programs described in subsection (c) of this section. These funds
shall be matched by non-State fund* on a dollar-for-dollar basis.
(b) The Administrative Office of the Courts shall distribute the funds in quarterly
payments beginning July 1993, and ending April 1994. The Cumberland County
Dispute Resolution Center shall provide the Administrative Office of the Courts with
quarterly reports as to the expenditure of funds and relevant statistical data.
(c) The Cumberland County Dispute Resolution Center shall develop and imple-
ment the following programs to meet the objectives of this section:
(1) Development and implementation of a"Teen Court"Program as a community
resource for the 12th Judicial District of North Carolina. Cases in which a
Juvenile has allegedly committed an offense in the 12th Judicial District that
does not involve violence or personal injury, and that would constitute an
infraction or misdemeanor if committed by an adult, may be diverted by
` Intake Services to'Teen Court"to be"sentenced" by a jury of the juvenile's
peers. "Sentences" shall include extensive amounts of counseling and com-
munity service;
(2) 'Teen Court" model programs made available to all junior and senior high
schools in the 12th Judicial District to handle problems that develop at
school but that have not been turned over to the juvenile authorities,
(3) Alternative sentencing programs implemented and made available to the
juvenile court judges, including house arrest, monitored telephone curfew,
Victim-Offender Reconciliation Programs (VORP), and mediation referrals;
(4) School-based mediation programs made available to schools within the 12th
Judicial District, with students being trained as. peer mediators and with
teachers and administrators being trained in conflict resolution and media-
tion; and
(6) Curriculum supplements to the standard course of study made available to
' 9ducators to teach conflict resolution and related topics to all students.
(d) The Cumberland County Dispute Resolution Center shall report at least annu-
ally to the Administrative Office of the Courts and to officials of the 12th Judicial
y. District. The Administrative Once of the Courts shall evaluate the effectiveness of
the programs and report its findings and any recommendations by March 16, 1996,to
the Joint Legislative Commission on Governmental Operations and to the Chairs of
the House and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on Justice and Public Safety.
32
Chapter 24, Section 40 (Senate Bill 150 of 1994 Extra Session)
Requested . by: Representatives Nesbitt, Diamont, Gist, Holt, Redwine, Bowie,
Michaux, Senators Daniel, Plyler, Cooper, Soles
TEEN COURT PROGRAM FUNDS
Sec. 40. (a) Of the funds appropriated in this act to the Judicial
Department, the sum of seventy-five thousand dollars (575,000) for the 1994-95 fiscal
year shall be used to develop and implement "teen court" programs in judicial
districts to be selected by the Administrative Office of the Courts. These programs
are to be made available to junior and senior high schools within the selected judicial
districts. Any grant application shall be reviewed and approved by the chief district
court judge for the district in which the program is to be conducted. Grants from the
Administrative Office of the Courts to any local agency or authority shall be used to
develop and implement programs that meet either or both of the following objectives:
(1) Development and implementation of a "teen court" program as a
community resource for the selected judicial districts. Cases in
which a juvenile allegedly commits an offense within the
jurisdiction of the juvenile court, as specified in the teen court
plan, which offense, if committed by an adult, would constitute a
crime or infraction, may be diverted by law enforcement or the
court, or referred by intake Services, to "teen court" to be
"sentenced" by a jury of the juvenile's peers. The plan shall
specify the kinds of offenses that are appropriate for referral to
teen court. "Sentences" may include counseling, restitution,
curfews, or community service, as well as other rehabilitative
measures; or
(2) "Teen court" model programs made available to all junior and
senior high school students in the selected judicial districts to
handle problems that develop at school but that have not been
turned over to the juvenile authorities.
(b) The Administrative Office of the Courts shall distribute the funds to
grantees in quarterly payments beginning July 1994 and ending April 1995. Grantees
shall provide the Administrative Office of the Courts with quarterly reports as to the
expenditure of funds and relevant statistical data.
(c) Grantees of the funds shall report at least annually to the
Administrative Office of the Courts and to officials of the selected judicial districts.
The Administrative Office of the Courts shall evaluate the effectiveness of the
programs and report its findings and any recommendations by March 15, 1995, to the
Joint Legislative Commission on Governmental Operations and to the Chairs of the
House and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on Justice and Public Safety.
(d) in addition to the reports required in subsection (d) of Section 80 of
Chapter 561 of the 1993 Session Laws, the Administrative Office of the Courts shall
make an interim report by May 15, 1994, on the effectiveness of the Cumberland
County "Teen Court" program established pursuant to Section 80 of Chapter 561 of
the 1993 Session Laws.