Juvenile offender case study: arrest through rehabilitation in California

Juvenile Justice Process: A Case Study

The Juvenile Justice Process

In this text, I give a detailed description of the process a juvenile offender, Xander L., will follow from his time of arrest to eventual punishment or rehabilitation. In so doing, I will describe the key highlights of the said process including but not limited to intake and sentencing. Further, while taking into consideration the level of offense, I will also draft a letter to the judge with regard to the impending sentence. In seeking to define the above process based on the selected juvenile offender, I stand guided by the state laws and practices of the state of Florida.

It is important to note from the onset that the juvenile court procedure or process differs significantly from the adult system. Indeed, as Kupchik (2006) observes, those who established the juvenile justice system shaped it differently from the adult justice system because in their view, "juveniles who misbehaved were products of pathological environments rather than intrinsically evil" (p.11). In our case, we have Xander L., a 17-year-old who has had prior juvenile adjudications. Xander's immediate arrest is for the possession of a concealed weapon. Given that Xander has not yet attained the age of the majority, he will most likely be exposed to the juvenile court justice of the state.

Given that Xander's violation of the law is somewhat serious, the minor is likely to be taken into custody after which he will be released to the Judicial Assessment Center -- JAC. From here, the case will be forwarded to the state AG's office. It is also important to note that a Department Risk Assessment Instrument (DRAI) will be completed by the Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) intake officials so as to determine if Xander meets the criteria for detention. The Florida Department of Juvenile Justice (2012) defines the DRAI as an "instrument used to determine if a youth meets detention criteria and to determine whether a youth should be placed in secure, non-secure, or home detention care prior to a detention hearing." In my view, Xander satisfies the statutory secure detention criteria. This is particularly the case given his prior juvenile adjudications and the seriousness of the offense for which he has been arrested.

During the second day after arrest, Xander will attend a detention hearing and it is during this hearing that a probate cause will be established. Given that Xander has already pleaded guilty to the offense of being in possession of a concealed weapon, it is likely that he will be subjected to continued detention which should not exceed 21 days. Formal charges against Xander will commence after a petition has been filed. Thereafter, an arraignment hearing will commence and given that Xander is likely to be on detention status, the said arraignment and the detention hearing will be held concurrently. During arraignment, Xander will be asked by the court whether or not he pleads guilty to the charges leveled against him. Based on his plea, the court will make a ruling on whether there Xander should be provided with a court appointed attorney. Given that Xander has already pleaded guilty to being in possession of a concealed weapon (as highlighted in the case study); it is likely that he will also plead guilty to the charges as filed. If he maintains his guilty stance, a disposition date for the hearing of the case will be set. During disposition, the court could according to the Florida Department of Juvenile Justice (2012) find that the youth (in our case Xander) "committed the delinquent act, but withhold an adjudication of delinquency." Xander will in this case be placed under community supervision. Should the court deem it appropriate to adjudicate delinquent, the youth (in our case, Xander) could be committed to a residential facility (Florida Department of Juvenile Justice, 2012).