Posted February 11, 2008

Juvenile Justice State Legislation in 2007

State juvenile justice legislation in 2007 focused on protecting juvenile offenders and distinguishing them from adult offenders, including raising the age of juvenile court jurisdiction and protecting the confidentiality of juvenile records. Lawmakers also addressed treatment for juveniles with mental health and substance abuse needs and passed truancy, graffiti and gang prevention measures.

Several years of planning in Connecticut resulted in a new law to raise the age of juvenile court jurisdiction from 16 to 18. Previously, Connecticut was one of only three states (New York and North Carolina) that automatically sent 16- and 17- year-olds to the adult criminal justice system. Connecticut's measure represents a trend in states to rethink adult treatment of juvenile offenders and create safer communities through a strengthened juvenile justice system.

Age of juvenile jurisdiction also was on the agenda in Rhode Island in 2007. After the budget bill carried the governor's recommendation to decrease the age of juvenile jurisdiction from 18 to 17, the General Assembly reversed the decision with a measure that restored the jurisdiction age to 18.

Many other state laws addressed treating juveniles differently than adults by focusing on protecting juvenile court and arrest records. In particular, legislatures discussed how and when confidentiality of juvenile records should be protected in terms of the consequences for schooling, employment or other transitions to adulthood. A New Mexico measure requires that information concerning juvenile arrests, delinquency proceedings and social records not be disclosed on any public access websites maintained by state and local agencies. In Illinois, an act also strengthens juvenile record confidentiality by specifying that only a juvenile court judge may issue an order releasing juvenile arrest or court records, and that civil subpoenas may not be used to circumvent the confidentiality provision of the court. Under a new Kansas law, fingerprinting or photographing juveniles who are taken into custody is forbidden unless the arrest is for an alleged adult felony. Legislation in New York prevents employers from having access to sealed criminal history information about juvenile arrests that did not result in a criminal conviction. An Arkansas act protects personally identifying information included in juvenile records in many government contexts.

As part of strengthening juvenile justice systems, policymakers in 2007 also continued to be attentive to juveniles' mental health and substance abuse treatment needs. Colorado lawmakers established programs to provide family services to youth with mental health needs in the juvenile justice system, as well as for those at risk of such involvement. New Jersey now requires suicide and mental health screening of juveniles in detention centers with or without their consent in order to properly assess their needs. Idaho legislation allows a judge to order juveniles to undergo a substance abuse assessment and subsequently provide necessary treatment. North Dakota and Oregon acts require alcohol and drug education, assessment and treatment for juveniles who commit alcohol violations. Tennessee law now allows the juvenile courts to develop and operate drug court treatment programs for youth.

Again in 2007, states recognized the need to attempt to prevent juvenile crime with enactments addressing gang recruitment, truancy and graffiti. Some laws hold both juveniles and their parents responsible for delinquent behavior. In California, juvenile courts now are allowed to order anti-gang violence classes for parents of juveniles who have committed gang-related offenses. California also established the Office of Gang and Youth Violence Policy to develop strategies to prevent gang violence and youth involvement. A new Illinois law provides for gang resistance education and training in the schools, and Washington legislation directs the State Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs to convene a work group to study gang-related crime and recommend ways to combat it. Other states put in place new penalties related to gangs. Arizona and New Jersey acts make it a crime to solicit or recruit a minor into a gang.

States also focused attention on the problem of graffiti hoping to deter further delinquent behavior. Acts in Arizona Hawaii and create new penalties for property damage from graffiti. The Hawaii measure also requires juveniles and their parents remove the offending graffiti. Tennessee legislation makes parents responsible for the second delinquent act of the juvenile's vandalism to property and requires them to clean the damage or pay for its repair. Texas requires the juvenile offender to make restitution to the owner of the defaced property.

Addressing the relationship of truancy and delinquency also was addressed. A Delaware measure, for example, gives truancy courts enhanced jurisdiction over parents and students charged with truancy, enabling them to more closely monitor these individuals' behaviors. A Maine measure strengthens the truancy law by making it a crime when parents fail to take corrective measures for children truant from elementary school. A truancy reduction pilot program was created in Maryland to deal with truant youth.

For a complete list of the 2007 Juvenile Justice State Enactments

Appendix

Juvenile Jurisdiction and Records
Arkansas HB 2248; Connecticut SB 1500; Illinois HB 615; Kansas HB 2074; New Mexico HB 738; New York SB 3092; Rhode Island S 1141

Mental Health and Substance Abuse

Colorado HB 1057; Idaho SB 1142; New Jersey A 2281; North Dakota SB 2329; Oregon HB 2149; Tennessee HB 1871

Delinquency Prevention (Truancy, Gangs and Graffiti)
Arizona HB 2344 and SB 1222; California A 1291 and A1381; Delaware HB 56 and SB 26; Hawaii SB 228; Illinois HB 438; Maine HB 353; Maryland HB 1325; New Jersey A 2667; Tennessee HB 1167; Texas HB 2151; Washington SB 5987