Download Lecture 6

CRIM 309
Intake and Diversion
Intake
• Intake=Process of screening cases referred to
the juvenile justice system
• Determines which cases will be formally
processed v. those handled without formal court
processing
• Offenses range in seriousness; court resources
are reserved for more serious cases
– Avoids stigma
– More efficient use of resources
– More effective in the long run
Accomplishing Intake
• Intake officers review the case and make a
determination of how to process
• Who act as intake officers? Depends on the
state and how the system is structured.
Typically, this involves one of the following:
– Probation officer acting as an intake officer makes the
final decision on how to process
– Prosecutor acting as an intake officer makes the final
decision on how to process
– Probation officer makes an initial decision that is
referred to the prosecutor for a final decision
– Probation officer handles less serious charges and
the prosecutor handles more serious charges
Court Rulings on Intake
• Little guidance at the Supreme Court level
• Does not require representation
• Information collected prior to the adjudication
can be tricky—can it be used later in the
adjudication proceedings?
– Use of Miranda would enable the use of the
information
– No clarity in how the information will be used before it
is collected will cause problems
– Some states prohibit the use of intake information in
the adjudication proceeding
Result of Intake
• Intake officers determine whether the case will
be dismissed, handled formally (delinquency
petition), diverted, or waived to the adult court
• Just over ½ will be petitioned to juvenile court for
an adjudication hearing
• A very small percent will be waived to adult court
• The remaining amount will be dismissed or
diverted from formal processing
The Intake Process
• Intake is essentially a point in the process to
assess public safety with regard to specific
offenders
• Includes assessment of a variety of risk related
characteristics
• May include a screening tool to determine what
should be done with the youth
• Typically, this process is connected to referrals
to other programming that may be needed by
the youth and family
Diversion
• Informal handling of the charges; youth must admit to the
charges
– The case is “adjusted”
• Youth must attend and successfully complete a program
related to their offending
• Typically, the youth must complete the program within a
specific period of time
• If youth successfully completes the program, the
prosecutor does not charge the youth
• If youth is not successful in completing the program, the
prosecutor will formally adjudicate the youth in court for
the charges
Diversion, Continued
• Acceptance of diversion is voluntary
– If decline, the case is typically petitioned to
court for adjudication
• There is no constitutional right to diversion
programming
• Diversion programming can be viewed as
a prior record
• Diversion can be informal or formal
Examples of Diversion
•
•
•
•
•
Teen Court
Alcohol and Drug Education Program
Scared Straight
Pre-adjudication drug courts
Victim mediation
Concerns
• When one takes diversion as an option,
there are no due process protections
• Diversion program raises concerns over
net widening (bringing more kids under the
system simply because programming is
available)