JUVENILITY AND PUNISHMENT: SENTENCING JUVENILES IN ADULT CRIMINAL COURT*

The study outlined in this article addressed a key limitation of prior research on the punishment of juveniles transferred to adult court by employing propensity score matching techniques to create more comparable samples of juvenile and young adult offenders. Using recent data from the Maryland State Commission on Criminal Sentencing Policy, it tested competing theoretical propositions about the salience of juvenile status in adult court. Findings indicate that even after rigorous statistical matching procedures, juvenile offenders are punished more severely than their young adult counterparts. We found no evidence that this “juvenile penalty” is exacerbated by an offender's race or gender, but it does vary starkly across offense type and mode of transfer, being driven primarily by drug crimes and discretionary waivers. The import of these findings is discussed as they relate to the future of juvenile justice policy regarding the continued use of juvenile transfer to adult court.     

民法诚信原则与劳动法适用之博弈论纲——以“奋斗者协议”和“自愿弃保”为例

"奋斗者协议"与"自愿弃保"案件背后隐含的法理可简概为民法诚信原则与劳动法适用问题。实践中的误读和误判、《民法典》缺失劳动权(益)之基本民事权利设置、共享经济下新型劳动用工和疫情与后疫情时代之多重叠加效应,导致了劳动法之"衰"与"殇"。民法诚信原则同样适用劳动法含社会保障法,所谓劳动法不能适用该原则或者民法思维模式都是不严谨之"伪"命题。劳动法适用诚信原则应当考量其特殊性,惩戒权适用时,应当遵循比例原则和有利原则,并不得涉及劳动者非职业行为即私人行为和排除社会保障权。任何排除或剥夺劳动者社会保障权的约定或规章都是无效的。后劳动合同义务适用诚信原则不能"选择性""遗漏"抗辩权,如果当事人依法行使抗辩权,则不能裁定其违反了诚信原则,否则就是"伪"民法思维模式。实习关系属于特殊的劳动关系,在实习法律规范严重缺失下,用具有弥补法律不足之价值与功能的诚信原则治理"虚假实习"完全必要而且可行。     

The Effects of Juvenile Transfer to Criminal Court on Incarceration Decisions

The present study examined the effects of institutional pressures on homeland security preparedness among law enforcement agencies in Illinois. The data come from the Illinois Homeland Security Survey (IHSS). Specifically, the study employed three theories to explain homeland security preparedness: contingency theory, resource dependence theory, and institutional theory. We hypothesized that institutional pressures will lead to isomorphism as agencies attempt to conform to institutional expectations about appropriate activities in a homeland security era. To evaluate these theories and their impact on homeland security practices, the authors used confirmatory factor analysis. The IHSS data lend strong support to the application of organizational theory as a lens through which homeland security preparedness can be understood. Institutional pressures, such as professional and government publications, training, professional associations, and the actions of peer agencies, significantly influenced municipal and county agencies in Illinois. Funding, while often thought important to encourage preparedness, was not a significant predictor. The results of this analysis advance our understanding of homeland security preparedness via institutional theory by suggesting that the larger environment is salient.     

To Waive or Not to Waive: The Right to Trial and Plea Bargaining

Criminal defendants in many countries are faced with a dilemma: If they waive their right to trial and plead guilty, they typically receive charge or sentence reductions in exchange for having done so. If they exercise their right to trial and are found guilty, they often receive stiffer sanctions than if they had pled guilty. I characterize the former as ‘waiver rewards’ and the latter as ‘non-waiver penalties.’ After clarifying the two and considering the relation between them, I briefly explicate the grounds for a moral right to trial. I then assess the defensibility of such rewards and penalties. In addition to considering whether waiver rewards and non-waiver penalties serve the aims of legal punishment, I address the three main arguments for permitting them. The first suggests that defendants willing to plead display more remorse for their crimes and thus are deserving of lighter sentences. The second defends waiver rewards and non-waiver penalties in cases where prosecutors are alleged to know that defendants are guilty but face problems establishing their guilt at trial. The third holds that guilty defendants who are willing to plead conserve scarce state resources and should be rewarded for it, whereas those unwilling to plead squander such resources and should be penalized accordingly. I contend that none of these arguments provides persuasive grounds for waiver rewards or non-waiver penalties, even on the assumption that we can distinguish those defendants who should waive their right to trial from those who should not. This conclusion presents a fundamental challenge to contemporary plea bargaining practices.

Juvenile Waiver 2014: A Review of State Statutes

Juvenile waiver has received much attention from the public, practitioners, and scholars. Prior studies have documented the increased use and effects of waiver. In this study we examine the current state of the law regarding juvenile waiver. We replicate 1995 and 2003 studies that examined state waiver statutes and detail the changes in prosecutorial, judicial, and legislative waiver since 2003. While the juvenile crime rate has dropped dramatically, it is unclear why legislatures’ fascination with juvenile waiver has also decreased. In this study we determine that juvenile waiver remains popular with legislatures, although there are signs of change.     

JUVENILE WAIVER AS A MECHANISM OF SOCIAL STRATIFICATION: A FOCUS ON HUMAN CAPITAL*

The historic transformations of the criminal justice system must be justified and interpreted through the effects on criminals (Maruna and Immarigeon, 2011). The push for harsher sentencing policies for juvenile offenders specifically through the use of juvenile waiver to criminal court is one such policy that is not well understood in terms of its effects on offenders, especially in terms of broader outcomes beyond recidivism. We use data from the Pathways to Desistance Study, which consists of a sample of adolescent offenders followed for 7 years postadjudication, to investigate the effect juvenile waiver has on human capital acquisition and yield among 557 adolescents from Maricopa County, Arizona. By using various matching specifications, our findings demonstrate that juveniles transferred to adult court experience no deleterious effects on human capital in terms of educational acquisition compared with similar youth retained in the juvenile system, yet they still earn considerably less income 7 years postadjudication. These results suggest that an important and unintended collateral consequence of juvenile waiver is an increase in social stratification potentially through labeling and labor market discrimination.     

JUVENILE CRIME AND WHY WAIVER IS NOT THE ANSWER

Many states deal with the issue of juvenile crime by charging juveniles as adults. This is done by a method of waiver. Waiver allows adult criminal courts to have the power to exercise jurisdiction over juveniles.¹ In effect, a juvenile is tried and sentenced as an adult when his or her case is waived (removed) from the juvenile court to the adult court. Waiver in juvenile (youths seventeen and younger) cases should never be allowed because juvenile offenders are too immature and incompetent to appreciate the nature of their crimes and because the juvenile justice system is a more appropriate place to rehabilitate juvenile offenders.     

TRANSFERRED JUVENILES IN THE ERA OF SENTENCING GUIDELINES: EXAMINING JUDICIAL DEPARTURES FOR JUVENILE OFFENDERS IN ADULT CRIMINAL COURT*

This study contributes to contemporary research on the punishment of juvenile offenders in adult court by analyzing the use of guidelines departures for transferred juveniles in two states, one with presumptive sentencing guidelines (Pennsylvania) and one with voluntary guidelines (Maryland). Propensity score matching is first used to create more comparable samples of juvenile and young adult offenders, and then Tobit regressions are employed to estimate the effect of juvenile status on the likelihood and length of departures. Our findings indicate that juvenile status significantly affects the use of upward departures in Pennsylvania, and the use of both downward and upward departures in Maryland. Judicial reasons for departure are examined to provide additional insight into the complex dynamics surrounding exceptional sentences for juvenile offenders sentenced in adult court.     

刑事缺席审判程序的理论检视

最高立法机关将缺席审判程序引入《刑事诉讼法》,既应遵守国际共识,又须彰显中国特色。改革者宜遵循"凸显权利属性、淡化义务属性"的思路,尊重被追诉人明示或者暗示放弃出庭受审权利的意愿,进而采取二元化的方案。其一,针对简单轻微犯罪案件,以认罪认罚从宽制度改革为契机,允许被追诉人以签署具结书的形式放弃审判在场权,实现书面审理与缺席审判的"合二为一"。其二,针对重大贪污贿赂犯罪案件,慎重地权衡国家公共利益与被追诉人利益的关系,采取"四步走"的规划,最大限度地实现制度反腐的法治化。同时,完善缺席审判程序立法规则还要明确"五个区别",涉及弃权自愿性审查、被追诉人诉讼权利、审理活动、司法救济途径、被害人权益等方面。     

我国行贿罪的立法完善

传统刑法理论认为行贿罪与受贿罪是对合性犯罪,故而遵循＂双打＂的策略,即在打击受贿的同时也不放松对行贿罪的惩处,但受诸多因素影响,司法实践中的行贿罪已经发生异化从而背离立法初衷。为了更有利地打击贿赂犯罪,应当调整刑事政策,引入举报豁免制度与污点证人制度,从内部瓦解行、受贿双方的同盟关系以更有力地打击贪污腐败。