This article examines the impact of defense-based disposition case advocacy in San Francisco commitment rates to state juvenile correctional facilities. Historically, this juvenile justice system committed a large percentage of youths to state institutions. These rates were strongly influenced by the probation system's penchant for recommending custodial confinement. Defense-based case advocates began presenting alternative disposition reports to judges in 1980. As a result, between 1980 and 1990, commitments to state correctional facilities fell 73%. The evidence suggests that case advocacy is an effective strategy for reducing commitments to juvenile correctional institutions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aronson, Peter
. 1987. “Youth Program Draws Controversy: Prison Alternatives Are Welcome, But Results Questioned.”The Recorder, July 19, pp. 1-2.
2.
Baird, Chris
. 1988. Development of Risk Prediction Scales for the California Youthful Offender Parole Board. San Francisco: National Council on Crime and Delinquency.
3.
Blackmore, John
, Marci Brown, and Barry Krisberg. 1988. Juvenile Justice Reform: The Bellweather States. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Center for the Study of Youth Policy.
4.
DeMuro, Paul
, Ann DeMuro, and Steve Lerner. 1988. Reforming the CYA: How to End Crowding and Diversify Treatment and Protect the Public Without Spending More Money. Bolinas, CA: Commonweal Research Institute.
5.
California Youth Authority, Youthful Offender Parole Board
. 1988. Youth Authority Length of Stay and Recidivism, California Juvenile Arrest Rates, and Guidelines for Parole Consideration Dates. Sacramento: State of California.
6.
Doyle, Jim
and Rick DelVecchio. 1989. “Reversal of Trend: More S.F. Teens Sent to the Youth Authority.”San Francisco Chronicle, September 18, Sec. A, p. 2.
7.
Edwards, Leonard
. 1976. “The Defense Attorney at the Dispositional Hearing: The Need for Social Worker Assistance.” Paper presented at the National Legal Association for Defense Attorneys.
8.
Furillo, Andy
. 1990. “Far Fewer S.F. Youths Being Sent to Prison.”San Francisco Examiner, October 4, Sec. A, pp. 1, 22.
9.
Greenwood, Peter
. 1987. An Evaluation of the Vision Quest Program. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
10.
Greenwood, Peter W.
and Susan Turner. 1991. Implementing and Managing Innovative Correctional Programs: Lessons from OJJJDP's Private Sector Initiative. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
11.
Jefferson and Associates, Community Research and Associates
. 1987. Creating a New Agenda for the Care and Treatment of San Francisco's Youthful Offenders: A Model Program. San Francisco: Author.
12.
Johnson, Clarence
. 1991. “Saving Youngsters from the Streets: Omega Boys Club Helps 250 Bay Youths.”San Francisco Chronicle, September 12, Sec. A, p. 22.
13.
Krisberg, Barry
, James Austin, Karen Joe, and Patricia Steele. 1988. Unlocking Juvenile Corrections: Evaluating the Massachusetts Department of Youth Services. San Francisco: National Council on Crime and Delinquency.
14.
Lerner, Steve
. 1986. Bodily Harm: The Pattern of Fear and Violence at the California Youth Authority. Bolinas, CA: Commonweal Research Press.
15.
Lerner, Steve
. 1990. The Good News About Juvenile Justice: The Movement Away from Large Institutions and Toward Community-Based Services. Bolinas, CA: Commonweal Research Press.
16.
Macallair, Dan
. 1993. “Reaffirming Rehabilitation in Juvenile Justice.”Youth & Society25:104-125.
17.
Miller, Jerome G.
1991. Last One Over the Wall: The Massachusetts Experiment in Closing Reform Schools. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.
18.
Palmer, Ted
. 1992. The Re-emergence of Correctional Intervention. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
19.
Siegel, Larry J.
and Joseph J. Senna. 1985. Juvenile Delinquency: Theory, Practice, and Law. St. Paul, MN: West.
20.
Steinhart, David
and Patricia Steele. 1988. San Francisco Detention Survey: Results and Recommendations. San Francisco: National Council on Crime and Delinquency.
21.
Wald, Michael S.
1972. The Use of Social Workers in a Public Defender Office: An Evaluation of the Offender Rehabilitation Project of the Public Defender Office for Santa Clara County, California. Rockville, MD: National Criminal Justice Reference Service.
