{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021755162241887907, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0007374631268436578, 'mean_word_length': 5.324009324009324, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Delays in Youth Justice

To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this Federally-funded grant final report available electronically in addition to traditional paper copies. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. The causes of delay in the youth justice system are complex. No single approach is likely to be effective in restoring the timeliness of the process. Researchers have successfully linked court delays to a wide range of factors, including resources and workload, jurisdiction size, case characteristics (e.g., offense type and severity), various procedural factors, management and organization, and the informal norms and values of a court. More research is needed, however, on the factors that facilitate or impede the timely processing of delinquency cases. The literature from criminal (adult) courts may be of limited value in understanding youth justice delays, as the individualized approach of juvenile court proceedings is more complicated and often takes more time at intake, detention, adjudication, and disposition. There are two basic approaches to controlling processing delays in the youth justice system: 1) managerial; and 2) legal/professional. The first approach is probably most important. It is essential to confront the organizational elements that contribute to delay. Unlike adult defendants in criminal courts, juveniles do not have a Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial under the U.S. Constitution. A few states have provided something close to juvenile speedy trial rights for juveniles using statutes, court rules, or both. Other states have formally endorsed various administrative standards for the timely processing of juvenile cases. These standards are seldom mandatory, however, and wide variations remain within and across jurisdictions in juvenile delinquency case processing time. This study reviews the literature on court processing delay and the types of delay that most often affect delinquency cases in juvenile and family courts. It places the concept of court delay in a legal, social, and organizational context and describes the wide range of approaches used to prevent or control unwanted delay, including legislation, court rules, and professional standards. The analysis also describes the results of three case studies conducted in juvenile courts in the jurisdictions were selected because they each used a different approach to controlling and reducing unwanted juvenile court delays and they were all regarded as effective by their peers, according to a series of interviews conducted by the researchers with juvenile court leaders …