Seventeen-Year-Olds in the NH Criminal Justice System

1. Seventeen-Year-Olds in the NH Criminal Justice System Lauren Bowman Grace Hart SooJee Lee Kali Montecalvo Melanie Wilcox February 2011

2. 1. INTRODUCTION

3. Current State Policy • 1996: NH state legislature enacted a law lowering the age of criminal responsibility from 18 to 17 • Reasons: • Political pressure: “tough on crime” • Age consistency with Massachusetts • Thought to be more cost effective than juvenile facilities

4. Seventeen-Year-Olds in NH • Majority commit non-violent crimes • ex: Possession of drugs or alcohol, shoplifting

5. Concerns • Rising prison expenditures • Developmental effects on seventeen-year-olds

6. Policy Options • Keep the same policy • Blended sentencing • Raising the age of adulthood and expanding other programs: • Teen Courts • Alternative specialized courts

7. 2. Maintaining THE CURRENT AGE OF CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY

8. Benefits of Treating Seventeen-Year-Olds as Adults • Hold juvenile offenders accountable • General deterrence • Inconsistent evidence for this benefit • Age consistency with neighboring states

9. Drawbacks of Treating Seventeen-Year-Olds as Adults • Higher recidivism rates • But no data for NH • Exposure to criminal culture • Vulnerable to physical and/or sexual abuse • Fewer opportunities for meaningful rehabilitation in adult facilities

10. Implications for New Hampshire • 2006: Report on the Financial Impact of Age of Majority in NH • Raising the age would transfer 1,214 seventeen-year-olds to juvenile justice system • 607 cases open at any time

11. Additional Costs of Treating Seventeen-Year-Olds as Juveniles *These figures do not include the salaries and benefits of additional staff that would need to be hired

12. Budget Implications for NH *The maximum average daily cost per resident at the Sununu Youth Services Center is $370 per day

13. Implications for NH (cont.) • Recidivism data for NH unavailable • Studies conducted in other states indicates higher recidivism when tried as adults • County superintendents reported holding seventeen-year-olds not burdensome • Didn’t have to create additional programs

14. Case Study: Wisconsin - Background • Categorical exclusion approach (1996) • Goals: • Individual accountability • Age consistency • Focus resources on younger offenders

15. Case Study: Wisconsin - Results • Two out of three goals achieved • Study of legislation from 2002-2006: • Fewer than one-half completed probation • High recidivism rates • Significant fiscal effects if entered back into juvenile criminal system

16. Other States with the Same Policy

17. Other States with the Same Policy (cont’d.) • States that considered/enacted legislation to raise age since 2006:

18. 3. BLENDED SENTENCING

19. Overview • Minimal age of criminal court jurisdiction is 18 • Choice between juvenile and criminal court sanctions • More flexibility

20. Case Study: Vermont • State’s Attorney decides where to file • Family Court option • 80% of petitions begin in adult court, and most remain there

21. Case Study: New Mexico • Effective in 1993 • Eliminated judicial waiver provision • Two types of offenders: • Youthful offenders • Serious youthful offenders • Drawbacks, but overall deemed success

22. Case Study: Minnesota • Three changes (1994): • ‘Extended jurisdiction juvenile’ (EJJ) category • Juvenile disposition and stayed sentence • Juvenile court jurisdiction until age 21 • Compromise, but with drawbacks • Generally considered success

23. 4. TEEN COURTS

24. Background • Voluntary alternative for teens convicted of non-violent crimes • Sentence determined by fellow teens • Some run by the state, others by non-profits and municipalities

25. Benefits and Drawbacks of Teen Court Benefits • Accountability without stigmatization • Fosters social bonds and pro-social attitudes • Drawbacks • Can’t handle all cases • Voluntary programs • Effectiveness not established

26. Teen Courts in New Hampshire • Not in state law, but some still operating in the state • Child and Family Services of New Hampshire operates Upper Valley Youth Court • Merrimack County Department of Human Services runs the Merrimack County Teen Court

27. 5. AlTERNATIVE SPECIALIZED COURTS

28. Juvenile Drug Courts: Background • Rationale: Reduce overall costs to criminal system by lowering recidivism rate • Community-based treatment programs, diverse support services, intensive judicial supervision

29. Juvenile Drug Courts in NH:Background • One of top ten states in nation in teen drug & alcohol use • Increasing juvenile drug charges and arrests

30. Juvenile Drug Courts: Benefits & Drawbacks Benefits • Increased options • Immediate incentives & sanctions • Increased coordination • More expedient & targeted response Drawbacks • Major unique challenges • Negative peer influence • Psychological • Effectiveness

31. 6. Recommendation

32. Conclusion & Recommendation • Keep the same policy • Likely more cost-effective • Able to provide adequate services • Adapt or blend alternative sentencing approaches • Developmental concerns • Establish recidivism definition and data tracking mechanisms • Would provide greater accuracy