Arizona’s Juvenile Court Counts Statewide Statistical Information FY2015 JULY 1, 2014 - JUNE 30, 2015 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS JUVENILE JUSTICE SERVICES DIVISION Research & Information Unit | Suite 337 | 602.452.3443 Produced and Published by Arizona Supreme Court – Administrative Office of the Courts Juvenile Justice Services Division Deborah D. Kurth, PhD Research and Information Manager Special thanks to the JOLTS Coordinators, Directors, and staff for their diligence in ensuring quality data for this report. ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY15 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section I: Introduction & Trends INTRODUCTION AND TRENDS .............................................................................. 1 Section II: Referral Processing REFERRALS ......................................................................................................... 7 DETENTION ...................................................................................................... 13 DIVERSION ....................................................................................................... 17 Section III: Court Processing PETITIONS ........................................................................................................ 21 DISMISSALS ...................................................................................................... 25 PENALTY ONLY .................................................................................................. 29 STANDARD PROBATION ..................................................................................... 33 INTENSIVE PROBATION (JIPS) ........................................................................... 37 Section IV: Additional Topics JUVENILE CORRECTIONS (ADJC) ....................................................................... 41 ADJC & AOC COMPARISON................................................................................. 45 PATHWAYS TO ADULT COURT ............................................................................ 47 DIRECT FILINGS IN ADULT COURT ........................................................ 48 TRANSFERRED TO ADULT COURT ......................................................... 52 GENDER .......................................................................................................... 57 Notes & Glossary NOTES ............................................................................................................ 59 GLOSSARY ........................................................................................................ 62 i ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY15 LIST OF TABLES AND GRAPHS INTRODUCTION & TRENDS Juvenile Justice Flow Chart ......................................................................................... 3 Arizona Juvenile Court Activity, FY15 ........................................................................... 4 Arizona Juvenile Population Projections, Ages 8 - 17 ..................................................... 4 Referrals, Petitions Filed & Juveniles Referred and Petitioned, Fiscal Years 2011 - 2015 ... 5 The Number of Juveniles Disposed to Probation, Intensive Probation, ADJC and Adult Court, Fiscal Years 2011 - 2015 .................................................................................. 5 Pathways to Adult Court, Fiscal Years 2011 - 2015 ....................................................... 6 REFERRALS 1.1 Juveniles Referred by County, FY15 ....................................................................... 7 1.2 Juveniles Referred by Gender, FY15 ...................................................................... 7 1.3 Juveniles Referred by Age, FY15 ........................................................................... 7 1.4 Juveniles Referred by Race, FY15 .......................................................................... 8 1.5 Juveniles Referred by Education Status, FY15 ......................................................... 8 1.6 Juveniles Referred by Number of Prior Referrals, FY15 ............................................ 8 1.7 Juveniles Referred by Severity of Most Serious Offense, FY15 .................................. 8 1.8 Juveniles Referred by Offense Class of Most Serious Offense, FY15 .......................... 8 Graph: Referrals, Five Year Trend ............................................................................... 9 1.9 Top Ten Referral Categories ................................................................................. 9 1.10 Juveniles Referred by County and Gender, FY15 ..................................................10 1.11 Juveniles Referred by County and Age, FY15 .......................................................10 1.12 Juveniles Referred by County and Race, FY15 ......................................................11 DETENTION 2.1 Juveniles Detained by County, FY15 .....................................................................13 2.2 Juveniles Detained by Gender, FY15 .....................................................................13 2.3 Juveniles Detained by Age, FY15 ..........................................................................14 2.4 Juveniles Detained by Race, FY15 ........................................................................14 2.5 Juveniles Detained by Education Status, FY15 .......................................................14 2.6 Juveniles Detained by Number of Prior Referrals, FY15 ...........................................14 2.7 Juveniles Detained for a Referral by Severity of Most Serious Offense, FY15.............14 2.8 Juveniles Detained for a Referral by Offense Class of Most Serious Offense, FY15 .....14 2.9 Juveniles Detained by County and Gender, FY15....................................................15 2.10 Juveniles Detained by County and Age, FY15 .......................................................15 2.11 Juveniles Detained by County and Race, FY15 .....................................................16 Graph: Juveniles Detained, Five Year Trend ................................................................16 DIVERSION 3.1 Juveniles Diverted by County, FY15 ......................................................................17 3.2 Juveniles Diverted by Gender, FY15 ......................................................................17 3.3 Juveniles Diverted by Age, FY15 ...........................................................................17 3.4 Juveniles Diverted by Race, FY15 .........................................................................18 3.5 Juveniles Diverted by Education Status, FY15 ........................................................18 3.6 Juveniles Diverted by Number of Prior Referrals, FY15 ...........................................18 3.7 Juveniles Diverted by Severity of Most Serious Offense, FY15 .................................18 3.8 Juveniles Diverted by Offense Class, FY15 .............................................................18 3.9 Juveniles Diverted by County and Gender, FY15 ....................................................19 3.10 Juveniles Diverted by County and Age, FY15 .......................................................19 3.11 Juveniles Diverted by County and Race, FY15 ......................................................20 Graph: Five Year Trend .............................................................................................20 ii PETITIONS 4.1 Juveniles Petitioned by County, FY15 ....................................................................21 4.2 Juveniles Petitioned by Gender, FY15....................................................................21 4.3 Juveniles Petitioned by Age, FY15 ........................................................................21 4.4 Juveniles Petitioned by Race, FY15 .......................................................................22 4.5 Juveniles Petitioned by Education Status, FY15 ......................................................22 4.6 Juveniles Petitioned by Number of Prior Referrals, FY15 .........................................22 4.7 Juveniles Petitioned by Severity of Most Serious Offense, FY15 ...............................22 4.8 Juveniles Petitioned by Offense Class, FY15 ..........................................................22 4.9 Juveniles Petitioned by County and Gender, FY15 ..................................................23 4.10 Juveniles Petitioned by County and Age, FY15 .....................................................23 4.11 Juveniles Petitioned by County and Race, FY15 ....................................................24 Graph: Petitions, Five Year Trend...............................................................................24 DISMISSALS 5.1 Juveniles with Dismissals by County, FY15 ............................................................25 5.2 Juveniles with Dismissals by Gender, FY15 ............................................................25 5.3 Juveniles with Dismissals by Age, FY15 .................................................................25 5.4 Juveniles with Dismissals by Race, FY15 ...............................................................26 5.5 Juveniles with Dismissals by Education Status, FY15 ..............................................26 5.6 Juveniles with Dismissals by Number of Prior Referrals, FY15 ..................................26 5.7 Juveniles with Dismissals by Severity of Most Serious Offense, FY15........................26 5.8 Juveniles with Dismissals by Offense Class, FY15 ...................................................26 5.9 Juveniles with Dismissals by County and Gender, FY15...........................................27 5.10 Juveniles with Dismissals by County and Age, FY15 ..............................................27 5.11 Juveniles with Dismissals by County and Race, FY15 ............................................28 Graph: Dismissals, Five Year Trend ............................................................................28 PENALTY ONLY 6.1 Juveniles Disposed to Penalty Only by County, FY15 ..............................................29 6.2 Juveniles Disposed to Penalty Only by Gender, FY15 ..............................................29 6.3 Juveniles Disposed to Penalty Only by Age, FY15 ...................................................29 6.4 Juveniles Disposed to Penalty Only by Race, FY15 .................................................30 6.5 Juveniles Disposed to Penalty Only by Education Status, FY15 ................................30 6.6 Juveniles Disposed to Penalty Only by Number of Prior Referrals, FY15 ....................30 6.7 Juveniles Disposed to Penalty Only by Severity of Most Serious Offense, FY15..........30 6.8 Juveniles Disposed to Penalty Only by Offense Class, FY15 .....................................30 6.9 Juveniles Disposed to Penalty Only by County and Gender, FY15 ............................31 6.10 Juveniles Disposed to Penalty Only by County and Age, FY15 ................................31 6.11 Juveniles Disposed to Penalty Only by County and Race, FY15 ..............................32 Graph: Penalty Only, Five Year Trend .........................................................................32 STANDARD PROBATION 7.1 Standard Probation by County, FY15 ....................................................................33 7.2 Standard Probation by Gender, FY15 ....................................................................33 7.3 Standard Probation by Age, FY15 .........................................................................33 7.4 Standard Probation by Race, FY15 ........................................................................34 7.5 Standard Probation by Education Status, FY15 ......................................................34 7.6 Standard Probation by Number of Prior Referrals, FY15 ..........................................34 7.7 Standard Probation by Severity of Most Serious Offense, FY15 ................................34 7.8 Standard Probation by Offense Class, FY15 ...........................................................34 7.9 Standard Probation by County and Gender, FY15 ...................................................35 7.10 Standard Probation by County and Age, FY15 ......................................................35 7.11 Standard Probation by County and Race, FY15 ....................................................36 Graph: Standard Probation, Five Year Trend ...............................................................36 INTENSIVE PROBATION (JIPS) 8.1 JIPS by County, FY15 ..........................................................................................37 8.2 JIPS by Gender, FY15 ..........................................................................................37 8.3 JIPS by Age, FY15 ...............................................................................................37 iii 8.4 JIPS by Race, FY15 .............................................................................................38 8.5 JIPS by Education Status, FY15 ............................................................................38 8.6 JIPS by Number of Prior Referrals, FY15 ...............................................................38 8.7 JIPS by Severity of Most Serious Offense, FY15 .....................................................38 8.8 JIPS by Offense Class, FY15.................................................................................38 8.9 JIPS by Gender by County, FY15 ..........................................................................39 8.10 JIPS by Age by County, FY15 .............................................................................39 8.11 JIPS by Race by County, FY15 ............................................................................40 Graph: Intensive Probation, Five Year Trend ...............................................................40 JUVENILE CORRECTIONS (ADJC) 9.1 Juvenile Corrections by County, FY15 ...................................................................41 9.2 Juvenile Corrections by Gender, FY15 ...................................................................41 9.3 Juvenile Corrections by Age, FY15 ........................................................................42 9.4 Juvenile Corrections by Race, FY15.......................................................................42 9.5 Juvenile Corrections by Education Status, FY15 .....................................................42 9.6 Juvenile Corrections by Number of Prior Referrals, FY15 .........................................42 9.7 Juvenile Corrections by Severity of Most Serious Offense, FY15 ...............................42 9.8 Juvenile Corrections by Offense Class, FY15 ..........................................................42 9.9 Juvenile Corrections by County and Gender, FY15 ..................................................43 9.10 Juvenile Corrections by County and Age, FY15 .....................................................43 9.11 Juvenile Corrections by County and Race, FY15 ...................................................44 Graph: Arizona Dept. of Juvenile Corrections, Five Year Trend ......................................44 ADJC & AOC COMPARISON 10.1 Commitments FY15 ...........................................................................................45 10.2 Commitments FY14 ...........................................................................................46 Graph: Juveniles with Original Commitments to ADJC, Five Year Trend .........................46 PATHWAYS TO ADULT COURT 11.1 Pathways to Adult Court, FY15 ...........................................................................47 11.2 Pathways to Adult Court by County, FY15............................................................47 DIRECT FILINGS IN ADULT COURT 11.3 Direct Filings by County, FY15 ............................................................................48 11.4 Direct Filings by Gender, FY15............................................................................48 11.5 Direct Filings by Age, FY15 ................................................................................49 11.6 Direct Filings by Race, FY15 ...............................................................................49 11.7 Direct Filings by Education Status, FY15 ..............................................................49 11.8 Direct Filings by Number of Prior Referrals, FY15 .................................................49 11.9 Direct Filings by Severity of Most Serious Offense, FY15 .......................................49 11.10 Direct Filings by Offense Class, FY15 .................................................................49 11.11 Direct Filings by County and Gender, FY15 ........................................................50 11.12 Direct Filings by County and Age, FY15 .............................................................50 11.13 Direct Filings by County and Race, FY15 ............................................................51 Graph: Juveniles Direct Filed to Adult Court, Five Year Trend .......................................51 TRANSFERRED TO ADULT COURT 11.14 Transferred by County, FY15 ............................................................................52 11.15 Transferred by Gender, FY15............................................................................52 11.16 Transferred by Age, FY15 ................................................................................53 11.17 Transferred by Race, FY15 ...............................................................................53 11.18 Transferred by Education Status, FY15 ..............................................................53 11.19 Transferred by Number of Prior Referrals, FY15 .................................................53 11.20 Transferred by Severity of Most Serious Offense, FY15 .......................................53 11.21 Transferred by Offense Class, FY15...................................................................53 11.22 Transferred by County and Gender, FY15 ..........................................................54 11.23 Transferred by County and Age, FY15 ...............................................................54 11.24 Transferred by County and Race, FY15..............................................................55 Graph: Juveniles Transferred to Adult Court, Five Year Trend .......................................55 iv GENDER 12.1 Gender by Court Stage, FY15 .............................................................................57 12.2 Average Age at First Referral, FY15 ....................................................................57 12.3 Gender by Severity of the Most Serious Referral Offense, FY15 .............................57 12.4 Gender by Offense Class ....................................................................................58 12.5 Juveniles Who Received Court Funded Treatment, FY15 .......................................58 12.6 Treatment Expenditures by Category Percentage of Total Dollars Spent ................58 Graph: Juveniles Referred by Gender .........................................................................58 NOTES & GLOSSARY Notes ......................................................................................................................59 Glossary ..................................................................................................................62 v This page was intentionally left blank. vi FY 2015 Introduction & Trends Arizona’s Juvenile Court Counts ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY15 INTRODUCTION AND TRENDS The Juvenile Justice Services Division’s Research and Information Unit is pleased to present the fifth edition of Arizona’s Juvenile Court Counts. Prior to fiscal year 2011, statistics were presented in a series entitled Juveniles Processed in the Arizona Court System, which ran from 1993 to 2010. Both publications have utilized the same methodology to ensure statistics are comparable across time. Statistics provided are for youth 8 to 17 years old whom have been processed through the juvenile system for either delinquent or incorrigible acts. In Arizona, the Superior Court exercises jurisdiction over these juveniles, and while exercising such jurisdiction, sits as a Juvenile Court. Children under the age of eight are considered dependent regardless of the nature of the act committed and individuals 18 and older are considered adults (A.R.S. §8-201.13), therefore these two categories of offenders are not included in this publication. Currently, information on delinquent and incorrigible youth are maintained in two case management systems – Juvenile Online Tracking System (JOLTS) and the integrated Court Information System (iCIS). Maricopa County uses iCIS and the remaining fourteen counties use JOLTS. However, Pima County recently transitioned to an upgraded version of JOLTS (JOLTSaz) on July 1, 2013. Various departments and staff members input data into these systems and each juvenile court actively participates in maintaining the data to ensure its quality and accuracy. Data from these systems were extracted in November 2015 and used to calculate statistics for this edition. Due to ongoing quality assurance and data conversion between systems, some tables include an “unknown” category to account for missing data or records with data entry errors. For this extract, data from JOLTSaz were formatted and coded to mirror data from JOLTS. In last year’s edition, racial and ethnic data had not yet been reformatted and coded. As a result, statistics on race from FY14 are not comparable to this edition. Included in the data extraction were data on all juveniles who were processed through any court stage during fiscal year 2015 (FY15), July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2015. Each section of this publication provides statistics on each of these court stages, which are as follows:       Referral Detention Diversion Petition Dismissal Penalty Only       Standard Probation Juvenile Intensive Probation Supervision (JIPS) Juvenile Corrections Direct File to Adult Court Transfer to Adult Court Juvenile Females (Special Topic Section) Statistics provided are cross-sectional in design. Therefore, statistics are not reflective of case processing start to finish for individual youth, but rather a snapshot of the juveniles who experienced each particular stage during the given timeframe. A juvenile may be counted in one or multiple stages or have been counted in a previous fiscal year when processing first began. In addition, youth from the current counts may reappear in next year’s numbers as well, if their case is not resolved until then. Each section starts with the count of juveniles1 who experienced that stage. Each juvenile is counted once. Note, these statistics will diverge from reports that count by case or charge. Next, breakdowns of those juveniles by demographic categories, offense2, and county are provided. In the event the 1 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY15 INTRODUCTION AND TRENDS juvenile had multiple referrals or petitions moving through the court, each variable was measured using the juveniles’ first referral, petition, or disposition falling within the fiscal year. Each section also has a graph showing the five year trend for that stage. Officers from the Juvenile Probation Department conduct risk assessments on youth at various stages, such as intake, diversion, dispositional investigation and report, probation, etc. Assessments are completed with a state approved tool that classifies a juvenile as a low, medium/moderate, or high risk to recidivate. The assessment covers multiple domains and often uses input from the juvenile, parents, school, and other official documents such as school or delinquency records. Currently, risk assessment data is undergoing a conversion and is not available for this edition. On the pages that follow, several charts and graphs are included to provide an overview of how juveniles are processed through the system as well as to illustrate current trends. The Arizona Juvenile Court Activities graph on page 4 provides duplicated and unduplicated counts of juveniles at each stage. Since a juvenile may receive more than one referral in a given year and each referral may or may not have the same disposition, the number of referrals and the number of juveniles at each stage will not be the same. A population projection graph is provided on page 4 to illustrate the increasing number of youth residing in Arizona who are within the Juvenile Court’s age of jurisdiction. The next graph on page 5 shows trends for referrals, juveniles referred, petitions filed and juveniles with petitions filed. The “referrals” figure is the cumulative number of referrals for the year. The “juveniles referred” figure, on the other hand, is the number of unique youth who received those referrals. The same distinction is made between petitions filed (every petition counted) and juveniles with petitions filed (each juvenile counted once regardless of multiple petitions). Overall, the number of referrals and petitions, as well as the number of juveniles from each category, has been decreasing since FY07. The Dispositions graph on page 5 shows the number of juveniles ordered to each disposition over the past five years. The number for each disposition is unduplicated; however, if a youth received more than one disposition during the fiscal year, he or she would be counted once in each disposition category. Each year, standard probation is the most common disposition followed by intensive probation. Disposition to the adult court is consistently the least common outcome. The last graph in this section (page 6) shows the number of juveniles entering adult court through each available pathway. Pathways include judicial transfer, mandatory direct file, mandatory prior conviction direct file, chronic direct file, and discretionary direct file. While the number of juveniles in each pathway is unduplicated, a juvenile may appear in more than one pathway due to multiple petitions taking different pathways. Overall, the number of juveniles in adult court is decreasing. Mandatory direct filings remain the most common pathway to adult court. The least common is transfers. Research on juveniles processed in the Arizona court system is constant. For additional publications and statistical reports from the Arizona Supreme Court’s Juvenile Justice Services Division (JJSD), please visit our website at http://www.azcourts.gov/jjsd. 2 INTRODUCTION AND TRENDS FY15 Juvenile Justice Flow Chart REFER TO OTHER AGENCY DELINQUENT/INCORRIGIBLE ACT ACTION BY POLICE, SCHOOL OR PARENTS COMPLAINT/REFERRAL JUVENILE PROBATION DEPARTMENT DIVERSION PROBATION OFFICER DIRECT FILING TO ADULT COURT DISCRETIONARY OR MANDATORY COUNTY ATTORNEY COMMUNITY JUSTICE COMMITTEE DIVERSION PROGRAM NO PETITION FILED PETITION TRANSFER REQUEST ADVISORY HEARING CONSEQUENCES ADVISORY HEARING SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION TRANSFER HEARING NON-COMPLIANCE ADJUDICATION HEARING DENIED DISMISSED GRANTED ADJUDICATED REMAND TO ADULT COURT DISPOSITION HEARING OTHER SANCTIONS PROBATION 3 NOTE: Adult court processes past transfer/direct filing are not shown here. COMMIT TO ADJC INTRODUCTION AND TRENDS FY15 Arizona Juvenile Court Activity, FY15 Intake: Received by Probation Department 37,411 Referrals 25,467 Juveniles Referrals (Physical) 6,247 Referrals 4,876 Juveniles Diversion 12,950 Referrals 11,793 Juveniles Referrals (Paper) 31,164 Referrals 22,815 Juveniles Petitions Filed 15,076 Petitions 8,954 Juveniles Penalty Only 475 Petitions 428 Juveniles Dismissed 4,659 Petitions 3,774 Juveniles Transferred to Adult Court 12 Petitions 12 Juveniles Standard Probation 6,895 Petitions 4,964 Juveniles Direct Filed in Adult Court 237 Referrals 212 Juveniles ADJC 536 Petitions 374 Juveniles JIPS 2,092 Petitions 1,083 Juveniles 1,190,630 1,167,106 1,142,546 1,117,347 1,091,818 1,067,405 1,046,525 1,030,722 1,020,439 1,011,611 1,002,713 995,172 989,372 984,396 978,784 975,729 969,083 955,973 939,459 924,365 Arizona Juvenile Population Projections Ages 8 - 17 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 Source: Arizona Department of Administration, Office of Employment and Population Statistics 4 INTRODUCTION AND TRENDS FY15 Referrals, Petitions Filed & Juveniles Referred and Petitioned, Fiscal Years 2011-2015 60,000 54,610 50,251 50,000 40,000 43,827 36,639 39,578 29,510 30,000 21,897 20,000 12,805 37,411 33,617 19,602 17,085 11,249 26,991 25,467 15,193 15,076 9,850 9,032 8,954 FY13 FY14 FY15 10,000 0 FY11 Referrals FY12 Juveniles Referred Petitions Juveniles Petitioned Juveniles Disposed to Probation, Intensive Probation, ADJC and Adult Court Fiscal Years 2011-2015 8,000 7,793 6,695 7,000 5,837 6,000 5,000 4,929 4,964 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,449 1,282 1,191 1,089 1,083 1,000 703 584 479 471 374 0 394 FY11 295 FY12 294 FY13 241 FY14 224 FY15 Standard Probation Intensive Probation 5 ADJC Adult Court INTRODUCTION AND TRENDS FY15 Juvenile Pathways to Adult Court Fiscal Years 2011-2015 180 163 161 160 140 128 120 127 121 105 105 100 69 80 60 40 20 70 79 53 27 26 18 17 24 18 FY11 FY12 28 0 Transfer Mandatory 20 21 19 14 16 12 FY13 FY14 Mandatory-Prior Chronic 7 FY15 Discretionary *Charts are updated with current direct file and transfer statistics from Pima County, which altered statewide totals for previous fiscal years. 6 FY 2015 Referral Processing REFERRALS DETENTION DIVERSION ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY15 REFERRALS Statistics provided in this section are on individual youth (unduplicated). For youth who were referred more than once during the fiscal year, information from the first referral is reported. Table 1.1. Juveniles Referred by County, FY15 COUNTY Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Juveniles formally enter the court system when a referral is made. Referrals are submitted to the County Attorney and allege the youth committed a delinquent or incorrigible act. Referrals can be made by police, parents, school officials, probation officers, other agencies or individuals requesting the juvenile court to assume jurisdiction over the youth’s conduct. In order for a referral to be made, the youth must be between 8 and 17 years old. Referrals can be “paper referrals” issued as citations or police reports, or “physical referrals” where the juvenile is arrested by law enforcement. Multiple offenses can be included on a referral. Statistics provided in this section focus on the most serious offense included in the referral. Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma TOTAL COUNT 96 623 597 356 262 105 109 12,839 1,057 471 PERCENT 0.38% 2.45% 2.34% 1.40% 1.03% 0.41% 0.43% 50.41% 4.15% 1.85% 4,620 1,632 310 982 1,408 18.14% 6.41% 1.22% 3.86% 5.53% 25,467 100.00% Table 1.2. Juveniles Referred by Gender, FY15 In 2015, an estimated 939,459 juveniles aged 8 to 17 resided in Arizona. From July 1, 2014 to June 31, 2015, 2.7% of these juveniles were referred to Arizona’s juvenile courts. This figure translates to a ratio of roughly 1 in every 37 juveniles being referred. Lastly, these 25,467 juveniles generated 37,411 referrals, which is an average of almost 1.5 referrals per juvenile in the given year. Male Female 16,910 8,557 66.40% 33.60% TOTAL 25,467 100.00% Table 1.3. Juveniles Referred by Age, FY15 AGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Unknown As shown in Table 1.1, the majority of referrals originate from Maricopa County. Most of the referred juveniles were male, in their late teens, and White. In addition, most referred juveniles had no prior referrals on record and were referred for a misdemeanor offense. TOTAL 7 COUNT 127 184 263 499 1,054 2,017 3,403 4,762 5,793 7,159 206 PERCENT 0.50% 0.72% 1.03% 1.96% 4.14% 7.92% 13.36% 18.70% 22.75% 28.11% 0.81% 25,467 100.00% JUVENILES REFERRED IN THE ARIZONA JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 1.4. Juveniles Referred by Race, FY15 RACE Hispanic African American COUNT 8,981 2,867 PERCENT 35.27% 11.26% White Native American Asian/Pacific Islander Other Unknown 11,495 1,399 158 98 469 45.14% 5.49% 0.62% 0.38% 1.84% TOTAL 25,467 100.00% Table 1.5. Juveniles Referred by Education Status, FY15 STATUS COUNT PERCENT Enrolled 14,274 56.05% Not Enrolled Expelled Suspended Withdrawn Graduated GED Program Unknown TOTAL 1,315 72 110 198 101 15 9,382 5.16% 0.28% 0.43% 0.78% 0.40% 0.06% 36.84% 25,467 100.00% Table 1.7. Juveniles Referred by Severity of Offense, FY15 OFFENSE Felonies Against Persons Felonies Against Property Obstruction of Justice, Felony & Misdemeanor Misdemeanors Against Persons Drugs, Felony & Misdemeanor Public Peace, Felony & Misdemeanor Misdemeanors Against Property Status Offense Administrative TOTAL Most Serious COUNT 1,551 1,925 PERCENT 6.09% 7.56% 2,403 2,842 3,812 5,376 3,986 3,200 9.44% 11.16% 14.97% 21.11% 15.65% 12.57% 372 1.46% 25,467 100.00% Table 1.8. Juveniles Referred by Offense Class, FY15 Table 1.6. Juveniles Referred by Number of Prior Referrals, FY15 PRIOR REFERRALS COUNT PERCENT 0 13,782 54.12% 1 4,592 18.03% 2 2,085 8.19% 3 1,232 4.84% 4 889 3.49% 5 645 2.53% 6 445 1.75% 7 344 1.35% 8 or more 1,453 5.71% TOTAL 25,467 OFFENSE CLASS Felony Misdemeanor Violations of Probation & Ordinances Status Other COUNT 8,012 12,490 1,269 3,214 482 PERCENT 31.46% 49.04% 4.98% 12.62% 1.89% TOTAL 25,467 100.00% 100.00% 8 JUVENILES REFERRED IN THE ARIZONA JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 1.9. Top Ten Referral Categories, FY15 OFFENSE CATEGORY Shoplifting-Misdemeanor Probation Violation COUNT 3,940 3,629 Assault (Simple) Runaway Disorderly Conduct Alcohol Possession of Drug Paraphernalia Truancy Possession of Marijuana Curfew Violations TOTAL TOP TEN REFERRALS 3,309 2,736 2,450 2,240 1,999 1,885 1,824 1,485 25,497 TOTAL OF ALL REFERRALS 37,411 PERCENT 10.53% 9.70% 8.84% 7.31% 6.55% 6.00% 6.61% 5.04% 4.88% 3.97% 68.15% 100.00% Referrals, Five Year Trend 60,000 54,610 50,251 50,000 40,000 43,827 36,639 39,578 37,411 33,617 29,510 30,000 26,991 25,467 FY14 FY15 20,000 10,000 0 FY11 FY12 FY13 Juveniles 9 Referrals JUVENILES REFERRED IN THE ARIZONA JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 1.10. Juveniles Referred by County and Gender, FY15 COUNTY Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma STATEWIDE TOTALS MALE COUNT 60 389 402 228 PERCENT 62.50% 62.44% 67.34% 64.04% FEMALE COUNT 36 234 195 128 PERCENT 37.50% 37.56% 32.66% 35.96% 164 75 72 8,692 690 289 3,011 1,123 220 652 843 62.60% 71.43% 66.06% 67.70% 65.28% 61.36% 65.17% 68.81% 70.97% 66.40% 59.87% 98 30 37 4,147 367 182 1,609 509 90 330 565 37.40% 28.57% 33.94% 32.30% 34.72% 38.64% 34.83% 31.19% 29.03% 33.60% 40.13% 16,910 66.40% 8,557 33.60% Tables 1.10 through 1.12 provide statistics on gender, age and race by county. Males account for the majority of referrals in all fifteen counties; however, Yuma had the smallest proportion of males (59.87%) and Greenlee had the greatest proportion (71.43%). In each county, the number of juveniles referred increased with age and, with exception to four counties (La Paz, Pima, Santa Cruz and Yuma), the majority of juveniles were White. Table 1.11. Juveniles Referred by County and Age, FY15 COUNTY Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma TOTAL 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 0 4 3 2 11 0 1 16 5 0 27 0 1 5 3 11 1 1 42 7 2 48 2 8 3 11 1 19 8 57 9 90 18 138 23 132 32 162 0 1 96 623 6 3 4 45 8 0 12 43 2 1 15 0 1 82 14 3 69 9 3 14 12 8 18 5 4 188 19 6 132 24 4 15 39 24 20 7 7 419 51 9 252 51 7 48 63 38 30 10 11 907 99 27 436 124 24 71 94 40 32 19 17 1,672 125 61 635 229 36 125 92 64 37 10 18 2,472 196 110 852 279 51 166 116 86 44 24 26 3,123 231 128 943 390 61 252 165 90 44 28 21 3,861 292 122 1,212 484 114 274 6 0 0 1 2 57 18 3 14 28 7 1 597 356 262 105 109 12,839 1,057 471 4,620 1,632 310 982 40 50 100 112 219 259 214 258 68 1,408 127 184 263 499 1,054 2,017 3,403 4,762 5,793 7,159 206 25,467 10 UNKNOWN TOTAL % OF TOTAL 0.38% 2.45% 2.34% 1.40% 1.03% 0.41% 0.43% 50.41% 4.15% 1.85% 18.14% 6.41% 1.22% 3.86% 5.53% 100.00% JUVENILES REFERRED IN THE ARIZONA JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 1.12. Juveniles Referred by County and Race, FY15 16 265 83 74 AFRICAN AMERICAN 0 35 20 5 Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma 43 38 46 4,065 86 48 2,337 473 280 184 943 TOTAL 8,981 COUNTY Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal HISPANIC 70 309 212 224 NATIVE AMERICAN 6 6 275 29 5 4 5 1,958 33 9 453 270 1 24 45 181 56 3 5,922 890 238 1,488 775 20 732 375 21 0 2 445 37 173 233 97 2 41 32 1 0 0 105 2 0 23 5 2 0 10 0 0 52 40 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 11 7 1 304 8 3 86 12 5 0 3 262 105 109 12,839 1,057 471 4,620 1,632 310 982 1,408 2,867 11,495 1,399 158 98 469 25,467 100.00% WHITE 11 ASIAN/PI OTHER UNKNOWN TOTAL 3 1 4 2 0 2 2 0 1 5 1 22 96 623 597 356 % OF TOTAL 0.38% 2.45% 2.34% 1.40% 1.03% 0.41% 0.43% 50.41% 4.15% 1.85% 18.14% 6.41% 1.22% 3.86% 5.53% JUVENILES REFERRED IN THE ARIZONA JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM FY15 This page was intentionally left blank. 12 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY15 DETENTION three counties (Apache, Greenlee and La Paz) are transported to other jurisdictions (Navajo, Graham and Yuma respectively) when secure custody is needed. These juveniles appear in the originating county’s data as well as in the data of the county detained. Additionally, some counties have entered into contracts and/or agreements with federal agencies, tribal courts, or other state agencies to house juveniles. Statistics provided in this section are on individual youth (unduplicated). For youth who were detained more than once during the fiscal year, information from the first instance is reported. Some juveniles are arrested by law enforcement at the scene of the crime, or shortly thereafter, and taken to a detention facility. Juvenile detention is the temporary confinement of a juvenile in a physically restrictive facility surrounded by a locked and secure barrier with restricted ingress and egress. In Arizona, a juvenile may only be detained if certain criteria outlined in Rule 23D are met. Rule 23D states a juvenile may only be detained if there is probable cause to believe the juvenile committed acts alleged in the petition, and: In FY15, 5,211 juveniles were detained at least once. Roughly 3,128 (60%) of these juveniles were detained as a result of a referral, the others were detained as a result of court holds, warrants, probation consequences, or for another jurisdiction. Juveniles who were detained by a physical referral (arrest) represent 20% of the juvenile referred. Over the past few years, the number of juveniles detained has steadily decreased despite population increases. 1. The juvenile would not be present at any hearing; or 2. The juvenile is likely to commit an offense injurious to himself or others; or 3. The juvenile must be held for another jurisdiction; 4. The interests of the juvenile or the public require custodial protection; or 5. The juvenile must be held if the county attorney is filing criminal prosecution against the juvenile in adult court, pursuant to A.R.S. §13-501. Table 2.1. Juveniles Detained by County, FY15 Juveniles may also be held in detention as a consequence or condition of probation. Juvenile detention provides a range of services to support the juvenile's physical, emotional, educational, and social development. Supportive services, at a minimum, include education, recreation, nutrition, medical and health services, visitation, communication, and continuous supervision. Juvenile detention also provides for clinical observation and assessment. Juvenile detention centers must be separate from the adult jail, which is a responsibility vested with the counties. Twelve of Arizona’s fifteen counties maintain juvenile detention facilities, also referred to as secure care. Juveniles from the remaining COUNTY Apache Cochise Coconino Gila COUNT 53 107 254 57 PERCENT 1.02% 2.05% 4.87% 1.09% Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma 90 23 10 2,551 231 172 463 308 98 336 458 1.73% 0.44% 0.19% 48.95% 4.43% 3.30% 8.89% 5.91% 1.88% 6.45% 8.79% TOTAL 5,211 100.00% Table 2.2. Juveniles Detained by Gender, FY15 13 Male Female 4,049 1,162 77.70% 22.30% TOTAL 5,211 100.00% JUVENILES DETAINED IN THE ARIZONA JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 2.3. Juveniles Detained by Age, FY15 AGE 8 9 COUNT 1 4 PERCENT 0.02% 0.08% 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Unknown 12 37 98 245 548 959 1,383 1,905 19 0.23% 0.71% 1.88% 4.70% 10.52% 18.40% 26.54% 36.56% 0.36% TOTAL 5,211 100.00% Table 2.4. Juveniles Detained by Race, FY15 RACE Hispanic African American White Native American Asian/Pacific Islander Other Unknown TOTAL COUNT 2,072 712 1,926 439 PERCENT 39.76% 13.66% 36.96% 8.42% 24 16 22 0.46% 0.31% 0.42% 5,211 100.00% Table 2.6. Juveniles Detained for a Referral by Number of Prior Referrals, FY15 PRIOR REFERRALS COUNT PERCENT 0 805 25.74% 1 421 13.46% 2 360 11.51% 3 274 8.76% 4 5 6 7 8 or more TOTAL 235 155 151 126 601 7.51% 4.96% 4.83% 4.03% 19.21% 3,128 100.00% Table 2.7. Juveniles Detained for a Referral by Severity of Most Serious Offense, FY15 OFFENSE COUNT PERCENT Felonies Against Persons 810 25.90% Felonies Against Property 385 12.31% Obstruction of Justice, Felony & Misdemeanor 650 20.78% Misdemeanors Against Persons 319 10.20% Drugs, Felony & Misdemeanor 377 12.05% Public Peace, Felony & Misdemeanor 348 11.13% Misdemeanors Against Property 146 4.67% Status Offense Administrative TOTAL Table 2.5. Juveniles Detained by Education Status, FY15 STATUS COUNT PERCENT Enrolled 1,745 33.49% Not Enrolled 359 6.89% Expelled 24 0.46% Suspended 38 0.73% Withdrawn 40 0.77% Graduated 23 0.44% GED Program 7 0.13% Unknown 2,975 57.09% TOTAL 5,211 36 57 1.15% 1.82% 3,128 100.00% Table 2.8. Juveniles Detained for a Referral by Offense Class, FY15 OFFENSE CLASS COUNT PERCENT Felony Misdemeanor Violations of Probation & Ordinances Status Other 1,736 872 464 37 19 55.50% 27.88% 14.83% 1.18% 0.61% TOTAL 3,128 100.00% 100.00% 14 JUVENILES DETAINED IN THE ARIZONA JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 2.9. Juveniles Detained by County and Gender, FY15 MALE COUNT COUNTY Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma STATEWIDE TOTALS FEMALE COUNT PERCENT PERCENT 32 85 178 48 70 19 9 2,041 168 126 372 252 60% 79% 70% 84% 78% 83% 90% 80% 73% 73% 80% 82% 21 22 76 9 20 4 1 510 63 46 91 56 40% 21% 30% 16% 22% 17% 10% 20% 27% 27% 20% 18% 70 251 328 71% 75% 72% 28 85 130 29% 25% 28% 4,049 77.70% 1,162 22.30% In Tables 2.9 through 2.11, county breakdowns by gender, age, and race are presented. In each county, the majority of detained juveniles were males in their late teens. The most frequent racial category varied by county. For most counties, the greatest number of detained youth were White. Table 2.10. Juveniles Detained by County and Age, FY15 COUNTY Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma TOTAL 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 10 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 1 11 2 3 5 1 3 0 0 9 0 12 1 1 6 1 6 13 5 5 22 6 7 14 4 15 36 3 16 15 10 23 48 14 16 16 10 24 59 20 19 17 20 36 77 12 20 1 2 1 0 4 6 0 0 44 5 3 6 2 1 7 15 1 1 92 18 13 11 13 2 17 32 2 1 247 30 13 56 29 7 31 58 5 3 447 38 38 80 62 17 65 93 7 2 703 54 43 124 87 29 94 108 8 3 994 85 61 182 113 42 112 140 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 3 1 4 12 37 98 245 548 959 1,383 1,905 15 UNKNOWN 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 11 0 0 2 1 0 0 3 19 TOTAL % OF TOTAL 53 1.02% 107 2.05% 254 4.87% 57 1.09% 90 1.73% 23 10 2,551 231 172 463 308 98 336 458 0.44% 0.19% 48.95% 4.43% 3.30% 8.89% 5.91% 1.88% 6.45% 8.79% 5,211 100.00% JUVENILES DETAINED IN THE ARIZONA JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 2.11. Juveniles Detained by County and Race, FY15 COUNTY Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma TOTAL 11 49 40 16 17 5 2 1,044 AFRICAN AMERICAN 0 6 14 0 3 0 1 529 30 17 245 133 88 71 304 2,072 HISPANIC 39 51 82 31 57 15 3 812 NATIVE AMERICAN 1 1 116 6 12 0 0 131 8 4 57 54 1 12 23 183 77 126 98 8 237 107 8 72 32 23 1 16 20 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 712 1,926 439 24 WHITE ASIAN/PI OTHER UNKNOWN TOTAL 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 1 0 0 4 10 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 3 0 10 0 2 3 53 107 254 57 90 23 10 2,551 % OF TOTAL 1.02% 2.05% 4.87% 1.09% 1.73% 0.44% 0.19% 48.95% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 231 172 463 308 98 336 458 4.43% 3.30% 8.89% 5.91% 1.88% 6.45% 8.79% 16 22 5,211 100.00% Juveniles Detained, Five Year Trend 9,000 8,340 7,641 8,000 6,610 7,000 5,952 6,000 5,211 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 FY11 FY12 FY13 Note: The vertical axis does not start at zero. 16 FY14 FY15 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY15 DIVERSION Statistics provided in this section are for individual youth (unduplicated). For youth who were diverted more than once during the fiscal year, information from the first instance is reported. Table 3.1. Juveniles Diverted by County, FY15 Diversion is an alternative available to some juvenile offenders to avoid prosecution. Through diversion, a juvenile is given the opportunity to admit to the allegations contained in the referral and receive a consequence in lieu of the formal court process. Consequences can include unpaid community service work, fines or restitution, educational programming, rehabilitative programming, or counseling. If the juvenile successfully completes diversion, his/her obligation to the state (and victim when applicable) is satisfied and a petition is not filed. The outcome cannot be used against the juvenile in any further proceedings and there is no adjudication of incorrigibility or delinquency. If the juvenile is noncompliant with diversion, the referral is sent back to the County Attorney who may then decide to file a petition. COUNTY Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo COUNT 17 362 274 182 78 25 49 5,937 403 83 PERCENT 0.14% 3.07% 2.32% 1.54% 0.66% 0.21% 0.42% 50.34% 3.42% 0.70% Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma 2,511 764 99 515 494 21.29% 6.48% 0.84% 4.37% 4.19% 11,793 100.00% TOTAL Table 3.2. Juveniles Diverted by Gender, FY15 Male Female The County Attorney has sole discretion to divert prosecution and determine which offenses are eligible for diversion. The County Attorney or Juvenile Court may establish the community-based alternative programs used for diversion. A.R.S. §8321 provides the statutory authority and requirements for diversion and are briefly summarized in the Notes section.3 TOTAL 7,216 4,577 61.19% 38.81% 11,793 100.00% Table 3.3. Juveniles Diverted by Age, FY15 AGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Unknown In FY15, there were 11,793 juveniles diverted in Arizona’s juvenile justice system. Over the last five years, the number of juveniles being diverted declined 31.1%, which coincides with the 30.5% decline in referrals. Of the juveniles diverted in FY15, 70.65% had no prior referrals and 60.38% had a misdemeanor as the most serious offense. As shown in Table 3.1, the majority of diverted juveniles originate from Maricopa County. In addition, most diverted juveniles are male, in their late teens, and White. The majority are also enrolled in school. TOTAL 17 COUNT 69 93 140 PERCENT 0.59% 0.79% 1.19% 284 646 1,208 2,007 2,455 2,641 2,244 6 2.41% 5.48% 10.24% 17.02% 20.82% 22.39% 19.03% 0.05% 11,793 100.00% JUVENILES DIVERTED IN THE ARIZONA JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 3.4. Juveniles Diverted by Race, FY15 RACE Hispanic African American COUNT 4,262 1,236 PERCENT 36.14% 10.48% White Native American Asian/Pacific Islander Other Unknown 5,395 557 81 47 215 45.75% 4.72% 0.69% 0.40% 1.82% 11,793 100.00% TOTAL Table 3.5. Juveniles Diverted by Education Status, FY15 STATUS COUNT PERCENT Enrolled 8,210 69.62% Not Enrolled Expelled Suspended Withdrawn Graduated GED Program Unknown TOTAL 329 15 29 36 31 3 3,140 2.79% 0.13% 0.25% 0.31% 0.26% 0.03% 26.63% 11,793 100.00% Table 3.7. Juveniles Diverted by Severity of Most Serious Offense, FY15 OFFENSE* COUNT Felonies Against Persons 142 Felonies Against Property 351 Obstruction of Justice, Felony & Misdemeanor 234 Misdemeanors Against Persons 1,517 Drugs, Felony & Misdemeanor 2,165 Public Peace, Felony & Misdemeanor 2,494 Misdemeanors Against Property 3,154 Status Offense 1,696 Administrative TOTAL PERCENT 1.20% 2.98% 1.98% 12.86% 18.36% 21.15% 26.74% 14.38% 40 0.34% 11,793 100.00% *Offense alleged at the time of the referral. Table 3.8. Juveniles Diverted by Offense Class, FY15 Table 3.6. Juveniles Diverted by Number of Prior Referrals, FY15 PRIOR REFERRALS COUNT PERCENT 0 8,332 70.65% 1 2,290 19.42% 2 678 5.75% 3 238 2.02% 4 110 0.93% 5 43 0.36% 6 23 0.20% 7 23 0.20% 8 or more 56 0.47% TOTAL 11,793 OFFENSE CLASS Felony Misdemeanor Violations of Probation & Ordinances Status Other TOTAL 100.00% 18 COUNT 2,725 7,120 206 1,696 46 PERCENT 23.11% 60.37% 1.75% 14.38% 0.39% 11,793 100.00% JUVENILES DIVERTED IN THE ARIZONA JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 3.9. Juveniles Diverted by County and Gender, FY15 MALE COUNT COUNTY Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma STATEWIDE TOTALS FEMALE COUNT PERCENT PERCENT 13 211 173 107 44 17 28 76.47% 58.29% 63.14% 58.79% 56.41% 68.00% 57.14% 4 151 101 75 34 8 21 23.53% 41.71% 36.86% 41.21% 43.59% 32.00% 42.86% 3,681 234 39 1,535 481 67 327 259 62.00% 58.06% 46.99% 61.15% 62.96% 67.68% 63.50% 52.43% 2,256 169 44 976 283 32 188 235 38.00% 41.94% 53.01% 38.85% 37.04% 32.32% 36.50% 47.57% 7,216 61.19% 4,577 38.81% In Tables 3.9 through 3.11 county specific breakouts are presented. Navajo had the smallest proportion of diverted male juveniles (47%), while Apache had the greatest proportion (76%). For all the counties, the majority of diverted juveniles were older teenagers. In most counties, White was the most frequent racial category. Table 3.10. Juveniles Diverted by County and Age, FY15 COUNTY 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Apache Cochise Coconino 0 2 2 0 1 3 2 5 0 2 9 5 0 12 25 1 35 35 3 56 48 3 84 42 6 81 47 0 77 67 0 0 0 17 362 274 Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma 2 4 0 0 9 2 0 10 1 2 2 33 0 4 1 0 24 3 0 18 3 0 3 33 0 7 0 0 40 7 0 39 5 1 4 30 5 5 1 2 108 12 1 82 14 1 7 30 15 10 2 6 254 27 2 173 31 3 28 58 18 12 2 6 572 44 4 289 74 9 42 65 26 8 4 8 1,047 63 20 404 132 18 87 83 27 13 2 6 1,355 86 13 495 145 23 96 65 44 6 7 9 1,441 91 23 485 198 23 128 52 45 9 6 12 1,086 68 20 515 160 19 118 42 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 3 182 78 25 49 5,937 403 83 2,511 764 99 515 494 TOTAL 69 93 140 284 646 1,208 2,007 2,455 2,641 2,244 6 11,793 19 UNKNOWN TOTAL % OF TOTAL 0.14% 3.07% 2.32% 1.54% 0.66% 0.21% 0.42% 50.34% 3.42% 0.70% 21.29% 6.48% 0.84% 4.37% 4.19% 100.00% JUVENILES DIVERTED IN THE ARIZONA JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 3.11. Juveniles Diverted by County and Race, FY15 COUNTY HISPANIC Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa 3 173 45 30 6 12 23 1,916 Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma 29 5 1,292 204 95 100 329 TOTAL 4,262 AFRICAN AMERICAN 0 16 7 2 2 1 2 819 18 0 228 14 169 95 115 64 12 1 2,785 343 43 834 NATIVE AMERICAN 0 1 122 19 1 0 0 195 11 34 105 124 0 11 6 388 2 383 147 42 0 21 6 2 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,236 5,395 557 81 47 WHITE ASIAN/PI OTHER UNKNOWN TOTAL 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 58 0 0 13 0 1 1 0 0 0 23 21 0 2 0 16 5 0 0 143 17 362 274 182 78 25 49 5,937 % OF TOTAL 0.14% 3.07% 2.32% 1.54% 0.66% 0.21% 0.42% 50.34% 1 1 39 4 2 0 2 403 83 2,511 764 99 515 494 3.42% 0.70% 21.29% 6.48% 0.84% 4.37% 4.19% 215 11,793 100.00% Diversion, Five Year Trend 20,000 18,863 17,407 18,000 16,000 14,751 17,109 15,737 14,000 12,000 13,418 10,000 13,436 12,950 12,286 11,793 FY14 FY15 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 FY11 FY12 FY13 Juveniles 20 Referrals FY 2015 Court Processing PETITIONS DISMISSALS PENALTY ONLY STANDARD PROBATION INTENSIVE PROBATION (JIPS) ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY15 PETITIONS Statistics provided in this section are for individual youth (unduplicated). For youth who had more than one petition filed during the fiscal year, information from the first petition is reported. Arizona’s Juvenile Court Counts reports petition data on delinquent and incorrigible youth only. Information on dependent youth can be found in the Administrative Office of the Courts, Dependent Children’s Services Division’s Annual Reports. old and 75% of juveniles petitioned are between 15 and 17 years of age. Table 4.1. Juveniles Petitioned by County, FY15 Only the County Attorney has the authority to send a juvenile case to court by filing a petition. A petition initiates the formal court hearing process by requiring the juvenile and his/her parent/guardian to attend formal hearings before the court to answer the allegations located in the petition. The County Attorney determines which allegations to include in the petition based on the evidence and elements of the alleged act. Petitions counted in this section are for delinquent and incorrigible youth. A youth under the age of eighteen commits a delinquent act if that same act committed by an adult would be a criminal offense. An incorrigible youth commits an offense that would not be considered a crime if he or she were an adult and are often referred to as status offenses. Typically, incorrigible youth are juveniles who are habitually truant from school, have ran away from home, or violated curfew. In addition, juveniles who refuse to obey the reasonable and proper direction of their parents or guardians can be considered incorrigible. COUNTY Apache Cochise COUNT 85 201 PERCENT 0.95% 2.24% Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai 262 166 143 43 23 3,950 360 328 1,275 752 191 435 2.93% 1.85% 1.60% 0.48% 0.26% 44.11% 4.02% 3.66% 14.24% 8.40% 2.13% 4.86% Yuma 740 8.26% TOTAL 8,954 100.00% Table 4.2. Juveniles Petitioned by Gender, FY15 Male Female 6,713 2,241 74.97% 25.03% TOTAL 8,954 100.00% Table 4.3. Juveniles Petitioned by Age, FY15 If a juvenile is taken to detention and held, the filing of a petition must occur within 24 hours of admission to the detention facility (Rule 24B in the Arizona Rules of the Court). When the juvenile is not detained, the petition must be filed within 45 days of receipt of the referral unless time is waived an additional 30 days for further investigation. There were 8,954 juveniles with a petition filed during FY15. The relative rate of juveniles petitioned has been stable, staying around 34% of the juveniles referred. The average age of juveniles receiving a petition is just over 15 years 21 AGE COUNT PERCENT 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Unknown 9 30 51 136 273 638 1,109 1,778 2,326 2,595 9 0.10% 0.34% 0.57% 1.52% 3.05% 7.13% 12.39% 19.86% 25.98% 28.98% 0.10% TOTAL 8,954 100.00% JUVENILES WITH PETITIONS FILED IN THE ARIZONA JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 4.4. Juveniles Petitioned by Race, FY15 RACE Hispanic African American White Native American Asian/Pacific Islander Other Unknown COUNT 3,381 1,206 3,564 677 45 22 59 PERCENT 37.76% 13.47% 39.80% 7.56% 0.50% 0.25% 0.66% TOTAL 8,954 100.00% Table 4.5. Juveniles Petitioned by Education Status, FY15 STATUS COUNT PERCENT Enrolled 4,911 54.85% Not Enrolled 895 10.00% Expelled 55 0.61% Suspended Withdrawn Graduated GED Program Unknown 81 146 53 12 2,801 0.90% 1.63% 0.59% 0.13% 31.28% TOTAL 8,954 100.00% Table 4.7. Juveniles Petitioned by Severity of Most Serious Offense, FY15 OFFENSE COUNT PERCENT Felonies Against Persons 1,079 12.05% Felonies Against Property 1,489 16.63% Obstruction of Justice, Felony & Misdemeanor 1,975 22.06% Misdemeanors Against Persons 947 10.58% Drugs, Felony & Misdemeanor 1,318 17.72% Public Peace, Felony & Misdemeanor 1,023 11.43% Misdemeanors Against Property 866 9.67% Status Offense Administrative TOTAL 222 35 2.48% 0.39% 8,954 100.00% Table 4.8. Juveniles Petitioned by Offense Class, FY15 Table 4.6. Juveniles Petitioned by Number of Prior Referrals, FY15 PRIOR REFERRALS COUNT PERCENT 0 2,708 30.24% 1 1,504 16.80% 2 1,083 12.10% 3 825 9.21% 4 606 6.77% 5 481 5.37% 6 360 4.02% 7 8 or more 278 1,109 3.10% 12.39% TOTAL 8,954 100.00% OFFENSE CLASS Felony Misdemeanor Violations of Probation & Ordinances Status Other COUNT 4,331 3,211 993 246 173 PERCENT 48.37% 35.86% 11.09% 2.75% 1.93% TOTAL 8,954 100.00% 22 JUVENILES WITH PETITIONS FILED IN THE ARIZONA JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 4.9. Juveniles Petitioned by County and Gender, FY15 COUNTY MALE COUNT PERCENT FEMALE COUNT PERCENT 58 146 180 119 99 68.24% 72.64% 68.70% 71.69% 69.23% 27 55 82 47 44 31.76% 27.36% 31.30% 28.31% 30.77% 31 21 3,094 273 218 950 567 138 321 498 72.09% 91.30% 78.33% 75.83% 66.46% 74.51% 75.40% 72.25% 73.79% 67.30% 12 2 856 87 110 325 185 53 114 242 27.91% 8.70% 21.67% 24.17% 33.54% 25.49% 24.60% 27.75% 26.21% 32.70% 6,713 74.97% 2,241 25.03% Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma STATEWIDE TOTALS In Tables 4.9 through 4.11, gender, age, and race are presented by county. In all of the counties, the majority of juveniles with a petition filed were males in their late teens. In most counties, White was the most frequent racial category. Table 4.10. Juveniles Petitioned by County and Age, FY15 COUNTY Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 UNKNOWN 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 3 4 0 1 0 3 2 2 0 2 2 4 0 0 13 6 1 3 4 4 2 11 0 0 48 2 4 1 7 9 6 9 0 1 120 18 7 6 23 26 19 22 5 2 231 41 20 6 26 44 21 20 8 2 431 48 35 20 43 46 40 20 6 4 730 64 73 22 45 63 45 28 12 10 1,052 98 109 25 50 68 27 25 12 3 1,325 77 76 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 3 3 26 30 93 175 254 324 365 2 1,275 Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma 1 1 6 0 7 0 11 0 17 3 67 9 107 16 157 28 203 50 176 79 0 5 752 191 0 3 4 2 4 7 8 13 14 31 26 48 53 117 88 205 124 141 114 173 0 0 435 740 8.40% 2.13% 4.86% 8.26% TOTAL 9 30 51 136 273 638 1,109 1,778 2,326 2,595 9 8,954 100.00% Navajo Pima 23 TOTAL % OF TOTAL 0.95% 85 2.24% 201 2.93% 262 1.85% 166 1.60% 143 0.48% 43 0.26% 23 44.11% 3,950 4.02% 360 328 3.66% 14.24% JUVENILES WITH PETITIONS FILED IN THE ARIZONA JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 4.11. Juveniles Petitioned by County and Race, FY15 COUNTY HISPANIC Apache 17 AFRICAN AMERICAN 0 76 28 42 27 8 8 1,459 36 30 646 246 169 Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma TOTAL 60 NATIVE AMERICAN 6 16 14 3 5 1 1 799 9 7 161 148 1 107 80 100 87 29 2 1,442 297 172 380 295 17 1 140 15 19 0 1 188 14 116 77 55 1 1 0 2 1 0 0 27 2 0 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 10 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 5 1 23 2 3 8 6 2 201 262 166 143 43 23 3,950 360 328 1,275 752 191 2.24% 2.93% 1.85% 1.60% 0.48% 0.26% 44.11% 4.02% 3.66% 14.24% 8.40% 2.13% 86 503 9 32 319 177 21 23 0 5 0 0 0 0 435 740 4.86% 8.26% 3,381 1,206 3,564 677 45 22 59 8,954 100.00% WHITE ASIAN/PI OTHER UNKNOWN TOTAL 1 0 1 85 % OF TOTAL 0.95% Petitions, Five Year Trend 25,000 21,897 19,602 20,000 15,000 17,085 15,193 15,076 9,032 8,954 FY14 FY15 12,805 11,249 9,850 10,000 5,000 0 FY11 FY12 FY13 Juveniles 24 Petitions ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY15 DISMISSALS Table 5.1. Juveniles with Dismissals by County, FY15 COUNTY COUNT PERCENT Apache 47 1.25% Cochise 56 1.48% Coconino 143 3.79% Statistics provided in this section are for individual youth (unduplicated). For youth who had more than one dismissal during the fiscal year, information from the first instance is reported. Petitions or charges within a petition can be dismissed by a judge. A dismissal means further consideration or hearings regarding the petition or charge are terminated and no further formal action is taken. Dismissals can be either with prejudice (cannot be refiled) or without prejudice (can be refiled). Dismissal of a petition can occur during the advisory or adjudication stages. It is possible for a petition to be dismissed due to a lack of evidence during either of these hearings. Similarly, a juvenile could have more than one charge/count pending. In this situation, the juvenile's attorney could initiate a process with the County Attorney resulting in dismissal of one charge while receiving a disposition (i.e., penalty only, probation, JIPS, or commitment to ADJC) on another charge. Dismissals can also take place as an agreement in court to extend unfulfilled diversion conditions. Upon completion of the conditions, the dismissal stops any further prosecution. Cases can also be dismissed when transferred to another jurisdiction prior to adjudication or by the County Attorney filing a motion to dismiss due to a victims request, lack of cooperation or availability of witnesses, or unreasonable likelihood of adjudication. Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma 58 42 24 10 1,975 103 86 642 256 46 116 170 1.54% 1.11% 0.64% 0.26% 52.32% 2.73% 2.28% 17.03% 6.78% 1.22% 3.07% 4.50% TOTAL 3,774 100.00% Table 5.2. Juveniles with Dismissals by Gender, FY15 Male 2,739 72.58% Female 1,035 27.42% TOTAL 3,774 100.00% Table 5.3. Juveniles with Dismissals by Age, FY15 In juvenile cases, when a petition is not adjudicated prior to the juvenile’s eighteenth birthday, a dismissal is processed after the eighteenth birthday and a determination is made as to what further action, if any, is to be taken in the case. Only juveniles with a dismissed petition are included in this section. In FY15, roughly 30.9% of petitions filed had a disposition of dismissed, which equates to 12.5% of all referrals. 25 AGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Unknown COUNT 2 16 23 58 105 241 447 655 846 1,207 174 PERCENT 0.05% 0.42% 0.61% 1.54% 2.78% 6.39% 11.84% 17.36% 22.42% 31.98% 4.61% TOTAL 3,774 100.00% JUVENILES WITH PETITIONS DISMISSED IN THE ARIZONA JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 5.4. Juveniles with FY15 RACE Hispanic African American White Native American Asian/Pacific Islander Other Unknown Dismissals by Race, COUNT 1,265 538 1,629 265 19 11 47 PERCENT 33.52% 14.26% 43.16% 7.02% 0.50% 0.29% 1.25% TOTAL 3,774 100.00% Table 5.5. Juveniles with Dismissals by Education Status, FY15 STATUS COUNT PERCENT Enrolled 1,953 51.75% Not Enrolled 345 9.14% Expelled 16 0.42% Suspended 41 1.09% Withdrawn 68 1.80% Graduated 26 0.69% GED Program 3 0.08% Unknown 1,322 35.03% TOTAL 3,774 100.00% Table 5.7. Juveniles with Dismissals by Severity of Most Offense, FY15 OFFENSE COUNT Felonies Against Persons 253 Felonies Against Property 269 Obstruction of Justice, Felony & Misdemeanor 519 Misdemeanors Against Persons 492 Drugs, Felony & Misdemeanor 460 Public Peace, Felony & Misdemeanor 928 Misdemeanors Against Property 504 Status Offense 296 Administrative 53 Serious TOTAL 100.00% 3,774 PERCENT 6.70% 7.13% 13.75% 13.04% 12.19% 24.59% 13.35% 7.84% 1.40% Table 5.8. Juveniles with Dismissals by Offense Class, FY15 Table 5.6. Juveniles with Dismissals by Number of Prior Referrals, FY15 PRIOR REFERRALS COUNT PERCENT 0 1,350 35.77% 1 670 17.75% 2 450 11.92% 3 340 9.01% 4 214 5.67% 5 6 7 8 or more TOTAL 155 130 86 379 4.11% 3.44% 2.28% 10.04% 3,774 100.00% OFFENSE CLASS Felony Misdemeanor Violations of Probation & Ordinances Status Other COUNT 1,074 1,922 421 299 58 PERCENT 28.46% 50.93% 11.16% 7.92% 1.54% TOTAL 3,774 100.00% 26 JUVENILES WITH PETITIONS DISMISSED IN THE ARIZONA JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 5.9. Juveniles with Dismissals by County and Gender, FY15 MALE COUNTY Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma STATEWIDE TOTALS FEMALE COUNT PERCENT COUNT PERCENT 32 38 91 47 26 68.09% 67.86% 63.64% 81.03% 61.90% 15 18 52 11 16 31.91% 32.14% 36.36% 18.97% 38.10% 17 9 1,446 76 55 476 205 29 88 104 70.83% 90.00% 73.22% 73.79% 63.95% 74.14% 80.08% 63.04% 75.86% 61.18% 7 1 529 27 31 166 51 17 28 66 29.17% 10.00% 26.78% 26.21% 36.05% 25.86% 19.92% 36.96% 24.14% 38.82% 2,739 72.58% 1,035 27.42% In Tables 5.9 through 5.11, county specific breakdowns by gender, age, and race are presented. Across all of the counties, the majority of juveniles with dismissals were males in their late teens. White was the most frequent racial category; however, Hispanic and Native American were the leading category in some counties. Table 5.10. Juveniles with Dismissals by County and Age, FY15 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 UNKNOWN Apache Cochise 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 4 6 2 8 15 11 11 12 11 15 1 1 47 56 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 5 2 0 9 1 1 2 1 0 2 3 6 0 1 2 0 50 2 2 25 3 0 6 17 5 11 2 2 97 7 5 49 12 2 11 21 10 8 2 0 233 13 4 82 25 6 9 27 15 6 5 3 322 19 17 111 45 5 10 31 12 7 3 1 471 21 18 150 58 5 22 35 12 1 4 3 714 24 30 174 81 22 41 1 1 1 3 1 59 10 8 38 27 6 7 143 58 42 24 10 1,975 103 86 642 256 46 116 3.79% 1.54% 1.11% 0.64% 0.26% 52.33% 2.73% 2.28% 17.01% 6.78% 1.22% 3.07% Yuma 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 1 5 3 0 19 4 1 10 2 0 3 6 6 11 24 44 24 40 10 170 4.50% TOTAL 2 16 23 58 105 241 447 655 846 1,207 174 3,774 Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai 27 TOTAL % OF TOTAL 1.25% 1.48% COUNTY 100.00% JUVENILES WITH PETITIONS DISMISSED IN THE ARIZONA JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 5.11. Juveniles with Dismissals by County and Race, FY15 COUNTY 7 20 18 12 9 8 4 AFRICAN AMERICAN 0 4 10 1 2 0 0 600 10 6 316 76 38 22 119 1,265 HISPANIC Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma TOTAL 36 32 51 39 22 15 0 NATIVE AMERICAN 4 0 64 4 7 0 0 350 5 3 88 61 1 5 8 891 84 43 187 102 6 85 36 82 4 34 40 16 0 4 6 538 1,629 265 WHITE ASIAN/PI OTHER UNKNOWN TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 1 0 32 0 0 8 47 56 143 58 42 24 10 % OF TOTAL 1.25% 1.48% 3.79% 1.54% 1.11% 0.64% 0.26% 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1,975 103 86 642 256 46 116 170 52.33% 2.73% 2.28% 17.01% 6.78% 1.22% 3.07% 4.50% 19 11 47 3,774 100.00% Dismissals, Five Year Trend 8,000 7,023 7,000 6,688 5,713 6,000 5,000 5,802 4,948 5,386 4,659 4,595 4,000 3,979 3,000 3,774 2,000 1,000 0 FY11 FY12 FY13 Juveniles FY14 Dismissals 28 FY15 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY15 PENALTY ONLY Table 6.1. Juveniles Disposed to Penalty County, FY15 COUNTY COUNT Apache 0 Cochise 19 Coconino 3 Gila 4 Graham 1 Greenlee 0 La Paz 0 Maricopa 135 Mohave 0 Navajo 9 Pima 183 Statistics provided in this section are for individual youth (unduplicated). For youth who received a penalty only disposition more than once during the fiscal year, information from the first instance is reported. Adjudicated juveniles may receive a disposition of penalty only. Penalties may include, but are not limited to, fines, community restitution, and/or participation in various treatment programs. Juveniles with dispositions of penalty only are not assigned to a diversion program nor are they placed on Standard Probation, JIPS, or committed to ADJC. Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma Over the past five years, the number of penalty only dispositions has fluctuated. FY15 had the greatest number of dispositions to penalty only, 428 juveniles. TOTAL Table 6.1 shows the distribution of youth across counties in Arizona. Pima County had the greatest number of penalty only dispositions. The majority of juveniles receiving a penalty only disposition were male, in their late teens, and White. Only by PERCENT 0.00% 4.44% 0.70% 0.93% 0.23% 0.00% 0.00% 31.54% 0.00% 2.10% 42.76% 29 6 1 38 6.78% 1.40% 0.23% 8.88% 428 100.00% Table 6.2. Juveniles Disposed to Penalty Only by Gender, FY15 Male 321 75.00% Female 107 25.00% TOTAL 428 100.00% Table 6.3. Juveniles Disposed to Penalty Only by Age, FY15 AGE COUNT PERCENT 29 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Unknown 0 0 1 2 2 13 22 53 76 238 21 0.00% 0.00% 0.23% 0.47% 0.47% 3.04% 5.14% 12.38% 17.76% 55.61% 4.91% TOTAL 428 100.00% JUVENILES WITH PENALTY ONLY DISPOSITIONS IN ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 6.4. Juveniles Disposed to Penalty Only by Race, FY15 RACE COUNT PERCENT Hispanic 188 43.93% African American 61 14.25% White 151 35.28% Native American 25 5.84% Asian/Pacific Islander 1 0.23% Other 1 0.23% Unknown 1 0.23% TOTAL 428 100.00% Table 6.5. Juveniles Disposed to Penalty Only by Education Status, FY15 STATUS COUNT PERCENT Enrolled 222 51.87% Not Enrolled 45 10.51% Expelled 3 0.70% Suspended 3 0.70% Withdrawn Graduated GED Program Unknown 7 5 2 141 1.64% 1.17% 0.47% 32.94% TOTAL 428 100.00% Table 6.6. Juveniles Disposed to Penalty Only by Number of Prior Referrals, FY15 PRIOR REFERRALS COUNT PERCENT 0 82 19.16% 1 55 12.85% 2 44 10.28% 3 41 9.58% 4 30 7.01% 5 34 7.94% 6 26 6.07% 7 20 4.67% 8 or more 96 22.43% TOTAL 428 Table 6.7. Juveniles Disposed to Penalty Only by Severity of Most Serious Offense, FY15 OFFENSE COUNT PERCENT Felonies Against Persons 26 6.07% Felonies Against Property 29 6.78% Obstruction of Justice, Felony & Misdemeanor 124 28.97% Misdemeanors Against Persons 50 11.68% Drugs, Felony & Misdemeanor 59 13.79% Public Peace, Felony & Misdemeanor 84 19.63% Misdemeanors Against Property 51 11.92% Status Offense 1 0.23% Administrative 4 0.93% TOTAL 428 100.00% Table 6.8. Juveniles Disposed to Penalty Only by Offense Class, FY15 OFFENSE CLASS COUNT PERCENT Felony 113 26.40% Misdemeanor 200 46.73% Violations of Probation & Ordinances 112 26.17% Status 0 0.00% Other 3 0.70% TOTAL 428 100.00% 30 100.00% JUVENILES WITH PENALTY ONLY DISPOSITIONS IN ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 6.9. Juveniles Disposed to Penalty Only by County and Gender, FY15 MALE FEMALE COUNTY COUNT PERCENT COUNT PERCENT Apache 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Cochise 14 73.68% 5 26.32% Coconino 2 66.67% 1 33.33% Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma 2 1 0 0 106 0 7 137 18 5 0 29 50.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 78.52% 0.00% 77.78% 74.86% 62.07% 83.33% 0.00% 76.32% 2 0 0 0 29 0 2 46 11 1 1 9 50.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 21.48% 0.00% 22.22% 25.14% 37.93% 16.67% 100.00% 23.68% STATEWIDE TOTALS 321 75.00% 107 25.00% Tables 6.9 through 6.11 provide county breakdowns by gender, age, and race. Consistent across the counties, males in their late teens accounted for the majority of juveniles with a penalty only disposition. In most counties, White was the most common racial category. Table 6.10. Juveniles Disposed to Penalty Only by County and Age, FY15 COUNTY 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 UNKNOWN TOTAL Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 14 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 19 3 4 % OF TOTAL 0.00% 4.42% 0.70% 0.93% Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 7 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 13 2 0 0 4 1 0 0 9 0 1 30 2 0 1 6 0 0 0 17 0 3 42 2 1 0 8 0 0 0 97 0 4 79 18 5 0 17 0 0 0 8 0 1 10 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 135 0 9 183 29 6 1 38 0.23% 0.00% 0.00% 31.40% 0.00% 2.09% 42.33% 7.21% 1.63% 0.23% 8.84% TOTAL 0 0 1 2 2 13 22 53 76 238 21 428 31 100.00% JUVENILES WITH PENALTY ONLY DISPOSITIONS IN ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 6.11. Juveniles Disposed to Penalty Only by County and Race, FY15 COUNTY HISPANIC Apache 0 6 1 2 AFRICAN AMERICAN 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 48 0 1 86 7 4 1 32 188 Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma TOTAL 0 10 1 1 NATIVE AMERICAN 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 26 0 1 25 7 0 0 0 1 0 0 57 0 2 63 9 1 0 6 0 0 0 3 0 4 9 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 135 0 9 183 29 6 1 38 61 151 25 1 1 1 428 WHITE ASIAN/PI OTHER UNKNOWN TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 3 4 Penalty Only, Five Year Trend 600 510 500 400 373 368 300 344 344 475 440 428 FY14 FY15 242 200 231 100 0 FY11 FY12 FY13 Juveniles Dispositions 32 % OF TOTAL 0.00% 4.44% 0.70% 0.93% 0.23% 0.00% 0.00% 31.54% 0.00% 2.10% 42.76% 6.78% 1.40% 0.23% 8.88% 100.00% ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY15 STANDARD PROBATION liberty restrictions, including detention, placement on JIPS, or commitment to the ADJC. In FY15, 4,964 juveniles were given a disposition of standard probation. Statistics provided in this section are for individual youth (unduplicated). For youth who were placed on standard probation more than once during the fiscal year, information from the first instance is reported. After adjudication, a juvenile may receive a disposition to probation. Probation allows the juvenile to remain in the community contingent on compliance with court ordered conditions. The core tenets of juvenile probation are: protection of the community, the belief that youth can make positive changes in their behavior, fostering lawabiding behavior, restitution to victims and society for the wrongs committed against them, preservation of the best interest of the child, and stability of the family unit. Table 7.1. Standard Probation by County, FY15 Each juvenile on probation receives a treatment plan addressing their individual risks and needs. However, standard conditions apply to all probation cases, which include such things as obey the law and rules set forth by parents, guardians, and probation officer, notify Probation of any change of residence, pay restitution, fines and fees, attend school or work, submit to search and seizure of person or property by an officer, drug test, abide by set curfews, do not associate with anyone violating the law, do not own or using a firearm or deadly weapon, and perform community service hours as ordered. Special conditions can also be ordered with cases that may involve gangs, mental health, or sex offenses. Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma COUNTY Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo TOTAL COUNT 46 111 109 80 98 33 11 2,599 226 214 PERCENT 0.93% 2.24% 2.20% 1.61% 1.97% 0.66% 0.22% 52.36% 4.55% 4.31% 536 291 84 210 316 10.80% 5.86% 1.69% 4.23% 6.37% 4,964 100.00% Table 7.2. Standard Probation by Gender, FY15 Male Female 3,787 1,177 76.29% 23.71% TOTAL 4,964 100.00% Table 7.3. Standard Probation by Age, FY15 Throughout a probation term, the probation and/or surveillance officer monitors the juvenile's compliance and case plan progress. The probation officer works closely with the juvenile, family members, and members of the community such as teachers, victims, treatment providers and others involved in the life of the juvenile. If the youth does not comply with conditions and/or continues violating the law, the probation officer may issue administrative sanctions or refer the juvenile back to court. The court may then impose more strict 33 AGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Unknown COUNT 0 2 6 26 87 302 566 951 1,306 1,705 13 PERCENT 0.00% 0.04% 0.12% 0.52% 1.75% 6.08% 11.40% 19.16% 26.31% 34.35% 0.26% TOTAL 4,964 100.00% JUVENILES DISPOSED TO STANDARD PROBATION IN THE JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 7.4. Standard Probation by Race, FY15 RACE Hispanic African American White Native American Asian/Pacific Islander Other Unknown COUNT 1,864 650 2,053 322 28 15 32 PERCENT 37.55% 13.09% 41.36% 6.49% 0.56% 0.30% 0.64% TOTAL 4,964 100.00% Table 7.5. Standard Probation by Education Status, FY15 STATUS COUNT PERCENT Enrolled 2,527 50.91% Not Enrolled 577 11.62% Expelled 45 0.91% Suspended 56 1.13% Withdrawn 116 2.34% Graduated 37 0.75% GED Program Unknown 4 1,602 0.08% 32.27% TOTAL 4,964 100.00% Table 7.6. Standard Probation by Number of Prior Referrals, FY15 PRIOR REFERRALS COUNT PERCENT 0 1,340 26.99% 1 917 18.47% 2 719 14.48% 3 4 5 6 7 8 or more TOTAL 561 409 292 184 150 392 11.30% 8.24% 5.88% 3.71% 3.02% 7.90% 4,964 100.00% Table 7.7. Standard Probation by Severity of Most Serious Offense, FY15 OFFENSE COUNT PERCENT Felonies Against Persons 803 16.18% Felonies Against Property 594 11.97% Obstruction of Justice, Felony & Misdemeanor 993 20.00% Misdemeanors Against Persons 467 9.41% Drugs, Felony & Misdemeanor 959 19.32% Public Peace, Felony & Misdemeanor 581 11.70% Misdemeanors Against Property 468 9.43% Status Offense 18 0.36% Administrative 81 1.63% TOTAL 4,964 100.00% Table 7.8. Standard Probation by Offense Class, FY15 OFFENSE CLASS Felony Misdemeanor Violations of Probation & Ordinances Status Other COUNT 2,655 1,687 523 19 80 PERCENT 53.49% 33.98% 10.54% 0.38% 1.61% TOTAL 4,964 100.00% 34 JUVENILES DISPOSED TO STANDARD PROBATION IN THE JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 7.9. Standard Probation by County and Gender, FY15 MALE COUNT 33 73 77 54 68 23 10 2,032 COUNTY Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma STATEWIDE TOTALS FEMALE COUNT 13 38 32 26 30 10 1 567 PERCENT 71.74% 65.77% 70.64% 67.50% 69.39% 69.70% 90.91% 78.18% PERCENT 28.26% 34.23% 29.36% 32.50% 30.61% 30.30% 9.09% 21.82% 178 149 414 234 59 156 227 78.76% 69.63% 77.24% 80.41% 70.24% 74.29% 71.84% 48 65 122 57 25 54 89 21.24% 30.37% 22.76% 19.59% 29.76% 25.71% 28.16% 3,787 76.29% 1,177 23.71% Tables 7.9 through 7.11 provide county breakdowns by gender, age, and race. In all of the counties, the majority of juveniles disposed to standard probation were males in their late teens. The most frequent racial category varied from county by White, Hispanic, and Native American. Table 7.10. Standard Probation by County and Age, FY15 COUNTY 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 1 4 0 0 38 7 3 11 6 5 13 6 4 13 3 1 125 26 13 22 21 5 17 17 10 20 6 1 247 44 16 62 41 9 21 19 24 15 5 2 476 33 62 103 50 6 28 27 21 12 5 2 699 47 65 149 79 21 25 37 19 26 14 4 997 62 54 186 92 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 6 0 0 3 0 46 111 109 80 98 33 11 2,599 226 214 536 291 Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 3 0 0 11 4 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 12 3 13 34 4 31 45 13 44 75 30 62 74 34 58 76 0 1 0 84 210 316 TOTAL 0 2 6 26 87 302 566 951 1,306 1,705 13 4,964 35 UNKNOWN TOTAL % OF TOTAL 0.93% 2.24% 2.20% 1.61% 1.97% 0.66% 0.22% 52.36% 4.55% 4.31% 10.80% 5.86% 1.69% 4.23% 6.37% 100.00% JUVENILES DISPOSED TO STANDARD PROBATION IN THE JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 7.11. Standard Probation by County and Race, FY15 9 AFRICAN AMERICAN 0 32 NATIVE AMERICAN 3 Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz 47 11 20 21 8 3 983 29 20 285 94 81 8 6 3 6 1 0 483 2 4 59 61 1 55 37 46 60 20 1 977 188 117 166 121 2 0 55 8 9 0 0 110 5 72 24 14 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 Yavapai Yuma 43 210 2 14 156 75 9 13 0 4 0 0 6 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,864 650 2,053 322 28 15 COUNTY HISPANIC Apache TOTAL WHITE ASIAN/PI OTHER UNKNOWN 1 0 0 0 0 1 46 % OF TOTAL 0.93% 0 0 1 2 4 1 17 2 1 2 1 0 111 109 80 98 33 11 2,599 226 214 536 291 84 2.24% 2.20% 1.61% 1.97% 0.66% 0.22% 52.36% 4.55% 4.31% 10.80% 5.86% 1.69% 0 0 210 316 4.23% 6.37% 32 4,964 100.00% TOTAL Standard Probation, Five Year Trend 12,000 10,917 9,594 10,000 8,276 8,000 7,793 6,000 6,829 6,895 4,929 4,964 FY14 FY15 6,695 5,837 4,000 2,000 0 FY11 FY12 FY13 Juveniles Dispositions 36 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY15 INTENSIVE PROBATION (JIPS) Statistics provided in this section are for individual youth (unduplicated). For youth were placed on Juvenile Intensive Probation Supervision more than once during the fiscal year, information from the first instance is reported. Table 8.1. JIPS by County, FY15 COUNTY Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo For youth in need of a higher level of supervision and more structured programming, a judge can order a youth to Juvenile Intensive Probation Supervision (JIPS). The JIPS program was enacted into law in 1987 with the intention of providing an alternative to commitment to the Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections (ADJC). JIPS is a less costly alternative to ADJC, yet provides a greater level of supervision than standard probation. Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma JIPS differs from standard probation in the increased frequency of face-to-face contacts between the juvenile and the JIPS officer, requirement to actively participate in 32 hours of structured activities per week, liberty restrictions concerning unsupervised time out of the home, and random drug testing. JIPS probation and surveillance officers also have lower caseload ratios than standard due to the increased contact requirements. TOTAL COUNT 7 37 62 16 19 9 1 420 61 29 PERCENT 0.65% 3.42% 5.72% 1.48% 1.75% 0.83% 0.09% 38.78% 5.63% 2.68% 137 61 11 69 144 12.65% 5.63% 1.02% 6.37% 13.30% 1,083 100.00% Table 8.2. JIPS by Gender, FY15 Male Female TOTAL In FY15, the number of juveniles placed on JIPS was 1,083. The rate of juveniles petitioned who end up disposed to JIPS has remained stable at around 12% of the juveniles petitioned. 915 168 84.49% 15.51% 1,083 100.00% Table 8.3. JIPS by Age, FY15 37 AGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Unknown COUNT 0 0 0 0 9 37 104 206 329 395 3 PERCENT 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.83% 3.42% 9.60% 19.02% 30.38% 36.47% 0.28% TOTAL 1,083 100.00% JUVENILES DISPOSED TO JIPS IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 8.4. JIPS by Race, FY15 RACE Hispanic African American White Native American Asian/Pacific Islander Other Unknown COUNT 489 134 361 90 3 2 4 PERCENT 45.15% 12.37% 33.33% 8.31% 0.28% 0.18% 0.37% TOTAL 1,083 100.00% Table 8.5. JIPS by Education Status, FY15 STATUS Enrolled Not Enrolled Expelled Suspended Withdrawn Graduated GED Program Unknown TOTAL COUNT 567 PERCENT 52.35% 195 21 21 33 13 6 227 18.01% 1.94% 1.94% 3.05% 1.20% 0.55% 20.96% 1,083 100.00% Table 8.7. JIPS by Severity of Most Serious Offense, FY15 OFFENSE Felonies Against Persons Felonies Against Property Obstruction of Justice, Felony & Misdemeanor Misdemeanors Against Persons Drugs, Felony & Misdemeanor Public Peace, Felony & Misdemeanor Misdemeanors Against Property Status Offense Administrative COUNT 168 195 PERCENT 15.51% 18.01% 527 24 68 65 29 2 5 48.66% 2.22% 6.26% 6.00% 2.68% 0.18% 0.46% TOTAL 1,083 100.00% OFFENSE CLASS Felony Misdemeanor Violations of Probation & Ordinances Status Other COUNT 536 186 356 1 4 PERCENT 49.49% 17.17% 32.87% 0.09% 0.37% TOTAL 1,083 100.00% Table 8.8. JIPS by Offense Class, FY15 Table 8.6. JIPS by Number of Prior Referrals, FY15 PRIOR REFERRALS COUNT PERCENT 0 56 5.17% 1 70 6.46% 2 72 6.65% 3 83 7.66% 4 94 8.68% 5 113 10.43% 6 7 8 or more TOTAL 88 95 412 8.13% 8.77% 38.04% 1,083 100.00% 38 JUVENILES DISPOSED TO JIPS IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 8.9. JIPS by County and Gender, FY15 MALE COUNT 3 33 43 14 16 6 1 378 47 26 COUNTY Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma STATEWIDE TOTAL PERCENT 42.86% 89.19% 69.35% 87.50% 84.21% 66.67% 100.00% 90.00% 77.05% 89.66% FEMALE COUNT 4 4 19 2 3 3 0 42 14 3 PERCENT 57.14% 10.81% 30.65% 12.50% 15.79% 33.33% 0.00% 10.00% 22.95% 10.34% 126 55 7 54 106 91.97% 90.16% 63.64% 78.26% 73.61% 11 6 4 15 38 8.03% 9.84% 36.36% 21.74% 26.39% 915 84.49% 168 15.51% In Tables 8.9 through 8.11 demographic variables by each county are presented. Overall, juveniles on JIPS tend to be males in their late teens. The most frequent racial category ranged from White, Hispanic, and Native American. Table 8.10. JIPS by County and Age, FY15 COUNTY 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 UNKNOWN TOTAL Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 1 5 1 0 2 0 0 6 0 7 9 1 5 0 0 30 1 9 10 4 5 0 0 70 4 9 16 8 5 4 1 133 1 7 25 3 2 5 0 179 7 37 62 16 19 9 1 420 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 1 6 1 4 2 0 1 8 4 2 20 5 1 4 16 11 15 27 16 0 10 28 17 5 47 12 3 25 40 22 6 35 26 7 28 49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 % OF TOTAL 0.65% 3.42% 5.72% 1.48% 1.75% 0.83% 0.09% 38.78% 61 29 137 61 11 69 144 5.63% 2.68% 12.65% 5.63% 1.02% 6.37% 13.30% 0 0 0 0 9 37 104 206 329 395 Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma TOTAL 39 0 0 2 3 1,083 100.00% JUVENILES DISPOSED TO JIPS IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 8.11. JIPS by County and Race, FY15 COUNTY Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma TOTAL 1 AFRICAN AMERICAN 0 5 NATIVE AMERICAN 1 18 8 8 9 4 0 204 10 4 66 21 10 2 3 0 0 0 0 87 2 0 21 10 0 17 20 7 9 4 1 100 44 12 38 29 1 0 31 0 1 0 0 22 5 13 12 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 37 62 16 19 9 1 420 61 29 137 61 11 3.42% 5.72% 1.48% 1.75% 0.83% 0.09% 38.78% 5.63% 2.68% 12.65% 5.63% 1.02% 20 106 1 8 46 28 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 69 144 6.37% 13.30% 489 134 361 90 3 2 4 1,083 100.00% HISPANIC WHITE ASIAN/PI OTHER UNKNOWN TOTAL 0 0 0 7 % OF TOTAL 0.65% JIPS, Five Year Trend 3,000 2,724 2,550 2,329 2,500 2,091 2,092 1,089 1,083 FY14 FY15 2,000 1,500 1,449 1,282 1,191 1,000 500 0 FY11 FY12 FY13 Juveniles Dispositions 40 FY 2015 Additional Topics JUVENILE CORRECTIONS (ADJC) ADJC & AOC COMPARISON PATHWAYS TO ADULT COURT Direct Filings in Adult Court Transferred to Adult Court GENDER ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY15 JUVENILE CORRECTIONS (ADJC) This year, commitments decreased by 20.6% from the previous fiscal year. Roughly, 47.86% of the juveniles were committed for obstruction of justice offenses such as probation and parole violations; however, the most severe offense is generally not the only consideration in the commitment (i.e., prior offense history, prior placement, risk to the community and need for a more secure placement). In addition, 50.27% of the juveniles committed to the ADJC had eight or more prior referrals suggesting that the majority are chronic offenders. Statistics provided in this section are for individual youth (unduplicated). For youth who were committed or awarded to the Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections more than once during the fiscal year, information from the first instance is reported. Disposition of a juvenile to the ADJC is governed by statute and the Arizona Code of Judicial Administration. Arizona Revised Statutes §8-342 (A) provides “A child under the age of fourteen years shall not be committed to the department of juvenile corrections nor shall a dependent or incorrigible child be awarded to the department of juvenile corrections.” Arizona Revised Statutes §8246(C), as amended, mandates: 1) the use of risk and needs assessment to determine appropriate disposition of juveniles; 2) development of commitment guidelines for use by juvenile court judges for dispositions of juveniles to the ADJC; and 3) development of length of stay guidelines consistent with treatment and public safety concerns. Table 9.1. Juvenile Corrections by County, FY15 COUNTY Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma The primary purpose of the commitment guidelines is to define factors the court must consider, in addition to other relevant facts, when committing youth to the care and custody of the ADJC. The legislative intent was to reserve commitment to juveniles whom the court believes are in need of placement in a secure care facility for the protection of the public and whom are unsuitable for JIPS. TOTAL The commitment guidelines revised and adopted in July, 2001 and documented in the Arizona Code of Judicial Administration Part 6, Chapter 3, Section 6304 can be found in the Notes section.4 COUNT PERCENT 3 13 10 8 4 1 1 210 22 0.80% 3.48% 2.67% 2.14% 1.07% 0.27% 0.27% 56.15% 5.88% 4 25 24 13 14 22 1.07% 6.68% 6.42% 3.48% 3.74% 5.88% 374 100.00% Table 9.2. Juvenile Corrections by Gender, FY15 Table 9.1 includes all juveniles who were disposed to the Juvenile Department of Corrections during FY15, which totals 374 juveniles. Commitments have been declining since a historical high of 1,670 in FY98. 41 Male Female 347 27 92.78% 7.22% TOTAL 374 100.00% JUVENILES DISPOSED TO ADJC IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 9.3. Juvenile Corrections by Age, FY15 AGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Unknown TOTAL COUNT 0 0 0 1 0 5 15 61 126 166 0 PERCENT 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.27% 0.00% 1.34% 4.01% 16.31% 33.69% 44.39% 0.00% 374 100.00% Table 9.4. Juvenile Corrections by Race, FY15 RACE Hispanic COUNT 162 PERCENT 43.32% African American White Native American Asian/Pacific Islander Other Unknown 68 120 22 0 1 1 18.18% 32.09% 5.88% 0.00% 0.27% 0.27% TOTAL 374 100.00% Table 9.6. Juvenile Corrections by Number of Prior Referrals, FY15 PRIOR REFERRALS COUNT PERCENT 0 31 8.29% 1 25 6.68% 2 21 5.61% 3 18 4.81% 4 15 4.01% 5 27 7.22% 6 25 6.68% 7 24 6.42% 8 or more 188 50.27% TOTAL 374 Table 9.7. Juvenile Corrections by Severity of Most Serious Offense, FY15 OFFENSE COUNT PERCENT Felonies Against Persons 83 22.19% Felonies Against Property 37 9.89% Obstruction of Justice, Felony & Misdemeanor 179 47.86% Misdemeanors Against Persons 9 2.41% Drugs, Felony & Misdemeanor Public Peace, Felony & Misdemeanor Misdemeanors Against Property Status Offense Administrative TOTAL Table 9.5. Juvenile Corrections by Education Status, FY15 STATUS COUNT PERCENT Enrolled 117 31.28% Not Enrolled 50 13.37% Expelled 2 0.53% Suspended 8 2.14% Withdrawn 5 1.34% Graduated 6 1.60% GED Program 0 0.00% Unknown 186 49.73% TOTAL 374 100.00% 31 14 17 0 4 8.29% 3.74% 4.55% 0.00% 1.07% 374 100.00% Table 9.8. Juvenile Corrections by Offense Class, FY15 OFFENSE CLASS Felony Misdemeanor Violations of Probation & Ordinances Status Other TOTAL 100.00% 42 COUNT 177 49 148 0 0 PERCENT 47.33% 13.01% 39.57% 0.00% 0.00% 374 100.00% JUVENILES DISPOSED TO ADJC IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 9.9. Juvenile Corrections by County and Gender, FY15 MALE COUNTY Apache Cochise Coconino Gila FEMALE COUNT PERCENT COUNT PERCENT 3 13 9 8 4 1 1 100.00% 100.00% 90.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0.00% 0.00% 10.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 191 20 4 24 24 12 14 19 90.95% 90.91% 100.00% 96.00% 100.00% 92.31% 100.00% 86.36% 19 2 0 1 0 1 0 3 9.05% 9.09% 0.00% 4.00% 0.00% 7.69% 0.00% 13.64% 347 92.78% 27 7.22% Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma STATEWIDE TOTALS In Tables 9.9 through 9.11, county breakdowns by gender, age, and race are presented. For each county, the majority of juveniles disposed to the Juvenile Department of Corrections were males in their late teens. The most common racial category shifted by county from White, Hispanic, and Native American. Table 9.10. Juvenile Corrections by County and Age, FY15 COUNTY 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 UNKNOWN TOTAL Apache Cochise Coconino Gila 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 1 2 2 5 0 1 0 29 1 5 3 1 0 0 1 68 1 5 5 2 4 0 0 102 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 13 10 8 4 1 1 210 % OF TOTAL 0.80% 3.48% 2.67% 2.14% 1.07% 0.27% 0.27% 56.15% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 3 3 2 3 5 1 3 4 7 0 10 12 6 6 6 11 0 12 5 6 4 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 4 25 24 13 14 22 5.88% 1.07% 6.68% 6.42% 3.48% 3.74% 5.88% 0 0 0 1 0 5 15 61 126 166 0 374 100.00% Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma TOTAL 43 JUVENILES DISPOSED TO ADJC IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM FY15 Table 9.11. Juvenile Corrections by County and Race, FY15 COUNTY HISPANIC Apache 0 6 3 4 AFRICAN AMERICAN 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 90 3 1 12 11 11 2 18 162 Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma TOTAL 3 6 2 3 NATIVE AMERICAN 0 0 5 1 0 0 0 55 0 0 3 5 0 1 3 3 1 0 54 19 2 7 7 2 11 0 1 0 0 9 0 1 3 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 1 210 22 4 25 24 13 14 22 1.07% 0.27% 0.27% 56.15% 5.88% 1.07% 6.68% 6.42% 3.48% 3.74% 5.88% 68 120 22 0 1 1 374 100.00% WHITE ASIAN/PI OTHER UNKNOWN TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 13 10 8 % OF TOTAL 0.80% 3.48% 2.67% 2.14% Arizona Dept. of Juvenile Corrections Five Year Trend 1200 1,004 1000 807 800 706 671 648 479 471 584 600 536 374 400 200 0 FY11 FY12 FY13 Juveniles FY14 Commitments 44 FY15 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY15 ADJC & AOC COMPARISON Original Commitments on a Statewide Basis The previous section on ADJC commitments used the traditional reporting method, juvenile dispositions to the Juvenile Department of Corrections during the fiscal year. This method, however, over counts the actual number of juveniles being committed as it does not differentiate between original and subsequent commitments and also fails to take into account juveniles who never arrive to ADJC for processing. Tables in this section provide that information. Table 10.1 shows juveniles who were committed for the first time during the fiscal year (original commitment) and arrived at an ADJC facility. Subsequent commitment includes juveniles who received a commitment decision in FY15, but were already committed from a different county or previous fiscal year. The last category, “Never Arrived at ADJC”, includes juveniles who received an original decision of commitment but were never processed into ADJC. In this scenario, a youth may have turned 18 while in detention and were therefore never transported to an ADJC facility or have been processed in an adult court at the time of commitment and were placed in adult confinement (jail or correctional facility). In FY15, there were 356 original commitments. The majority of original commitments were from Maricopa County. In addition, there were 108 juveniles with subsequent commitments and 7 juveniles who never arrived to ADJC. Table 10.1. Commitments, FY15 ORIGINAL COMMITMENT Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma TOTAL ADJC has the ability to count “recommitments”, a juvenile who is committed, discharged from ADJC and then receives another commitment. Those juveniles, few in number, are not reflected in these charts. 45 SUBSEQUENT COMMITMENT 3 10 7 8 1 1 1 147 19 4 23 15 0 3 3 0 3 0 0 57 3 0 2 9 NEVER ARRIVED AT ADJC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 12 13 19 1 1 3 0 0 0 4 1 1 210 22 4 25 24 13 14 22 283 85 6 374 3 13 10 8 ADJC & AOC COMPARISON FY15 Table 10.2. Commitments Prior Fiscal Year, FY14 ORIGINAL COMMITMENT Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma TOTAL SUBSEQUENT COMMITMENT 0 29 16 10 7 1 1 177 21 5 25 1 7 4 0 1 1 1 60 6 0 5 NEVER ARRIVED AT ADJC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 2 TOTAL 20 9 11 24 12 1 6 3 0 1 0 0 32 11 17 27 356 108 7 471 1 36 20 10 8 2 2 241 27 5 32 Juveniles with Original Commitments to ADJC Five Year Trend 600 551 500 452 393 400 356 283 300 200 100 0 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 It is with gratitude to ADJC for providing commitment data used for this section. 46 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY15 PATHWAYS TO ADULT COURT The Arizona Revised Statutes provide the requirements and procedures for prosecuting juveniles in criminal court as adults. Juveniles enter the adult system by either a direct file or transfer. Both require certain criteria to be met in order for the filing or transfer to take place. The provisions, presented here as pathways, are summarized below. mandatory direct file. More detail on Direct Filed and Transferred juveniles are provided in the sections that follow. Table 11.1. Pathways to Adult Court, FY15 PATHWAY Mandatory Mandatory Prior Chronic Discretionary Transfer There are five different pathways a juvenile can take to adult court, which are as follows: Mandatory Direct File for a Violent Offense – A juvenile aged fifteen, sixteen, or seventeen who commits a violent crime specified in A.R.S. §13501A must be filed in adult court. TOTAL * Mandatory Direct File due to Prior Conviction – A juvenile with a historical prior felony conviction must be prosecuted as an adult per A.R.S. §13501C. COUNT 105 7 21 79 12 % OF TOTAL 46.88% 3.13% 9.38% 35.27% 5.36% 224 100.00% Table 11.2. Pathways to Adult Court by County, FY15 COUNTY COUNT % OF TOTAL Apache 0 0.00% Cochise 0 0.00% Coconino 1 0.45% Gila 0 0.00% Graham 0 0.39% Greenlee 0 0.00% La Paz 0 0.00% Maricopa 136 60.71% Mohave 0 0.00% Navajo 2 0.89% Pima 43 19.20% Pinal 20 8.93% Mandatory Direct File for Chronic Offenders – A juvenile aged fifteen, sixteen, or seventeen who have two prior felony adjudications in juvenile court and must go to adult court for a subsequent felony per A.R.S. §13-501A. Discretionary Filing – The County Attorney may file in adult court, any juvenile who is fourteen years old and a chronic offender or fourteen or older and has committed one of a list of specified offenses in A.R.S. §13-501B. Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma Transfer – Juveniles who do not meet the above criteria may still be transferred by the juvenile court depending on a number of factors such as the type and severity of the offense and the juvenile’s record and previous history. The County Attorney may request an order of the juvenile court transferring jurisdiction to the criminal division of the superior court for prosecution of any juvenile charged with a felony. TOTAL * 7 3 12 3.12% 1.34% 5.36% 224 100.00% * The number of juveniles in these tables may be a duplicate count due to the possibility of multiple cases taking different pathways to adult court in the fiscal year. As shown in Table 11.1, the majority of juveniles end up in adult court through a 47 PATHWAYS TO ADULT COURT FY15 Direct Filings in Adult Court A legislative change creating the direct file process became effective in 1997. The result has been a reduction in the transfer decision. Statistics provided in this section are for individual youth (unduplicated). For youth who were direct filed in adult court more than once during the fiscal year, information from their first filings is reported. In FY99, direct filings reached a high of 804. Since then, the number of direct filings has decreased. In FY15, 212 juveniles were involved in the direct file process, which is a slight decrease from FY14 (227). Arizona Revised Statutes §13-501 mandates that the “County Attorney shall bring criminal prosecution against a juvenile in the same manner as an adult if the juvenile is fifteen, sixteen, or seventeen years of age and is accused of any of the following offenses”: Table 11.3. Direct Filings by County, FY15 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. First degree murder; Second degree murder; Forcible sexual assault; Armed robbery; Any other violent offenses, defined as aggravated assault A.R.S. §13-1204 A.1., aggravated assault with a deadly weapon A.R.S. §13-1204 A.2., drive by shooting, and discharging a firearm at a structure; 6. A felony offense committed by a chronic offender, defined as a juvenile who has two prior and separate adjudications; 7. Any offense that is properly joined to the above offenses. COUNTY Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma These offense categories are used to define pathways to adult court referred to as mandatory (1 through 5 and 7) and chronic (6). TOTAL In addition, the County Attorney has the discretion to bring criminal prosecution against fourteen year old juveniles accused of the offenses enumerated above. Criminal prosecution may also be brought against juveniles fourteen or older who have been accused of a class 1 or class 2 felony or a select class 3, 4, 5, and 6 felony, which are referred to as discretionary filings. In addition, criminal prosecution shall be brought against any juvenile with a prior conviction in adult court. These are referred to as mandatory prior conviction filings. COUNT 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 132 0 PERCENT 0.00% 0.00% 0.47% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 62.26% 0.00% 1 41 20 6 0 11 0.47% 19.34% 9.43% 2.83% 0.00% 5.19% 212 100.00% Table 11.4. Direct Filings by Gender, FY15 48 Male Female 202 10 95.28% 4.72% TOTAL 212 100.00% JUVENILES WITH DIRECT FILES FY15 Table 11.5. Direct Filings by Age, FY15 AGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Unknown TOTAL COUNT 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 23 58 126 2 PERCENT 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.42% 10.85% 27.36% 59.43% 0.94% 212 100.00% Table 11.6. Direct Filings by Race, FY15 RACE Hispanic African American White Native American Asian/Pacific Islander Other Unknown TOTAL COUNT 127 43 31 5 2 4 0 PERCENT 59..91% 20.28% 14.62% 2.36% 0.94% 1.89% 0.00% 212 100.00% Table 11.7. Direct Filings by Education FY15 STATUS COUNT Enrolled 56 Not Enrolled 37 Expelled 0 Status, Suspended Withdrawn Graduated GED Program Unknown 0 1 1 0 117 0.00% 0.47% 0.47% 0.00% 55.19% TOTAL 212 100.00% PERCENT 26.42% 17.45% 0.00% Table 11.8. Direct Filings by Number of Prior Referrals, FY15 PRIOR REFERRALS COUNT PERCENT 0 60 28.30% 1 26 12.26% 2 22 10.38% 3 13 6.13% 4 12 5.66% 5 8 3.77% 6 7 3.30% 7 9 4.25% 8 or more 55 25.94% TOTAL 212 100.00% Table 11.9. Direct Filings by Severity of Most Serious Offense, FY15 OFFENSE COUNT PERCENT Felonies Against Persons Felonies Against Property Obstruction of Justice, Felony & Misdemeanor Misdemeanors Against Persons Drugs, Felony & Misdemeanor Public Peace, Felony & Misdemeanor Misdemeanors Against Property Status Offense Administrative 150 26 70.75% 12.26% 0 0 31 5 0 0 0 0.00% 0.00% 14.62% 2.36% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% TOTAL 212 100.00% Table 11.10. Direct Filings by Offense Class, FY15 OFFENSE CLASS Felony Misdemeanor TOTAL 49 COUNT 212 0 PERCENT 100.00% 0.00% 212 100.00% JUVENILES WITH DIRECT FILES FY15 Table 11.11. Direct Filings by County and Gender, FY15 COUNTY Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa MALE COUNT 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 124 PERCENT 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 93.94% FEMALE COUNT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 PERCENT 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 6.06% 0 1 41 20 5 0 10 0.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 83.33% 0.00% 90.91% 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 16.67% 0.00% 9.09% 202 95.28% 10 4.72% Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma STATEWIDE TOTALS In Tables 11.11 through 11.13, county breakdowns of gender, age, and race are presented. Overall, the vast majority of juveniles with direct filings are males over fifteen years of age. Hispanic was the most common racial (ethnic) category for all of the counties. Table 11.12. Direct Filings by County and Age, FY15 COUNTY 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 UNKNOWN TOTAL Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 0 0 15 9 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 78 0 0 23 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 132 0 1 41 20 % OF TOTAL 0.00% 0.00% 0.44% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 62.26% 0.00% 0.47% 19.34% 9.43% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 5 0 9 1 0 0 6 0 11 2.83% 0.00% 5.19% 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 23 58 126 2 212 100.00% Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma TOTAL 50 JUVENILES WITH DIRECT FILES FY15 Table 11.13. Direct Filings by County and Race, FY15 COUNTY HISPANIC Apache 0 0 0 0 AFRICAN AMERICAN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 0 28 17 5 0 7 127 Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma TOTAL 0 0 0 0 NATIVE AMERICAN 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 37 0 0 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 19 0 1 5 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 132 0 1 41 20 6 0 11 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 62.26% 0.00% 0.00% 19.34% 9.43% 2.83% 0.00% 5.19% 43 31 5 2 4 0 212 100.00% WHITE ASIAN/PI OTHER UNKNOWN TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 % OF TOTAL 0.00% 0.00% 0.47% 0.00% Juveniles Direct Filed to Adult Court Five Year Trend 400 366 350 277 300 277 227 250 212 200 150 100 50 0 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 *Chart is updated with current statistics from Pima County, which altered statewide totals for previous years. 51 PATHWAYS TO ADULT COURT FY15 Transferred to Adult Court Prior to fiscal year 1998 and the passage of Proposition 102, juveniles could only be transferred to adult court through the judicial transfer process. Senate Bill (SB) 1446 initiated a shift from judicial transfers being the primary avenue to adult court to direct filing by the County Attorney. SB 1446 also made significant change to A.R.S. §8-327, which details the process for transferring juveniles to adult court, and went into effect July 1, 1998. Since the direct filing process began, the judicial transfer process has been utilized less frequently. During the current fiscal year, the direct filing process accounted for over 9 out of every 10 juveniles prosecuted in adult court. An order to transfer a juvenile is based on a finding by a preponderance of evidence that probable cause exists that the offense was committed by the juvenile and a transfer would best serve public safety. The determination of whether public safety would be served is based on the following factors outlined in A.R.S. §8-327 D: COUNTY Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Table 11.14. Transferred by County, FY15 Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma 1. 2. The seriousness of the offense involved. The record and previous history of the juvenile, including previous contacts with the courts and law enforcement, previous periods of any court ordered probation and the results of that probation. 3. Any previous commitments of the juvenile to juvenile residential placements and secure institutions. 4. If the juvenile was previously committed to the Department of Juvenile Corrections for a felony offense. 5. If the juvenile committed another felony offense while the juvenile was a ward of the Department of Juvenile Corrections. 6. If the juvenile committed the alleged offense while participating in, assisting, promoting or furthering the interests of a criminal street gang, a criminal syndicate or a racketeering enterprise. 7. The views of the victim of the offense. 8. If the degree of the juvenile’s participation in the offense was relatively minor but not so minor as to constitute a defense to prosecution. 9. The juvenile’s mental and emotional condition. 10. The likelihood of the juvenile’s reasonable rehabilitation through the use of services and facilities that are currently available to the juvenile court. TOTAL COUNT 0 0 0 0 0 PERCENT 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0 0 4 0 1 2 0 1 3 1 0.00% 0.00% 33.33% 0.00% 8.33% 16.67% 0.00% 8.33% 25.00% 8.33% 12 100.00% Table 11.15. Transferred by Gender, FY15 52 Male Female 10 2 83.33% 16.67% TOTAL 12 100.00% JUVENILES TRANSFERRED FY15 Table 11.16. Transferred to Adult Court by Age, FY15 AGE COUNT PERCENT 8 0 0.00% 9 0 0.00% 10 0 0.00% 11 0 0.00% 12 0 0.00% 13 0 0.00% 14 0 0.00% 15 0 0.00% 16 0 0.00% 17 11 91.67% Unknown 1 8.33% TOTAL 12 TOTAL TOTAL 12 6 0 5 1 0 0 0 50.00% 0.00% 41.67% 8.33% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 12 100.00% Table 11.20. Transferred to Adult Court by Severity of Most Serious Offense, FY15 OFFENSE COUNT PERCENT Felonies Against Persons 3 25.00% Felonies Against Property 4 3.33% Obstruction of Justice, Felony & Misdemeanor 0 0.00% Misdemeanors Against Persons 0 0.00% Drugs, Felony & Misdemeanor Public Peace, Felony & Misdemeanor Misdemeanors Against Property Status Offense Administrative TOTAL Table 11.18. Transferred to Adult Court by Education Status, FY15 STATUS COUNT PERCENT Enrolled 5 41.67% Not Enrolled 0 0.00% Expelled 0 0.00% Suspended 0 0.00% Withdrawn 0 0.00% Graduated 0 0.00% GED Program 0 0.00% Unknown TOTAL 100.00% 100.00% Table 11.17. Transferred to Adult Court by Race, FY15 RACE COUNT PERCENT Hispanic African American White Native American Asian/Pacific Islander Other Unknown Table 11.19. Transferred to Adult Court by Number of Prior Referrals, FY15 PRIOR REFERRAL COUNT PERCENT 0 5 41.67% 1 2 16.67% 2 0 0.00% 3 0 0.00% 4 0 0.00% 5 0 0.00% 6 0 0.00% 7 1 8.33% 8 or more 4 33.33% 7 58.33% 12 100.00% 3 2 0 0 0 25.00% 16.67% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 12 100.00% Table 11.21. Transferred to Adult Court by Offense Class, FY15 OFFENSE CLASS Felony Misdemeanor Violations of Probation & Ordinances Status Other TOTAL 53 COUNT 11 1 0 0 0 PERCENT 91.67% 8.33% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 12 100.00% Table 11.22. Transferred to Adult Court by County and Gender, FY15 COUNTY Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal MALE Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma STATEWIDE TOTALS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 2 0 % OF TOTAL 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 1 3 0 10 FEMALE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 % OF TOTAL 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0 0 1 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 83.33% 2 16.67% Tables 11.22 through 11.24 provide statistics on gender, age, and race by county. Overall, most transferred juveniles are males in their late teens. Hispanic and African American were the most common racial groups. Table 11.23. Transferred to Adult Court by County and Age, FY15 COUNTY 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 UNKNOWN TOTAL Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % OF TOTAL 0.00% 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 2 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 1 2 0 1 3 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 33.33% 0.00% 8.33% 16.67% 0.00% 8.33% 25.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 8.33% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 1 12 100.00% Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma TOTAL 54 Table 11.24. Transferred to Adult Court by County and Race, FY15 COUNTY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 AFRICAN AMERICAN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 6 HISPANIC Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 NATIVE AMERICAN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 3 1 16.67% 0.00% 8.33% 25.00% 8.33% 0 5 1 0 0 0 12 100.00% WHITE ASIAN/PI OTHER UNKNOWN TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 1 % OF TOTAL 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.33% 0.00% 8.33% Juveniles Transferred to Adult Court, Five Year Trend 30 28 25 20 18 17 14 15 12 10 5 0 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 *Chart is updated with current statistics from Pima County, which altered statewide totals. 55 This page was intentionally left blank. 56 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY15 GENDER In January, 2005, the Child Welfare League hosted a conference National Girls Initiative: Florence Crittenden Roundtable 2005. This section was prompted by that conference and other work being done in Arizona. This section offers simple comparisons between males and females in Arizona’s juvenile justice system. Information is provided on referrals, age at first referral, offense severity, and proportions of males and females at each stage in the juvenile justice system, and treatment received in FY15. This section was first published in Juveniles Processed FY04 and has been replicated annually since then. Average Age Over the last two decades, increasing attention has been paid to girls in the juvenile justice system. There was concern, according to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (2002), females’ arrests were increasing in most categories faster than males’ arrests. In Arizona, however, the proportions of males and females arrested have been constant. Females and males differ in the distribution of their referral offenses. Three offense categories make up almost two-thirds of female referrals: public peace (21.3%); misdemeanors against property (21.1%); and status (17.9%). On the other hand, apart from public peace offenses (21.1%) and drugs (17.0%), males’ referral offenses are more equally distributed across severity categories. For the juveniles referred in FY15, the average age of referral for the initial referral was slightly lower for females (14.07) than males (14.39). Table 12.2. Average Age at First Referral, FY15 Referral Detention Diversion Petitioned Dismissals Penalty Only Standard Probation JIPS ADJC Direct Filed MALE 33.59% 22.30% 38.80% 25.02% 27.42% 25.00% 23.71% 15.51% 7.22% 4.72% 66.41% 77.70% 61.20% 74.98% 72.58% 75.00% 76.29% 84.49% 92.78% 95.28% TOTAL 14.18 Misdemeanors make up the largest proportion of offenses for both males and females. Since FY07, the proportion of juveniles committing felonies and misdemeanors for both males and females has remained relatively stable. Table 12.1. Gender by Court Stage, FY15 FEMALE 14.39 14.07 Offense Severity and Type Traditionally, males are believed to commit more offenses and more serious offenses than females. Analysis of Arizona juvenile data provides support for these notions. STAGE Male Female Table 12.3. Gender by Severity of the Most Serious Referral Offense, FY15 OFFENSE FEMALE MALE Felonies Against Person 2.7% 7.8% Felonies Against Property 3.9% 9.4% Obstruction of Justice* 7.4% 10.4% Misdemeanors Against Person 13.0% 10.2% Drugs* 10.9% 17.0% Public Peace* 21.3% 21.0% Misdemeanors Against Property 21.1% 12.9% Status Offenses 17.9% 9.8% Administrative 1.7% 1.4% TOTAL 57 100.00% 100.00% JUVENILE FEMALES FY15 Table 12.6. Treatment Expenditures by Category Percentage of Total Dollars Spent, FY15 FEMALE MALE Ancillary Services 0.57% 1.61% Behavioral Support Services 0.26% 1.19% Competency Restoration 0.78% 1.29% Delinquency Prevention 4.89% 4.41% Drug Court 0.64% 2.10% Education 0.00% 0.04% Table 12.4. Gender by Offense Class FEMALE MALE FELONY 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 MISDEMEANOR 16.9% 16.7% 17.2% 18.5% 19.1% 37.8% 37.9% 38.0% 38.2% 37.7% 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 61.9% 62.5% 59.6% 58.6% 56.8% 46.9% 47.8% 46.8% 46.6% 45.2% Court Funded Treatment Received Of the 8,535 females referred in FY15, 28.16% received court funded treatment services in the major treatment categories listed in table 12.6 compared to 21.73% of males. Juveniles may be ordered to receive treatment funded from other sources (Title XIX, self-pay, tribal funds, etc.). Only court funded treatment is reflected here. On average, $1,836.66 was spent on court funded treatment for females and $4,035.46 for males. This funding was provided through the Juveniles Probation Services Fund (JPSF). 4,888 9.06% 0.00% 1.28% 62.84% 7.29% 0.00% 6.64% 7.60% 0.73% 34.22% 5.20% 0.00% 31.73% 8.43% 100.00% 100.00% $4,419,015.50 $14,781,876.56 TOTAL 30000 25000 24,269 22,189 15000 12,368 11,428 10000 58 18,237 16,854 9,701 8,754 8,535 FY13 FY14 FY15 5000 0 FY12 Male 19.2% 19,809 20000 FY11 Table 12.5. Juveniles Who Received Court Funded Treatment, FY15 REFERRED RED’ D COURT PERCENT FUNDED TX Male 16,910 3,663 21.73% Female 8,557 1,225 14.3% 25,467 7.20% 0.00% Juveniles Referred by Gender The largest allocation of treatment monies for both females (62.84%) and males (34.22%) was for outof-home treatment. The second largest amount of money spent on males was for sex offender treatment (31.73%) and for females it was substance abuse (7.60%). TOTAL Evaluation and Diagnosis Foster Home Functional Family Therapy Out-of-Home Outpatient R.A.F.T. Sex Offender Substance Abuse Female FY 2015 Notes & Glossary ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY15 NOTES 1. The number of juveniles in each stage is an unduplicated count, meaning each juvenile is only counted once. A juvenile could be counted more than once if assigned more than one disposition during the fiscal year. For example, if a juvenile was diverted and later placed on probation for a new offense in the same year, the juvenile would be counted twice, once for diversion and once for probation. Additionally, because the unique identifiers for juveniles are county specific – a juvenile could be counted in more than one county. The only exceptions to the unduplicated count of juveniles at each stage are Table 11.1. Pathways to Adult Court, FY15 and Table 11.2 Pathways to Adult Court by County, FY15. In these tables, if a juvenile is direct filed and transferred, the juvenile would be counted twice, once for any transfer and once for any direct file. Historical data presented are as previously reported in all Juveniles Processed publications and the Arizona’s Juvenile Court Counts FY2014. Although we strive to capture all direct filed juveniles, some direct filed juveniles may not be reflected in Juveniles Processed data. Percentages given in each table may not equal 100.00% due to rounding. 2. Specific definitions of each severity category include, but are not limited to: Felonies Against Person - Aggravated assault, arson of occupied structure, child molestation, child prostitution, child abuse, criminal syndicate, custodial interference, drive-by shooting, intimidating by gang, kidnapping, endangerment, incest, leaving accident, manslaughter, murder, negligent homicide, robbery, sexual abuse, sexual assault, sexual conduct with minor. Felonies Against Property - Aggravated criminal damage, criminal damage, shoplifting, arson of unoccupied structure, armed burglary, burglary, computer fraud, fraud, embezzlement, extortion, forgery, unauthorized use of vehicle, organized crime, failure to return rental property, trafficking, possession of stolen property, stolen vehicle, theft. Obstruction of Justice (Felonies and Misdemeanors) - Contempt of court, escape, unlawful or felony flight, failure to appear, hindering prosecution, influence witness, obstruction, perjury, parole or probation violation, resisting arrest. Misdemeanor Against Person - Assault, simple assault, domestic violence, endangerment, threatening intimidation, lewd and lascivious acts, unlawful imprisonment. Drugs (Felonies and Misdemeanors) - Possession, sale, use, transportation, or manufacture of any illegal drug (dangerous, narcotic, toxic substance, inhalant, hallucinogen, or prescription) or drug paraphernalia, involving a minor in a drug offense. 59 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY15 NOTES Public Peace (Felonies and Misdemeanors) - Aggravated DUI, alcohol under age consumption, carry concealed weapon, child neglect, commercial sex, contributing delinquency of minor, crime against nature, cruelty to animals, disorderly conduct, disturbing the peace, DUI, eavesdropping, false reporting, failure to stop, firework violation, gambling/gaming, harassment, indecent exposure, obscenity, prostitution, reckless burning, reckless driving, riot, public sexual indecency, speeding, traffic offenses, trespassing, criminal trespassing, unlawful assembly, weapons offenses, discharge firearm. Misdemeanors Against Property - Criminal damage, issue bad check, shoplifting, and theft. Status Offenses - Curfew, incorrigible, liquor possession, runaway, tobacco possession, truancy. Administrative - Court hold, courtesy hold, immigration, sovereignty, traffic, warrant. 3. Statutory requirements for diversion based on A.R.S. §8-321: 1. The County Attorney has sole discretion to divert a juvenile to a community based alternative program that is operated by the County Attorney or to a diversion program administered by the Juvenile Court. A juvenile identified as a chronic or violent offender, or who is alleged to have violated A.R.S. §28-1281, §28-1382, §28-1383 (DUI) or violated Title 13, Chapter 34 (Purchase, possession, or consumption of alcohol/drugs) and the juvenile has previously participated in a community-based alternative program or a diversion program or a diversion program administered by the juvenile court at least two times within twenty-four months is not eligible for diversion. 2. The juvenile probation officer is required to submit a referral to the County Attorney for alleged offenses that have been identified as not eligible for diversion. The County Attorney is able to return a case to the juvenile probation officer for further action if prosecution is declined. 3. The juvenile probation officer is mandated to conduct an interview with a juvenile diverted to the Juvenile Court and the juvenile’s parent(s) or guardian. If, during the interview, the juvenile acknowledges responsibility for the offense (based on the referral), the probation/intake officer may choose to begin the process of adjusting the referral. Adjustment of the referral can occur only after the juvenile completes one or more conditions (consequences), as assigned by the probation/intake officer. The consequences could be one or more of the following: a. Participation in unpaid community service work. b. Participation in a counseling program, which is designed to strengthen family relationships and to prevent repetitive juvenile delinquency. c. Participation in an education program, approved by the court, which has as its goal the prevention of further delinquent behavior. d. Participation in an education program, approved by the court, which is designed to deal with ancillary problems experienced by the juvenile, such as alcohol or drug abuse. 60 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY15 NOTES e. Participation in a non-residential program of rehabilitation or supervision offered by the court or offered by the community youth serving agency and approved by the court. f. Payment of restitution to the victim of the delinquent act. g. Payment of a monetary assessment. 4. The County Attorney or the juvenile court, in cooperation with the County Attorney, can establish community based alternative programs. Community-based alternative programs and diversion programs must ensure that the participation of both the juvenile and victim are voluntary, and that the juvenile accepts responsibility for the delinquent or incorrigible act. 5. The participants in a community-based alternative program agree on any legally reasonable consequence for the juvenile offender, with the exception of confinement. The program participants, juvenile and juvenile’s parents(s) or guardian and victim may sign a written contract agreeing on resolution of the matter in which the parent(s) or guardian agree to ensure that the juvenile complies with the contract. 6. If a juvenile complies with the consequences set forth by the probation officer or communitybased alternative program, the County Attorney will not file a petition in juvenile court. 6. Commitment Guidelines: 1. When considering the commitment of a juvenile to the care and custody of ADJC, the juvenile court shall: a. Only commit those juveniles who are adjudicated for a delinquent act and whom the court believes require placement in a secure care facility for the protection of the community; b. Consider commitment to ADJC as a final opportunity for rehabilitation of the juvenile, as well as a way of holding the juvenile accountable for a serious delinquent act or acts; c. Give special consideration to the nature of the offense, the level of risk the juvenile poses to the community, and whether appropriate, less restrictive alternatives to commitment exist within the community; and d. Clearly identify, in the commitment order, the offense or offenses for which the juvenile is being committed and any other relevant factors that the court determines as reasons to consider the juvenile a risk to the community. 2. The juvenile court shall not consider juveniles for commitment to ADJC when charged with an incorrigible offense(s) or a violation of a court order while under protective supervision for an incorrigible offense. 61 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY15 GLOSSARY Adjudication Hearing. A hearing at which a juvenile is found delinquent, incorrigible or dependent. The hearing is relatively formal and attended by the judicial officer, County Attorney, defense attorney and the juvenile. The parents/guardians and a juvenile probation officer may also attend along with any victims or witnesses required. The adjudication hearing is sometimes compared to the trial process in adult court, without the jury. In some respects, an "adjudication" for a delinquent offense is the juvenile court's equivalent of a "criminal conviction" in adult court. Administrative Sanction. A restriction, obligation or similar type of constraint imposed by Juvenile Probation when a youth fails to comply with his/her conditions of standard or intensive probation. Adult Court. Adult court has been defined in statute as the appropriate justice court, municipal court or criminal division of Superior Court with jurisdiction to hear offenses committed by adults. Law specifies that juveniles who commit certain offenses, are chronic felony offenders, or have historical prior convictions, must be prosecuted in the adult court and, if convicted, are subject to adult sentencing laws. Adult Probation. Adult probation is a function of the judicial branch of government responsible for the community-based supervision of adults convicted of criminal offenses. Juveniles prosecuted as adults and placed on probation are supervised by the Adult Probation Department. Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections (ADJC). The ADJC is operated by the executive branch and is the juvenile counterpart of the Department of Corrections. ADJC operates facilities and programs designed primarily for more serious juvenile offenders who are committed to their care and custody by the juvenile courts. ADJC operates secure correctional facilities, community-based after care programs, and juvenile parole. Chronic Felony Offender. A chronic felony offender is statutorily defined as a juvenile who on two prior separate occasions was adjudicated delinquent for an offense that would have been comparable to a felony offense had the juvenile been prosecuted as an adult, and who commits a third felony offense. The County Attorney is required by statute to bring criminal prosecution in adult court against all juveniles 15 years of age or older who are charged with committing a third felony offense. The County Attorney has discretion to also indict 14-year-old juveniles as chronic felony offenders and to prosecute them as adults. Community-Based Alternative Program (CBAP). As used in Senate Bill 1446 and current statute, Community-Based Alternative Programs are not specifically defined. However, the term "CBAP" has been used generally in reference to citizen boards established throughout local communities by County Attorneys and/or juvenile courts. In cases where the County Attorney has authorized "diversion," the juvenile and his/her parent(s) or guardian(s) may be referred to a CBAP, where the panel of citizens will review the offense, question the juvenile and issue a consequence. The fundamental intent of this type of Community-Based Alternative Program is to increase citizen involvement in the juvenile justice process. Community Restitution. Unpaid labor or services provided to a not-for-profit or government agency. Community restitution work may involve such things as graffiti abatement, litter cleanup or any other public or private community assistance project under the supervision of the County Attorney or juvenile court. Community restitution can be a consequence for youth in diversion or youth disposed to probation or penalty only disposition. 62 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY15 GLOSSARY Complaint. By statute, a complaint is a written statement of the essential facts that constitute a public offense. A report normally prepared by a law enforcement officer and submitted under oath to County Attorney alleging that a juvenile has violated the law. In some jurisdictions, the complaint goes to the Juvenile Probation Department prior to the County Attorney. It is also called a "delinquency complaint" or "written referral" (paper referral). Delinquent Juvenile. A delinquent juvenile is “a child who is adjudicated to have committed a delinquent act”, with the exception of a child under eight years of age who would be alternatively classified as a “dependent child”. A delinquent juvenile is simply a youth who commits an illegal offense. Dependent Child/Youth. A juvenile who is: adjudicated to be in need of proper and effective parental care and control and who has no parent or guardian willing to exercise or capable of exercising such care and control; destitute; not provided with the necessities of life, including adequate food, clothing, shelter or medical care; under eight years of age and found to have committed an act that would result in adjudication as a delinquent juvenile or incorrigible child if committed by an older juvenile or child; incompetent or not restorable to competency and alleged to have committed a serious offense or living in a home that is unfit by reason of abuse, neglect, cruelty or depravity by a parent, a guardian or any other person having custody or care of the juvenile. Detention. Juvenile detention is the temporary confinement of a juvenile in a physically restrictive facility surrounded by a locked and secure barrier with restricted ingress and egress. Juveniles can be held in detention pending court hearings for purposes of public protection or for their own protection or as a consequence. Discretionary Filings. Arizona law permits the County Attorney to prosecute a juvenile as an adult if the juvenile is fourteen years of age or older and accused of certain serious crimes. In addition, criminal prosecution may be brought against any juvenile with a prior conviction in adult court. Disposition Hearing. After a juvenile is adjudicated delinquent or incorrigible, a disposition hearing is held to determine the most appropriate punishment or intervention. This hearing is comparable to a "sentencing hearing" in the adult criminal court. Dispositional Investigation and Report. At least three days prior to disposition, the Juvenile Probation Department is required to provide a Dispositional Investigation Report to the Court. The report shall be made available to the victim/s as well, if applicable. The report includes a risk assessment, victim impact statement, facts regarding the offense, information regarding restitution, and treatment and disposition recommendations from the investigating Juvenile Probation Officer. Diversion. Diversion is a process by which formal court action (prosecution) is averted. The diversion process is an opportunity for youth to admit their misdeeds and to accept the consequences without going through a formal adjudication and disposition process. By statute, the County Attorney has sole discretion to divert prosecution for juveniles accused of committing any incorrigible or delinquent offense. Incorrigible Youth. Juveniles who commit offenses which would not be considered crimes if they were committed by adults are called status offenders (incorrigible youth). Typically, incorrigible youth are juveniles who refuse to obey the reasonable and proper directions of their parents or guardians. Juveniles who are habitually truant from school, run away from home, or violate curfew are also considered to be incorrigible. 63 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY15 GLOSSARY Intake. Intake occurs when a youth is referred to the Juvenile Probation Department with a delinquent or incorrigible charge. Intake staff determines if a youth is eligible for diversion, per the County Attorney's criteria, or whether the juvenile must be referred to the County Attorney for possible prosecution. Intake officers meet with the juveniles and their parents, coordinate diversion consequences and issue reports to the court and County Attorney. Juvenile Intensive Probation Supervision (JIPS). Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S. § 8-351) defines JIPS as "a program…of highly structured and closely supervised juvenile probation…..which emphasizes surveillance, treatment, work, education and home detention." A primary purpose of JIPS is to reduce the commitments to the Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections (ADJC) and other institutional or out-of-home placements. The statute requires that all juveniles adjudicated for a second felony offense must be placed on JIPS, committed to ADJC, or sent to adult court. Mandatory Offense. Arizona law mandates when a juvenile who is at least 15 years of age commits certain serious crimes he or she must be prosecuted as an adult. These "mandatory offenses" coincide with the crimes now enumerated in the State Constitution as amended through the provisions of Proposition 102, which was approved by Arizona voters at the 1996 general election. Parole. Community supervision of juveniles who have been committed to ADJC and granted release to a conditional liberty status. Parole is an executive branch function. Petition. An official legal document filed in the juvenile court by the County Attorney alleging one or more offenses that a juvenile is believed to have committed. The petition initiates the formal court hearing process of the juvenile court. Referral. A report submitted to the County Attorney alleging a child is dependent or incorrigible or has committed a delinquent act. Referrals can be made by police, parents, school officials, probation officers, other agencies or interested individuals requesting the juvenile court assume jurisdiction over the juvenile's conduct. Referrals can be "paper referrals" issued as citations or police reports or "physical referrals" where an arrest and possible detention is made by law enforcement. Juveniles may have multiple referrals between the ages of eight and seventeen. Risk Level. Is determined by use of a state approved assessment tool that classifies a juvenile as having a low, medium, or high risk to recidivate. The tool covers multiple domains using input from the juvenile, parents, school, and other official documents such as school or criminal records. Risk levels are assessed at various Court junctures. Standard Probation. A program of conditional freedom granted by the juvenile court to an adjudicated juvenile contingent on compliance with specific conditions. Transfer Hearing. A transfer hearing is held after the County Attorney requests that the juvenile court transfer its jurisdiction to the adult criminal court. The juvenile court judge may decide to waive or retain jurisdiction based on A.R.S. §8-327 and must state on the official court record the reasons for the decision. 64 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY15 Juvenile and Adult Terminology DIFFERENCES BETWEEN JUVENILE AND ADULT TERMINOLOGY JUVENILE ADULT Delinquent Act Incorrigible Act/Status Offense Detained Respondent Referral Petition Advisory Hearing Crime Not a Crime Arrested Defendant Submittal Indictment/Complaint Initial Appearance/Preliminary Hearing Arraignment Trial Jury Trial Verdict/Disposition Guilty Sentence Jail Imprisoned/Incarcerated Adjudication Hearing No Jury Trials Adjudication Delinquent/Incorrigible Disposition Detention/Secure Care Committed to ADJC 65 Produced and Published by Arizona Supreme Court Administrative Office of the Courts  Juvenile Justice Services Division 1501 W. Washington, Suite 337  Phoenix, Arizona 85007-3231 (602) 452-3443 www.azcourts.gov/jjsd This publication can be provided in an alternative format upon request to assist persons with disabilities under the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act.