Arizona’s Juvenile Court Counts Statewide Statistical Information FY2012 JULY 1, 2011 - JUNE 30, 2012 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS JUVENILE JUSTICE SERVICES DIVISION Research & Information Unit | Suite 337 | 602.452.3443 This Report Produced and Published By Administrative Office of the Courts Juvenile Justice Services Division Chad Campbell, Director David P. Redpath, Research Manager Margarita Aguilera, Business Analyst Elizabeth Simpson, Research Specialist Kathy Gillmore, Administrative Assistant Special thanks to the JOLTS Coordinators, Directors, and staff for their diligence in ensuring quality data for this report. ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS, FY12 CONTENTS Introduction and Trends .................................................................................. 1 Referral Counts ................................................................................................ 7 Juveniles Referred ................................................................................... 7 Juveniles Detained ................................................................................ 12 Juveniles Diverted ................................................................................. 16 Petition Counts............................................................................................... 20 Juveniles with Petitions Filed .................................................................. 20 Juveniles with Dispositions of Dismissed ................................................. 24 Juveniles with Dispositions of Penalty Only .............................................. 28 Juveniles with Dispositions to Standard Probation .................................... 32 Juveniles with Dispositions to JIPS .......................................................... 36 Selected Topics .............................................................................................. 40 ADJC ................................................................................................... 40 ADJC & AOC Comparison ....................................................................... 44 Direct Filed and Transferred ................................................................... 46 Direct Filed in Adult Court ...................................................................... 47 Transferred to Adult Court .................................................................... 51 Sex ...................................................................................................... 55 Notes & Glossary of Juvenile Justice Terms ................................................. 58 i ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS, FY12 LIST OF TABLES & GRAPHS Introduction & Trends Juvenile Justice Flowchart .......................................................................................... 3 Arizona Juvenile Court Activity FY12 ............................................................................ 4 Arizona Juvenile Population Estimates and Projections: Ages 8 – 17, 2012-2027 ............ 4 The Number of Juveniles Dispositioned to Probation, Intensive Probation, ADJC and Adult Court: Fiscal Years 2005 - 2012 .......................................................... 5 Referrals, Petitions Filed, Juveniles Referred and Petitioned, FY 2005 - 2012................... 5 Pathways for Juveniles Transferred and/or Direct Filed in Adult Court: FY 2005 - 2012 .... 6 Juveniles Referred 1.1 County ................................................................................................................ 7 1.2 Sex ..................................................................................................................... 7 1.3 Age .................................................................................................................... 7 1.4 Ethnicity.............................................................................................................. 8 1.5 Education Status .................................................................................................. 8 1.6 Number of Prior Referrals ..................................................................................... 8 1.7 Severity of Most Serious Offense ........................................................................... 8 1.8 Offense Class of Most Serious Offense ................................................................... 8 Graph: Five Year Trend .............................................................................................. 8 1.9 Top Ten Referral Categories ................................................................................. 9 1.10 Top Ten Referral Categories for Previous Fiscal Years ............................................ 9 1.11 Sex by County ..................................................................................................10 1.12 Age by County ..................................................................................................10 1.13 Race by County.................................................................................................11 1.14 Delinquency Risk Level…………….………………………………………………………………………11 Juveniles Detained 2.1 County ...............................................................................................................12 2.2 Sex ....................................................................................................................12 2.3 Age ...................................................................................................................13 2.4 Ethnicity.............................................................................................................13 2.5 Education Status .................................................................................................13 2.6 Number of Prior Referrals ....................................................................................13 2.7 Severity of Most Serious Offense ..........................................................................13 2.8 Offense Class of Most Serious Offense ..................................................................13 Graph: Five Year Trend .............................................................................................13 2.9 Sex by County ....................................................................................................14 2.10 Age by County ..................................................................................................14 2.11 Race by County.................................................................................................15 2.12 Delinquency Risk Level ......................................................................................15 Juveniles Diverted 3.1 County ...............................................................................................................16 3.2 Sex ....................................................................................................................16 3.3 Age ...................................................................................................................16 3.4 Ethnicity.............................................................................................................17 3.5 Education Status .................................................................................................17 3.6 Number of Prior Referrals ....................................................................................17 3.7 Severity of Most Serious Offense ..........................................................................17 3.8 Offense Class of Most Serious Offense ..................................................................17 Graph: Five Year Trend .............................................................................................17 3.9 Sex by County ....................................................................................................18 3.10 Age by County ..................................................................................................18 3.11 Race by County.................................................................................................19 3.12 Delinquency Risk Level…………….………………………………………………………………………19 ii Juveniles with Petitions Filed 4.1 County ...............................................................................................................20 4.2 Sex ....................................................................................................................20 4.3 Age ...................................................................................................................20 4.4 Ethnicity.............................................................................................................21 4.5 Education Status .................................................................................................21 4.6 Number of Prior Referrals ....................................................................................21 4.7 Severity of Most Serious Offense ..........................................................................21 4.8 Offense Class of Most Serious Offense ..................................................................21 Graph: Five Year Trend .............................................................................................21 4.9 Sex by County ....................................................................................................22 4.10 Age by County ..................................................................................................22 4.11 Race by County.................................................................................................23 4.12 Delinquency Risk Level…………….………………………………………………………………………23 Juveniles with Disposition of Dismissed 5.1 County ...............................................................................................................24 5.2 Sex ....................................................................................................................24 5.3 Age ...................................................................................................................24 5.4 Ethnicity.............................................................................................................25 5.5 Education Status .................................................................................................25 5.6 Number of Prior Referrals ....................................................................................25 5.7 Severity of Most Serious Offense ..........................................................................25 5.8 Offense Class of Most Serious Offense ..................................................................25 Graph: Five Year Trend .............................................................................................25 5.9 Sex by County ....................................................................................................26 5.10 Age by County ..................................................................................................26 5.11 Race by County.................................................................................................27 5.12 Delinquency Risk Level…………….………………………………………………………………………27 Juveniles with Dispositions of Penalty Only 6.1 County ...............................................................................................................28 6.2 Sex ....................................................................................................................28 6.3 Age ...................................................................................................................28 6.4 Ethnicity.............................................................................................................29 6.5 Education Status .................................................................................................29 6.6 Number of Prior Referrals ....................................................................................29 6.7 Severity of Most Serious Offense ..........................................................................29 6.8 Offense Class of Most Serious Offense ..................................................................29 Graph: Five Year Trend .............................................................................................29 6.9 Sex by County ....................................................................................................30 6.10 Age by County ..................................................................................................30 6.11 Race by County.................................................................................................31 6.12 Delinquency Risk Level…………….………………………………………………………………………31 Juveniles with Dispositions to Standard Probation 7.1 County ...............................................................................................................32 7.2 Sex ....................................................................................................................32 7.3 Age ...................................................................................................................32 7.4 Ethnicity.............................................................................................................33 7.5 Education Status .................................................................................................33 7.6 Number of Prior Referrals ....................................................................................33 7.7 Severity of Most Serious Offense ..........................................................................33 7.8 Offense Class of Most Serious Offense ..................................................................33 Graph: Five Year Trend .............................................................................................33 7.9 Sex by County ....................................................................................................34 7.10 Age by County ..................................................................................................34 7.11 Race by County.................................................................................................35 7.12 Delinquency Risk Level…………….………………………………………………………………………35 iii Juveniles with Dispositions to JIPS 8.1 County ...............................................................................................................36 8.2 Sex ....................................................................................................................36 8.3 Age ...................................................................................................................36 8.4 Ethnicity.............................................................................................................37 8.5 Education Status .................................................................................................37 8.6 Number of Prior Referrals ....................................................................................37 8.7 Severity of Most Serious Offense ..........................................................................37 8.8 Offense Class of Most Serious Offense ..................................................................37 Graph: Five Year Trend .............................................................................................37 8.9 Sex by County ....................................................................................................38 8.10 Age by County ..................................................................................................38 8.11 Race by County.................................................................................................39 8.12 Delinquency Risk Level…………….………………………………………………………………………39 Juveniles with Dispositions to ADJC 9.1 County ...............................................................................................................40 9.2 Sex ....................................................................................................................40 9.3 Age ...................................................................................................................41 9.4 Ethnicity.............................................................................................................41 9.5 Education Status .................................................................................................41 9.6 Number of Prior Referrals ....................................................................................41 9.7 Severity of Most Serious Offense ..........................................................................41 9.8 Offense Class of Most Serious Offense ..................................................................41 Graph: Five Year Trend .............................................................................................41 9.9 Sex by County ....................................................................................................42 9.10 Age by County ..................................................................................................42 9.11 Race by County.................................................................................................43 9.12 Delinquency Risk Level…………….………………………………………………………………………43 ADJC & AOC Comparison Graph: Juveniles Originally Committed, FY08 – FY12 ...................................................44 10.1 Commitments FY12 ...........................................................................................44 10.2 Commitments FY11 ...........................................................................................45 10.3 Commitments FY10 ...........................................................................................45 Juveniles Direct Filed in and Transferred to Adult Court 11.1 Pathways for Juveniles Filed in Adult Court ..........................................................46 11.2 County: Direct Filed in and Transferred to Adult Court .........................................46 Juveniles Direct Filed in Adult Court 11.3 County .............................................................................................................47 11.4 Sex ..................................................................................................................47 11.5 Age..................................................................................................................47 11.6 Ethnicity ...........................................................................................................48 11.7 Education Status ...............................................................................................48 11.8 Number of Prior Referrals ..................................................................................48 11.9 Severity of Most Serious Offense ........................................................................48 11.10 Offense Class of Most Serious Offense...............................................................48 Graph: Five Year Trend .............................................................................................48 11.11 Sex by County.................................................................................................49 11.12 Age by County ................................................................................................49 11.13 Race by County ...............................................................................................50 11.14 Delinquency Risk Level ....................................................................................50 Juveniles Transferred to Adult Court 11.15 County ...........................................................................................................51 11.16 Sex ................................................................................................................51 11.17 Age ................................................................................................................51 11.18 Ethnicity .........................................................................................................52 11.19 Education Status .............................................................................................52 iv 11.20 Number of Prior Referrals.................................................................................52 11.21 Severity of Most Serious Offense ......................................................................52 11.22 Offense Class of Most Serious Offense...............................................................52 Graph: Five Year Trend .............................................................................................52 11.23 Sex by County.................................................................................................53 11.24 Age by County ................................................................................................53 11.25 Race by County ...............................................................................................54 11.26 Delinquency Risk Level ....................................................................................54 Sex 12.1 Percentage of Each Sex at Stages in the Juvenile Justice System ...........................55 12.2 Average Age at First Referral..............................................................................55 12.3 Severity of the Most Serious Referral Offense ......................................................56 12.4 Offense Type of Most Serious Referral Offense ....................................................56 12.5 Juveniles Referred Who Received Treatment .......................................................57 12.6 Treatment Expenditures ....................................................................................57 Graph: Referrals by Sex ............................................................................................57 Notes & Glossary Notes ......................................................................................................................58 Glossary - Juvenile Justice Terms ...............................................................................62 v This page intentionally left blank. vi FY 2012 Introduction & Trends for Arizona’s Juvenile Court Counts FY05-FY12 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS IN FY12 INTRODUCTION & TRENDS 21 0B This is the second publication of Arizona’s Juvenile Court Counts. The methodology for calculating information is identical to the data book published by the Juvenile Justice Services Division (JJSD) of the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) from 1993-2010; Juveniles Processed in the Arizona Court System. The data for this report are extracted each year from the Juvenile On-Line Tracking Systems (JOLTS) and Integrated Court Information System (ICIS). JOLTS is the automated juvenile court information management system which has been operational and used by fourteen counties statewide for over fifteen years. After using JOLTS for more than 25 years, Maricopa County upgraded to their new ICIS system on July 1st 2008. Data from both JOLTS and iCIS was extracted on August 28th 2012. Each juvenile court actively participates in collecting and maintaining the data to ensure quality and accuracy. This report provides an overview of the juveniles processed at various stages of the juvenile justice system statewide during fiscal year 2012 (FY12), July 1, 2011 - June 30, 2012. Selected breakdowns of unduplicated juvenile counts1 are presented at the following stages: ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ Referral Detention Diversion Petition Dismissed Penalty Only Standard Probation ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ Juvenile Intensive Probation Supervision (JIPS) Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections (ADJC) Juveniles Direct Filed and Transferred to Adult Court Special Classification of Each Stage by Sex Characteristics of juveniles at each of these stages are contained in this report. Each characterization of the juvenile is determined using his or her most recent referral. The demographic characteristics displayed are sex, race, age, and education status. This information is followed by offense-specific characteristics that contain the number of prior referrals, offense class of the most serious offense, and the severity of the most serious offense.2 In addition, key demographic breakouts of sex, age and race at the county level for each chapter and statewide percentage of youth at each risk level at each stage are provided. Be aware that juveniles may have entered the system in a previous fiscal year but did not experience processing at a particular stage until this fiscal year. Data are not following the same juveniles through each stage; rather they are describing the juveniles who experienced a particular stage during FY12. In other words, one or more of the stages presented in this report happened during the year. Juveniles who were referred, detained, diverted, petitioned, had at least one disposition from the court, and/or were direct filed and/or transferred to adult court, at one point during FY12 are included in the reporting. The number of juveniles progressing through the juvenile justice system is influenced by several factors, such as legislative actions, law enforcement and prosecutorial practices, and the number of juvenile’s age eight to seventeen years old in Arizona’s population. Throughout 2012, the juvenile population continues to increase steadily, as evidenced in the Arizona Juvenile Population Estimates and Projections chart in this section. 3 The flow chart of the juvenile justice system in this Introduction and Trends section of the report is followed by a chart entitled Arizona Juvenile Court Activity FY12 that illustrates selected stages within the juvenile justice system and the number of juveniles processed at each stage. This chart outlines all stages showing both duplicated and unduplicated counts of juveniles. Since a juvenile may receive more than one referral in a given year 1 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY12 and each referral received 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. The unduplicated numbers of referrals and petitions on this chart demonstrates the amount of workload generated by these juveniles at each stage. Graphs included in the Introduction and Trends section illustrate trends since FY05. The first series of graphs shows data on referrals, juveniles referred, petitions filed and juveniles with petitions filed. The “referrals” figure includes the number of referrals for the year. The “juveniles referred” figure, on the other hand, shows the number of unique youth. The same distinction is made between petitions filed (includes counts of multiple petitions per youth) and juveniles with petitions filed (unduplicated). The second series of graphs shows the number of juveniles ordered to specific dispositions for each year. The number for each disposition is unduplicated; however, if a youth experienced more than one disposition during the year, he or she would be counted once in each disposition category. The last graph shows the pathways to adult court: judicial transfer, mandatory direct file, mandatory prior conviction direct file, chronic direct file, and discretionary direct file. Each pathway reflects the number of juveniles who were sent to adult court through that particular channel. While the number of juveniles in each pathway is unduplicated, a juvenile may appear in more than one pathway. Analysis of data on juveniles processed in the Arizona court system is ongoing. Data is analyzed to identify the treatment needs of juveniles; to determine what works in meeting needs and obtaining the best outcomes; to identify the most cost effective allocation of resources; and to develop the most effective partnerships with local communities to provide for public safety and juvenile accountability. Information from this report and others, in addition to past and ongoing studies, is important for public policy makers, juvenile justice professionals, and Arizona citizens to understand, formulate, and address current and future juvenile justice trends and issues. Several reports have also been completed over the past years, including Juveniles Processed FY00 through FY10, Arizona Juvenile Court Counts FY11, and AZ Juvenile Performance Measures Report Card FY08. These reports are available on the Arizona Supreme Court, Juvenile Justice Services Division (JJSD) website, http://www.azcourts.gov/jjsd. U U 2 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS IN FY12 3 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY12 Data Source: Arizona Supreme Court, Administrative Office of the Courts, Juvenile Justice Services Division; JOLTS/ICIS Research Extract FY2012 U Arizona Juvenile Population Estimates and Projections: Age 8-17 2012-2027 1,046,525 1,030,722 1,020,439 1,011,611 1,002,713 995,172 989,372 984,396 978,784 975,729 969,083 955,973 939,459 924,365 900,000 914,674 1,100,000 907,471 U 700,000 500,000 2012-2027 Population Estimates: Arizona Department of Administration, Office of Employment and Population Statistics 4 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY12 Referrals, Petitions Filed and Juveniles Referred and Petitioned Fiscal Years 2005 - 2012 90,000 73,116 75,000 72,771 86,617 69,976 68,902 60,822 60,000 54,610 48,436 48,395 48,677 46,749 45,955 45,000 41,040 36,639 30,066 30,000 15,000 18,329 30,547 18,055 30,425 30,555 28,336 17,974 17,958 50,251 24,074 16,945 21,897 14,307 12,805 FY10 FY11 33,617 19,602 11,249 0 FY05 FY06 Referrals FY07 FY08 FY09 Juveniles Referred Petitions FY12 Juveniles Petitioned The Number of Juveniles Dispositioned to Probation, Intensive Probation, ADJC and Adult Court - Fiscal Years 2005 - 2012 10,000 10,043 10,066 10,211 10,157 9,821 9,351 7,793 8,000 6,695 6,000 4,000 2,193 2,069 2,000 555 625 FY05 1,967 1,869 926 924 848 833 863 0 2,023 FY06 Standard Probation 605 588 FY07 FY08 751 427 611 FY09 Intensive Probation 5 1,568 1,449 703 364 FY10 ADJC FY11 1,282 584 277 FY12 Adult Court ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY12 Pathways for Juveniles Transferred and/or Direct Filed in Adult Court Fiscal Years 2005 - 20121 300 263 246 250 185 200 200 245 238 224 187 153 188 181 150 153 152 100 72 78 72 61 63 81 50 0 99 93 64 27 55 39 14 FY05 Transfer FY06 FY08 Mandatory 34 25 FY09 Mandatory-Prior 6 105 32 45 38 FY07 62 57 104 31 FY10 Chronic 26 24 FY11 18 18 FY12 Discretionary FY 2012 Referral Counts for Juveniles in the Arizona Court System Juveniles Referred Juveniles Detained Juveniles Diverted JUVENILES REFERRED IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 JUVENILES REFERRED 1B Information presented in this section characterizes individual youth (unduplicated). For those youth who were referred more than once during the fiscal year, information from the first instance in the time frame is reported. Table 1.1 shows the distribution of youth across counties in Arizona. Demographic and offense specific information are presented in subsequent tables. This section on juveniles referred to the Arizona Superior Court system reflects the characteristics of those juveniles, ages eight through seventeen, who came in contact with the system in FY12. The juveniles counted are those who had a report submitted to the juvenile court alleging that the youth committed a delinquent act or incorrigible behavior. Referrals can be made by police, parents, school officials, probation officers, other agencies or individuals requesting juvenile court assume jurisdiction over the youth’s conduct. Referrals can be “paper referrals” issued as citations or police reports to the juvenile court or “physical referrals” in which the juvenile is physically brought to the court. In 2012, there were approximately 975,022 juveniles ages eight to seventeen in Arizona. From July 1, 2011 to June 31, 2012, 3.5% of these juveniles (33,617) were referred at least once to Arizona’s juvenile courts. This represents about 1 in every 29 juveniles. These 33,617 juveniles generated 50,251 referrals, an average of 1.5 referrals per juvenile. 20BTable 1.1 County: Juveniles Referred FY12 Apache 149 0.44% Cochise 918 2.73% Coconino 961 2.86% Gila 445 Graham 231 0.69% Greenlee 79 0.24% La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo 102 0.30% 17,635 52.46% 1,479 4.40% 708 2.11% Pima 5,878 17.49% Pinal 1,683 5.01% Santa Cruz 425 1.26% Yavapai 1,296 3.86% Yuma 1,628 4.84% TOTAL 33,617 100.00% Table 1.2 Sex: Juveniles Referred FY12 Male 22,189 66.01% Female 11,428 33.99% TOTAL 33,617 100.00% Table 1.3 Age: Juveniles Referred FY12 8 139 0.41% 9 207 0.62% 10 329 0.98% 11 684 2.03% 12 1,425 4.24% 13 2,756 8.20% 14 4,365 12.98% 15 6,436 19.15% 16 7,569 22.52% 17 9,480 28.20% 227 0.68% 33,617 100.00% Unknown TOTAL 7 1.32% JUVENILES REFERRED IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 Table 1.4 Race: Juveniles Referred FY12 Hispanic 12,674 African American 3,170 9.43% Anglo 14,985 44.58% Native American 37.70% 1,931 5.74% Other 104 0.31% Unknown 494 1.47% Asian/Pacific Islander 259 0.77% TOTAL 33,617 100.00% Table 1.7 Severity of Most Serious Offense: Juveniles Referred FY122 Felonies Against Person 1,784 5.31% Felonies Against Property 2,574 Obstruction of Justice: Felony & Misdemeanor 2,872 8.54% Misdemeanors Against Person 3,502 10.42% Drugs: Felony & Misdemeanor 4,763 14.17% Public Peace: Felony & Misdemeanor 8,427 25.07% Misdemeanors Against Property 5,514 16.40% Status Offenses 3,878 11.54% 303 0.90% Administrative Table 1.5 Education Status: Juveniles Referred FY12 Enrolled 20,176 60.02% Not Enrolled 1,321 3.93% Expelled 105 0.31% Suspended 130 0.39% Withdrawn 188 0.56% Graduated 122 0.36% GED Program 21 0.06% Unknown 11,554 34.37% TOTAL 33,617 100.00% Table 1.6 Number of Prior Referrals: Juveniles Referred FY12 0 17,253 51.32% 1 6,048 17.99% 2 3,006 8.94% 3 1,887 5.61% 4 1,245 3.70% 5 913 2.72% 6 731 2.17% 7 517 1.54% 2,017 6.00% 33,617 100.00% 8 or more TOTAL TOTAL 33,617 7.66% 100.00% Table 1.8 Offense Class of Most Serious Offense: Juveniles Referred FY12 Felony 10,310 30.67% Misdemeanor 17,762 52.84% Violations of Probation & Ordinances 1,364 4.06% Status 3,878 11.54% Other 303 0.90% TOTAL 33,617 100.00% Juveniles Referred 60,000 50,000 45,955 41,040 46,749 36,639 40,000 33,617 30,000 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 For FY05 through FY12 data, refer to the graphs on page 5. 8 FY12 JUVENILES REFERRED IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 Table 1.9 Top Ten Referral Categories FY12 Shoplifting-Misdemeanor 5,240 10.43% Probation Violation 4,996 9.94% Alcohol 4,110 8.18% Runaway 3,702 7.37% Marijuana Possession 2,312 4.60% Drug Paraphernalia 2,297 4.57% Curfew 2,117 4.21% Truancy 2,040 4.06% DV Assault -Misdemeanor 1,757 3.50% Disorderly Conduct 1,540 3.06% 30,111 50,251 59.92% 100.00% TOTAL TOP TEN REFERRALS TOTAL ALL REFERRALS Table 1.10 Top Ten Referral Categories for Previous Fiscal Years* FY2008 Probation Violation FY2009 Shoplifting - Misd FY2010 Shoplifting - Misd FY2011 Shoplifting - Misd 6,628 Shoplifting - Misd 7,308 Probation Violation 6,734 Probation Violation 5,686 Probation Violation 6,323 Truancy 6,362 Runaway 4,394 Runaway 4,242 3,881 Alcohol 4,318 Runaway 4,131 3,702 Alcohol Curfew 3,980 Marijuana Possession 3,557 Disorderly Conduct 3,296 3,259 5,575 Alcohol 4,556 Curfew Curfew 6,118 Alcohol 4,302 Disorderly Conduct 3,440 Runaway Marijuana Possession Truancy 3,053 Marijuana Possession 3,108 Drug Paraphernalia 3,275 Drug Paraphernalia Truancy 2,492 Disorderly Conduct 2,373 Assault-Simple 2,362 Disorderly Conduct 2,326 Assault-Simple 3,275 Drug Paraphernalia 2,282 Assault-Simple 2,064 2,100 1,947 3,304 Marijuana Possession 2,745 Truancy 2,985 2,554 Drug Paraphernalia 2,453 Curfew 2,425 Assault-Simple *Cells indicate the number of referrals for each offense. 9 2,104 In FY12, shopliftingmisdemeanor was the most common referral, followed closely by runaway within county. This suggests Arizona’s juvenile probation departments are holding juveniles accountable. Over the past five years, there has been little change in the categories of the top ten offenses. Explanations of the categories can be found in the Notes section.4 JUVENILES REFERRED IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 In Tables 1.11-1.13 county specific breakouts of the key demographic variables of sex, age and race are presented. Table 1.14 gives a percentage of youth by delinquency risk level. That is youth who were identified as having a low, medium, or high risk level to reoffend on their first referral to the juvenile court in the fiscal year based on the delinquency risk assessment. Table 1.11 Sex by County: Juveniles Referred FY12 Male Female Total % of Total Apache 91 58 149 0.44% Cochise 579 339 918 2.73% Coconino 599 362 961 2.86% Gila 295 150 445 1.32% Graham 144 87 231 0.69% Greenlee 53 26 79 0.24% La Paz 77 25 102 0.30% 11,778 5,857 17,635 52.46% Mohave 960 519 1,479 4.40% Navajo Maricopa 457 251 708 2.11% Pima 3,857 2,021 5,878 17.49% Pinal 1,158 525 1,683 5.01% Santa Cruz 283 142 425 1.26% Yavapai 820 476 1,296 3.86% Yuma 1,038 590 1,628 4.84% TOTAL 22,189 11,428 33,617 100.00% Table 1.12 Age by County: Juveniles Referred FY12 8 Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma TOTAL 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Unknown Total % of Total 1 0 0 1 7 15 19 34 44 28 0 149 0.44% 3 8 14 26 46 85 124 173 205 231 3 918 2.73% 2 6 6 14 49 67 135 184 216 273 9 961 2.86% 9 3 9 12 20 36 54 76 106 115 5 445 1.32% 5 0 2 5 9 29 35 48 43 55 0 231 0.69% 0 2 4 0 4 7 9 18 20 15 0 79 0.24% 0 0 2 1 4 7 6 18 26 38 0 102 0.30% 23 67 128 267 633 1,345 2,265 3,449 4,156 5,209 93 17,635 52.46% 7 9 15 45 57 138 185 266 323 418 16 1,479 4.40% 0 3 6 9 21 63 85 141 162 211 7 708 2.11% 36 53 80 152 321 527 853 1,054 1,194 1,559 49 5,878 17.49% 2 11 18 42 80 154 193 340 341 479 23 1,683 5.01% 2 5 4 13 14 21 43 68 93 156 6 425 1.26% 7 9 11 37 71 128 161 269 293 307 3 1,296 3.86% 42 31 30 60 89 134 198 298 347 386 13 1,628 4.84% 139 207 329 684 1,425 2,756 4,365 6,436 7,569 9,480 227 33,617 100.00% 10 JUVENILES REFERRED IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 Table 1.13 Race by County: Juveniles Referred FY12 Apache Hispanic African American Anglo Native American Asian/PI Other Unknown Total % of Total 28 0 92 26 1 0 2 149 0.44% Cochise 362 58 459 20 7 1 11 918 2.73% Coconino 131 31 352 440 2 3 2 961 2.86% Gila 89 9 299 40 6 0 2 445 1.32% Graham 61 6 146 14 0 0 4 231 0.69% Greenlee 17 3 56 2 0 0 1 79 0.24% La Paz 39 2 58 3 0 0 0 102 0.30% 6,474 2,227 7,762 617 153 53 349 17,635 52.46% Maricopa Mohave 167 41 1203 43 1 3 21 1,479 4.40% Navajo 74 19 326 265 0 2 22 708 2.11% Pima 2,842 494 2,134 254 73 32 49 5,878 17.49% Pinal 572 191 784 110 7 5 14 1,683 5.01% Santa Cruz 404 0 17 0 0 1 3 425 1.26% Yavapai 226 27 985 44 4 4 6 1,296 3.86% Yuma 1,188 62 312 53 5 0 8 1,628 4.84% TOTAL 12,674 3,170 14,985 1,931 259 104 494 33,617 100% Table 1.14 Delinquency Risk Level: Juveniles Referred FY12 Low Medium High TOTAL 45.6% 26.2% 28.1% 100.00% 11 This page intentionally left blank. JUVENILES DETAINED IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 JUVENILES DETAINED Information presented in this section characterizes individual youth (unduplicated). For youth who were detained more than once during the fiscal year, information from their first instance in the time frame is reported. where they were detained. Additionally, some counties have entered into contracts and/or agreements with federal agencies, tribal courts, or other state agencies to house juveniles. Table 2.1 shows the distribution of youth across the counties in Arizona. Demographic and offense specific information are presented in subsequent tables. Table 2.1 County: Juveniles Detained FY12 Apache 75 0.98% Cochise 170 2.22% 21B Juvenile detention is the temporary and secure custody of juveniles under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court requiring a restricted environment for their own protection and/or the safety of the community. Responsibility for maintaining a juvenile detention center separate from an adult jail or lockup is vested with the counties. Juvenile detention provides a range of services which support the juvenile's physical, emotional, educational and social development. Supportive services minimally include: education, recreation, nutrition, medical and health services, visitation, communication and continuous supervision. Juvenile detention also provides for a system of clinical observation and assessment. In Arizona, a juvenile may be detained for the following reasons: 1. Probable cause to believe the juvenile committed acts alleged in the petition, and reasonable cause to believe: a. The juvenile would not be present at any hearing; b. Juvenile is likely to commit an offense injurious to himself or others; c. Juvenile must be held for another jurisdiction; d. Juvenile interests or the public require custodial protection. 2. As a condition of probation. Thirteen of the fifteen counties in Arizona maintain juvenile secure care facilities. Juveniles from two counties are transported to other jurisdictions when the need for secure custody is determined. These juveniles appear in the originating county’s data as well as in the data of the county 12 Coconino 186 2.43% Gila 122 1.60% Graham 103 1.35% Greenlee 23 0.30% La Paz 11 0.14% 3,816 49.94% Mohave 368 4.82% Navajo 228 2.98% Pima 692 9.06% Pinal 666 8.72% Santa Cruz 138 1.81% Yavapai 405 5.30% Yuma 638 8.35% TOTAL 7,641 100.00% Maricopa In FY12, 7,641 juveniles were detained at least once. Only 5,138 (67.0%) 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. • • The 5,138 juveniles that were detained on a referral (physical referral) represent 15.3% of the juveniles referred to the juvenile court in FY12. Over the past few years, juveniles detained have decreased from a high of 11,674 in FY08 to the low of 7,641 this year in spite of increased populations. Table 2.2 Sex: Juveniles Detained FY12 Male 5,880 Female 1,761 23.05% 7,641 100.0% TOTAL 76.95% JUVENILES DETAINED IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 Table 2.3 Age: Juveniles Detained FY12 8 3 0.04% 9 12 0.16% 10 17 0.22% 11 63 0.82% 12 146 1.91% 13 436 5.71% 14 838 10.97% 15 1,447 18.94% 16 2,005 26.24% 17 2,633 34.46% 41 0.54% 7,641 100.00% Unknown TOTAL Felonies Against Property 1,011 19.68% Obstruction of Justice: Felony & Misdemeanor 1,049 20.42% Misdemeanors Against Person 649 12.63% Drugs: Felony & Misdemeanor 520 10.12% Public Peace: Felony & Misdemeanor 682 13.27% Misdemeanors Against Property 232 4.52% Status Offenses 43 0.84% Administrative 57 1.11% 5,138 100.00% TOTAL Table 2.8 Offense Class of Most Serious Offense: Juveniles Detained FY12 Table 2.4 Race: Juveniles Detained FY12 Hispanic Table 2.7 Severity of Most Serious Offense: Juveniles Detained FY12 Felonies Against Person 895 17.42% 3,258 42.64% 907 11.87% 2,850 37.30% 555 7.26% Violations of Probation & Ordinances Asian/Pacific Islander 35 0.46% Other 16 0.21% Unknown 20 0.26% 7,641 100.00% African American Anglo Native American TOTAL Felony 2,738 53.29% Misdemeanor 1,590 30.95% 738 14.36% Status 42 0.82% Other 30 0.58% TOTAL 5,138 100.00% Table 2.5 Education Status: Juveniles Detained FY12 Enrolled 2,871 37.57% Not Enrolled 532 6.96% Expelled 61 0.80% Suspended 53 0.69% Withdrawn 89 1.16% Graduated 34 0.44% GED Program 14 0.18% Unknown 3,987 52.18% TOTAL 7,641 100.00% Table 2.6 Number of Prior Referrals: Juveniles Detained FY12 0 1,230 23.94% 1 763 14.85% 2 579 11.27% 3 441 8.58% 4 339 6.60% 5 315 6.13% 6 283 5.51% 7 203 3.95% 8 or more 985 19.17% 5,138 100.00% TOTAL 13 JUVENILES DETAINED IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 4B In Tables 2.9-2.11 county specific breakouts of the key demographic variables of sex, age and race are presented. Table 2.12 gives a percentage of youth by delinquency risk level. That is youth who were identified as having a low, medium, or high risk level to reoffend on their first referral to detention on a complaint in the fiscal year based on the delinquency risk assessment. Table 2.9 Sex by County: Juveniles Detained FY12 Male Female Total % of Total Apache 42 33 75 0.98% Cochise 126 44 170 2.22% Coconino 143 43 186 2.43% 91 31 122 1.60% Graham 67 36 103 1.35% Greenlee 19 4 23 0.30% 9 2 11 0.14% 3015 801 3,816 49.94% Mohave 268 100 368 4.82% Navajo 158 70 228 2.98% Pima 548 144 692 9.06% Pinal 511 155 666 8.72% Santa Cruz 106 32 138 1.81% Yavapai 296 109 405 5.30% Yuma 481 157 638 8.35% TOTAL 5,880 1,761 7,641 100.00% Gila La Paz Maricopa Table 2.10 Age by County: Juveniles Detained FY12 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Unknown Total % of Total Apache 1 0 0 0 3 8 9 15 26 13 0 75 0.98% Cochise 0 0 0 0 4 9 20 37 38 62 0 170 2.22% Coconino 0 0 0 0 5 5 26 33 46 71 0 186 2.43% Gila 0 0 1 1 1 5 13 23 29 48 1 122 1.60% Graham 0 0 0 2 2 11 14 25 21 28 0 103 1.35% Greenlee 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 5 7 5 1 23 0.30% La Paz 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 3 0 11 0.14% Maricopa 1 8 7 29 62 201 416 705 1,026 1,341 20 3,816 49.94% Mohave 0 0 0 6 6 16 43 81 86 126 4 368 4.82% Navajo 1 0 1 3 1 8 21 36 59 96 2 228 2.98% Pima 0 1 0 3 9 43 73 127 177 257 2 692 9.06% Pinal 0 0 5 9 23 52 81 140 152 199 5 666 8.72% Santa Cruz 0 0 0 0 3 9 16 26 36 46 2 138 1.81% Yavapai 0 2 2 5 10 26 42 69 112 136 1 405 5.30% Yuma 0 1 1 5 16 42 61 120 187 202 3 638 8.35% TOTAL 3 12 17 63 146 436 838 1,447 2,005 2,633 41 7,641 100.00% 14 JUVENILES DETAINED IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 Table 2.11 Race by County: Juveniles Detained FY12 Hispanic African American Native American Anglo Asian/PI Other Unknown Total % of Total Apache 16 0 49 9 0 0 1 75 0.98% Cochise 80 14 65 6 1 0 4 170 2.22% Coconino 34 8 52 91 1 0 0 186 2.43% Gila 42 2 52 24 0 0 2 122 1.60% Graham 28 5 62 7 0 0 1 103 1.35% Greenlee 3 2 15 3 0 0 0 23 0.30% La Paz 3 1 7 0 0 0 0 11 0.14% 1,663 681 1,250 183 25 8 6 3,816 49.94% Mohave 63 10 279 14 0 1 1 368 4.82% Navajo 29 10 97 89 0 1 2 228 2.98% Pima 362 65 213 46 2 3 1 692 9.06% Pinal 255 77 285 45 3 1 0 666 8.72% Santa Cruz 134 0 4 0 0 0 0 138 1.81% 75 7 305 14 1 2 1 405 5.30% Yuma 471 25 115 24 2 0 1 638 8.35% TOTAL 3,258 907 2,850 555 35 16 20 7,641 100.00% Maricopa Yavapai Table 2.12 Delinquency Risk Level: Juveniles Detained FY12 Low 11.1% Medium 21.9% High 67.0% TOTAL 100.00% 15 JUVENILES DIVERTED IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 JUVENILES DIVERTED Information presented in this section characterizes individual youth (unduplicated). For youth who were diverted more than once during the fiscal year, information from the first instance during the time frame is reported. Table 3.1 County: Juveniles Diverted FY12 Apache 22 0.14% 2B 393 2.50% Coconino 434 2.76% Gila Table 3.1 shows the distribution of youth across counties in Arizona. Demographic and offense specific information are presented on subsequent tables. Cochise 176 1.12% Graham 65 0.41% Greenlee 22 0.14% La Paz 35 0.22% 8,379 53.24% Diversion allows a juvenile to avoid formal court processing and have the referral alleging an offense adjusted if the juvenile completes one or more conditions. If a referral is adjusted, a petition is not filed. Conditions to be completed are the consequences assigned based on the juvenile’s behavior. Maricopa A.R.S. §8-321 provides the statutory authority and requirements for determining which juveniles can be diverted and the conditions that must be met. The major requirements are briefly summarized in the Notes section at the end of the document.5 In FY12, there were 15,737 juveniles diverted in Arizona’s juvenile justice system. Over the last five years, the number of juveniles having referrals diverted has declined 23.8% and the number of juveniles referred has declined 28% over the same time period. The trend line of juveniles referred over the last five years is visually displayed at the bottom of page 13. It is expected diverted juveniles would have less serious offenses and little or no prior referrals. Of the juveniles diverted in FY12: • • 68.44% had no prior referrals. 66.15% had a misdemeanor as the most serious offense. Mohave 617 3.92% Navajo 140 0.89% Pima 3,475 22.08% Pinal 503 3.20% Santa Cruz 157 1.00% Yavapai 764 4.85% Yuma 555 3.53% TOTAL 15,737 100.00% 35B Table 3.2 Sex: Juveniles Diverted FY12 Male 9,529 60.55% Female 39.45% TOTAL 15,737 100.0% Table 3.3 Age: Juveniles Diverted FY12 8 81 0.51% 9 107 0.68% 10 210 1.33% 11 432 2.75% 12 898 5.71% 13 1,632 10.37% 14 2,428 15.43% 15 3,310 21.03% 16 3,468 22.04% 17 3,169 20.14% 2 0.01% 15,737 100.0% Unknown TOTAL 16 6,208 JUVENILES DIVERTED IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 Table 3.4 Race: Juveniles Diverted FY12 Hispanic 5,992 38.08% Table 3.7 Severity of Most Serious Offense: Juveniles Diverted FY12 Felonies Against Person 119 324 1.62% 87 0.70% 0.70% African American 1,308 8.31% Anglo 7,274 46.22% Native American 738 4.69% Obstruction of Justice: Felony & Misdemeanor Asian/Pacific Islander 161 1.02% Misdemeanors Against Person 1,858 10.64% 60 0.38% Drugs: Felony & Misdemeanor 2,550 14.51% 204 1.30% Public Peace: Felony & Misdemeanor 4,334 28.42% Misdemeanors Against Property 4,318 15,737 100.00% 26.86% Status Offenses 2,114 16.42% 33 0.12% 15,737 100.0% Other Unknown TOTAL Felonies Against Property Administrative Table 3.5 Education Status: Juveniles Diverted FY12 11,052 70.23% 320 2.03% Expelled 23 0.15% Suspended 35 0.22% Withdrawn 31 0.20% Graduated 42 0.27% 1 0.01% 4,233 26.90% 15,737 100.00% Enrolled Not Enrolled GED Program Unknown TOTAL TOTAL Table 3.8 Offense Class of Most Serious Offense: Juveniles Diverted FY12 Felony Misdemeanor Violations of Probation & Ordinances Status Other Table 3.6 Number of Prior Referrals: Juveniles Diverted FY12 0 10,771 68.44% Invalid Complaint 1 3,152 20.03% 2 TOTAL 960 6.10% 3 383 2.43% 4 170 1.08% 5 102 0.65% 6 42 0.27% 7 8 or more TOTAL 35 0.22% 122 0.78% 15,737 100.0% 3,106 17.57% 10,410 66.15% 74 0.47% 2,114 16.42% 31 0.11% 2 0.01% 15,737 100.0% Juveniles Diverted 22,000 18,000 20,664 21,359 18,779 14,000 17,109 15,737 10,000 FY08 17 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 JUVENILES DIVERTED IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 Table 3.9 Sex by County: Juveniles Diverted FY12 Male Female Total Apache 10 12 22 0.14% Cochise 224 169 393 2.50% Coconino 226 208 434 2.76% Gila 111 65 176 1.12% Graham 30 35 65 0.41% Greenlee 12 10 22 0.14% La Paz 23 12 35 0.22% 5092 3287 8,379 53.24% Mohave 358 259 617 3.92% Navajo 84 56 140 0.89% Pima 2202 1273 3,475 22.08% Pinal 300 203 503 3.20% Santa Cruz 102 55 157 1.00% Yavapai 436 328 764 4.85% Maricopa In Tables 3.9-3.11 county specific breakouts of the key demographic variables of sex, age and race are presented. Table 3.12 gives a percentage of youth by delinquency risk level. That is youth who were identified as having a low, medium, or high risk level to reoffend, within 12 months, on their first referral diverted in the fiscal year based on the delinquency risk assessment. % of Total Yuma 319 236 555 3.53% TOTAL 9,529 6,208 15,737 100.00% Table 3.10 Age by County: Juveniles Diverted FY12 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Unknown Total % of Total Apache 0 0 0 1 3 4 2 7 3 2 0 22 0.14% Cochise 2 6 10 19 27 46 59 80 71 73 0 393 2.50% Coconino 2 4 3 8 20 31 64 100 114 88 0 434 2.76% Gila 4 1 7 7 10 11 17 35 48 36 0 176 1.12% Graham 3 0 0 0 2 12 11 12 11 14 0 65 0.41% Greenlee 0 1 2 0 2 2 4 4 3 4 0 22 0.14% La Paz 0 0 0 1 0 2 3 6 12 11 0 35 0.22% 11 18 71 155 405 824 1315 1880 1954 1746 0 8,379 53.24% Mohave 4 4 13 32 35 74 96 121 129 109 0 617 3.92% Navajo 0 2 2 5 10 17 21 30 29 24 0 140 0.89% Pima 20 35 56 105 245 388 555 640 699 730 2 3,475 22.08% Pinal 1 7 5 23 38 55 67 114 120 73 0 503 3.20% Santa Cruz 0 3 3 6 5 9 25 33 33 40 0 157 1.00% Yavapai 2 4 9 25 46 98 112 176 156 136 0 764 4.85% Yuma 32 22 29 45 50 59 77 72 86 83 0 555 3.53% TOTAL 81 107 210 432 898 1,632 2,428 3,310 3,468 3,169 2 15,737 100% Maricopa 18 JUVENILES DIVERTED IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 Table 3.12 Race by County: Juveniles Diverted FY12 African Native Hispanic American Anglo American Asian/PI Other Unknown Total % of Total Apache 4 0 15 3 0 0 0 22 0.14% Cochise 155 25 194 11 4 0 4 393 2.50% Coconino 57 11 176 185 1 3 1 434 2.76% Gila 33 3 126 8 5 0 1 176 1.12% Graham 14 0 47 2 0 0 2 65 0.41% Greenlee 7 1 14 0 0 0 0 22 0.14% 14 0 19 2 0 0 0 35 0.22% 3098 905 3832 271 87 28 158 8,379 53.24% 65 15 514 14 1 1 7 617 3.92% La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo 15 7 73 41 0 1 3 140 0.89% Pima 1693 255 1298 134 56 24 15 3,475 22.08% Pinal 152 50 266 29 2 0 4 503 3.20% Santa Cruz 151 0 6 0 0 0 0 157 1.00% Yavapai 123 17 587 25 4 3 5 764 4.85% Yuma 411 19 107 13 1 0 4 555 3.53% TOTAL 5,992 1,308 7,274 738 161 60 204 15,737 100% Table 3.12 Delinquency Risk Level: Juveniles Diverted FY12 Low 60.1% Medium 27.8% High 12.1% TOTAL 100.00% 19 FY 2012 Juvenile Court Counts Petitions in the Arizona Court System Juveniles with Petitions Filed Juveniles with Dispositions of Dismissed Juveniles with Dispositions of Penalty Only Juveniles with Dispositions to Standard Probation Juveniles with Dispositions to JIPS JUVENILES WITH PETITIONS FILED IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 PETITIONS FILED 5B Information presented in this section characterizes individual youth (unduplicated). For youth who were petitioned more than once during the fiscal year, information from their first instance during the time frame is reported. Table 4.1 shows the distribution of youth across the counties in Arizona. Demographic and offense specific information are presented in the subsequent tables. A petition is a legal document filed in the juvenile court alleging a referred juvenile is delinquent or incorrigible and requests the court to assume jurisdiction over the youth. A petition initiates the formal court hearing process of the juvenile court and is prepared by the county attorney who determines what charges to bring against the juvenile. 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. 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 which would not be considered a crime if he or she were an adult. Typically, incorrigible youth are juveniles who are habitually truant from school, runaway from home, or violate curfew. In addition, juveniles who refuse to obey the reasonable and proper direction of their parents or guardians can be considered incorrigible. There were 11,249 juveniles with a petition filed during FY12. The relative rate of petitions is rather stable hovering around 34% of the juveniles referred. The average age of juveniles receiving a petition is just over 15 years old and 75% of juveniles petitioned are between 15 and 17 years of age. Table 4.1 County: Petitions Filed FY12 Apache 87 0.77% Cochise 322 2.86% Coconino 387 3.44% Gila 228 2.03% Graham 153 1.36% Greenlee 45 0.40% La Paz 32 0.28% 4,863 43.23% Mohave 491 4.36% Navajo 421 3.74% 1,677 14.91% Maricopa Pima Pinal 771 6.85% Santa Cruz 249 2.21% Yavapai 635 5.64% Yuma 888 7.89% TOTAL 11,249 100.00% Table 4.2 Sex: Petitions Filed FY12 Male 8,462 Female TOTAL 24.78% 11,249 100.0% Table 4.3 Age: Petitions Filed FY12 8 12 0.11% 9 22 0.20% 10 55 0.49% 11 161 1.43% 12 360 3.20% 13 812 7.22% 14 1,421 12.63% 15 2,315 20.58% 16 2,889 25.68% 17 3,192 28.38% Unknown TOTAL 20 75.22% 2,787 10 0.09% 11,249 100.0% JUVENILES WITH PETITIONS FILED IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 Table 4.4 Race: Petitions Filed FY12 Hispanic 4,630 41.16% African American 1,170 10.40% Anglo 4,437 39.44% 882 7.84% 57 0.51% Native American Asian/Pacific Islander Other Unknown TOTAL 28 45 11,249 0.25% 0.40% 100.0 Table 4.5 Education Status: Petitions Filed FY12 Enrolled 6,574 58.44% Not Enrolled 913 8.12% Expelled 98 0.87% Suspended 104 0.92% Withdrawn 152 1.35% Graduated 58 0.52% GED Program 13 0.12% 3,337 29.66% Unknown TOTAL 11,249 100.0 Table 4.6 Number of Prior Referrals: Petitions Filed FY12 0 2,908 25.85% 1 1,841 16.37% 2 1,421 12.63% 3 1,108 9.85% 4 834 7.41% 5 658 5.85% 6 564 5.01% 7 383 3.40% 1,532 13.62% 8 or more TOTAL 11,249 Table 4.7 Severity of Most Serious Offense: Petitions Filed FY12 Felonies Against Person 1,063 9.45% Felonies Against Property 1,800 16.00% Obstruction of Justice: Felony & Misdemeanor 2,783 24.74% Misdemeanors Against Person 1,278 11.36% Drugs: Felony & Misdemeanor 1,691 15.03% Public Peace: Felony & Misdemeanor 1,293 11.49% Misdemeanors Against Property 1,131 10.05% Status Offenses 172 1.53% Administrative 38 0.34% TOTAL 11,249 100.0 Table 4.8 Offense Class of Most Serious Offense: Petitions Filed FY12 Felony 5,249 46.66% Misdemeanor 4,307 38.29% Violations of Probation & Ordinances 1,483 13.18% Status 172 1.53% Other 38 0.34% TOTAL 11,249 100.0 Juveniles Petitioned 25,000 20,000 100.0 17,974 14,307 16,945 15,000 11,249 12,805 10,000 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 For FY05 through FY12 data, refer to the graphs on page 5. 21 FY12 JUVENILES WITH PETITIONS FILED IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 6 Table 4.9 Sex by County: Juveniles Petitioned FY12 Male Female Total Apache 57 30 87 0.77% Cochise 224 98 322 2.86% Coconino 275 112 387 3.44% Gila 161 67 228 2.03% Graham 102 51 153 1.36% Greenlee 31 14 45 0.40% La Paz 24 8 32 0.28% 3806 1057 4,863 43.23% Mohave 364 127 491 4.36% Navajo 289 132 421 3.74% Pima 1301 376 1,677 14.91% Pinal 574 197 771 6.85% Santa Cruz 174 75 249 2.21% Yavapai 457 178 635 5.64% Yuma 623 265 888 7.89% TOTAL 8,462 2,787 11,249 100.00% Maricopa In Tables 4.9-4.11 county specific breakouts of the key demographic variables of sex, age and race are presented. Table 4.12 gives a percentage of youth by delinquency risk level. That is youth who were identified as having a low, medium, or high risk level to reoffend, within 12 months, on the complaints associated with the first petition in the fiscal year based on the delinquency risk assessment. % of Total Table 4.10 Age by County: Juveniles Petitioned FY12 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Unknown Apache 1 0 0 0 3 9 16 14 30 14 Cochise 0 0 3 6 15 19 41 58 106 Coconino 0 1 3 4 17 24 55 75 Gila 1 1 5 8 7 22 32 Graham 1 0 1 4 4 24 Greenlee 0 1 1 0 2 La Paz 0 0 0 0 Maricopa 0 1 6 Mohave 0 3 Navajo 1 Pima Total % of Total 0 87 0.77% 74 0 322 2.86% 101 107 0 387 3.44% 50 45 57 0 228 2.03% 23 32 32 32 0 153 1.36% 1 3 14 12 11 0 45 0.40% 3 5 0 11 7 6 0 32 0.28% 52 128 293 592 977 1,322 1,491 1 4,863 43.23% 5 8 16 47 71 118 119 103 1 491 4.36% 2 3 6 8 40 50 80 95 134 2 421 3.74% 1 6 15 30 62 145 234 317 395 469 3 1,677 14.91% Pinal 0 0 8 9 33 59 92 197 174 198 1 771 6.85% Santa Cruz 0 0 0 6 6 10 22 37 58 109 1 249 2.21% Yavapai 4 4 4 15 35 49 81 125 167 150 1 635 5.64% Yuma 3 3 1 13 21 65 109 210 226 237 0 888 7.89% TOTAL 12 22 55 161 360 812 1,421 2,315 2,889 3,192 10 11,249 100.00% 22 JUVENILES WITH PETITIONS FILED IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 Table 4.11 Race by County: Juveniles Petitioned FY12 Hispanic Apache African American Native American Anglo Asian/PI Other Unknown Total % of Total 87 0.77% 322 2.86% 387 3.44% 228 2.03% 153 1.36% 45 0.40% 32 0.28% 4,863 43.23% 491 4.36% 421 3.74% 1,677 14.91% 17 0 53 14 0 0 3 128 27 155 6 3 0 3 57 18 124 186 1 1 0 46 5 141 34 1 0 1 46 5 91 10 0 0 1 9 3 31 2 0 0 0 13 1 17 1 0 0 0 2084 794 1703 219 32 10 21 74 11 386 18 0 2 0 45 11 189 171 0 1 4 799 161 593 98 13 5 8 Pinal 305 91 302 63 3 7 0 771 6.85% Santa Cruz 240 0 9 0 0 0 0 249 2.21% 110 11 483 25 1 2 3 635 5.64% 657 32 160 35 3 0 1 888 7.89% 4,630 1,170 4,437 882 57 28 45 11,249 100.00% Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Yavapai Yuma TOTAL Table 4.12 Delinquency Risk Level: Juveniles Petitioned FY12 Low 20.3% Medium 24.4% High 55.3% TOTAL 100.00% 23 JUVENILES DISMISSED IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 JUVENILES DISMISSED B Information presented in this section characterizes individual youth (unduplicated). For those youth who had a dismissal more than once during the fiscal year, information from their first instance in the time frame is reported. Table 5.1 County: Disposition of Dismissed FY12 Apache 37 0.69% 23B Cochise 93 1.73% 156 2.90% Gila 52 0.97% Graham 33 0.61% Greenlee 16 0.30% La Paz 10 0.19% 3,083 57.24% Mohave 198 3.68% Navajo 141 2.62% Pima 793 14.72% Pinal 309 5.74% Coconino Table 5.1 shows the distribution of youth across counties in Arizona. Demographic and offense specific information are also presented in subsequent tables. Referrals and petitions against juveniles can be dismissed. Dismissal means further consideration or hearings regarding the charge are discontinued or discharged and no formal action is taken. Dismissal of petitions can occur during the advisory or adjudication hearing process. It is possible the charge could be dismissed for lack of evidence during either of these hearings. Similarly, a juvenile could have more than one charge pending. In this situation, the juvenile's attorney could initiate a process with the county attorney, which could result 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 will stop further prosecution of the offense. Other ways cases can be dismissed is when a case is transferred to another jurisdiction prior to adjudication or the County Attorney can file a motion to dismiss if a victim does not want further prosecution of a charge or witnesses are unavailable. In juvenile cases, when a petition is not adjudicated prior to the juvenile’s eighteenth birthday, dismissals are processed after the eighteenth birthday and determination is made as to what further action is to be taken in the case. In FY12 we saw 16% of all juveniles referred had a complaint dismissed. 24 Maricopa Santa Cruz 99 1.84% Yavapai 157 2.91% Yuma 209 3.88% 5,386 100.00% TOTAL 36B Table 5.2 Sex: Disposition of Dismissed FY12 Male 3,854 71.56% Female 1,532 28.44% TOTAL 5,386 100.0 Table 5.3 Age: Disposition of Dismissed FY12 8 6 0.11% 9 13 0.24% 10 27 0.50% 11 59 1.10% 12 127 2.36% 13 292 5.42% 14 601 11.16% 15 972 18.05% 16 1,253 23.26% 17 1,696 31.49% 340 6.31% Unknown TOTAL 5,386 100.0 JUVENILES DISMISSED IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 Table 5.4 Race: Disposition of Dismissed FY12 Hispanic 1,978 36.72% African American 590 10.95% Anglo Native American Asian/Pacific Islander Other Unknown TOTAL Table 5.5 Education Status: Disposition of Dismissed FY12 Enrolled Not Enrolled Felonies Against Person 214 3.97% Felonies Against Property 333 6.18% 0.54% Obstruction of Justice: Felony & Misdemeanor 885 16.43% 18 0.33% Misdemeanors Against Person 524 9.73% 59 1.10% Drugs: Felony & Misdemeanor 533 9.90% 1,691 31.40% Misdemeanors Against Property 687 12.76% Status Offenses 508 9.43% Administrative 11 0.20% 2,364 43.89% 348 6.46% 29 5,386 TOTAL 2,721 50.52% 404 7.50% 39 0.72% Suspended 62 1.15% Withdrawn 60 1.11% Graduated 29 0.54% 6 0.11% Unknown 2,065 38.34% TOTAL 5,386 100.0 Table 5.6 Number of Prior Referrals: Disposition of Dismissed FY12 0 1,768 32.83% 1 898 16.67% 2 723 13.42% 3 515 9.56% 4 343 6.37% 5 291 5.40% 6 174 3.23% 7 144 2.67% 8 or more 530 9.84% TOTAL Public Peace: Felony & Misdemeanor 100.0 Expelled GED Program Table 5.7 Severity of Most Serious Offense: Disposition of Dismissed FY12 5,386 5,386 100.0 Table 5.8 Offense Class of Most Serious Offense: Disposition of Dismissed FY12 Felony 1,255 23.30% Misdemeanor 2,942 54.62% Violations of Probation & Ordinances 674 12.51% Status 507 9.41% Other 8 0.15% TOTAL 5,386 100.0 Dismissed 8,000 7,000 6,931 6,874 6,383 5,802 6,000 5,386 100.0 5,000 FY08 25 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 JUVENILES DISMISSED IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 Table 5.9 Sex by County: Juveniles Dismissed FY12 7 Male Female Total Apache 20 17 37 0.69% Cochise 62 31 93 1.73% 110 46 156 2.90% Gila 38 14 52 0.97% Graham 18 15 33 0.61% Greenlee 12 4 16 0.30% La Paz 10 0 10 0.19% 2182 901 3,083 57.24% Mohave 142 56 198 3.68% Navajo 88 53 141 2.62% Pima 604 189 793 14.72% Pinal 240 69 309 5.74% 70 29 99 1.84% Yavapai 116 41 157 2.91% Yuma 142 67 209 3.88% TOTAL 3,854 1,532 5,386 100.00% Coconino Maricopa Santa Cruz In Tables 5.9-5.11 county specific breakouts of the key demographic variables of sex, age and race are presented. Table 5.12 gives a percentage of youth by delinquency risk level. That is youth who were identified as having a low, medium, or high risk level to reoffend, within 12 months, on their first referral dismissed in the fiscal year based on the delinquency risk assessment. % of Total Table 5.10 Age by County: Juveniles Dismissed FY12 8 Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma TOTAL 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Unknown Total % of Total 1 0 0 0 0 2 4 5 13 12 0 37 0.69% 0 0 0 2 2 8 14 15 29 20 3 93 1.73% 0 0 3 1 5 7 26 26 27 42 19 156 2.90% 0 2 0 0 1 3 6 11 11 16 2 52 0.97% 0 1 0 1 0 2 2 10 7 7 3 33 0.61% 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 9 2 1 16 0.30% 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 2 3 1 10 0.19% 0 0 2 23 58 136 317 565 764 1,064 154 3,083 57.24% 0 1 1 2 5 14 22 38 50 49 16 198 3.68% 0 1 2 3 4 4 13 20 23 49 22 141 2.62% 1 2 10 13 29 68 110 142 172 209 37 793 14.72% 0 1 4 5 5 19 26 47 60 101 41 309 5.74% 0 0 0 2 0 6 5 13 18 48 7 99 1.84% 1 2 4 4 10 10 20 23 32 33 18 157 2.91% 3 3 1 3 7 12 35 52 36 41 16 209 3.88% 6 13 27 59 127 292 601 972 1,253 1,696 340 5,386 100.00% 26 JUVENILES DISMISSED IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 Table 5.11 Race by County: Juveniles Dismissed FY12 African Hispanic American Anglo Native American Asian/PI Other Unknown Total % of Total Apache 8 0 25 4 0 0 0 37 0.69% Cochise 18 13 58 2 1 0 1 93 1.73% Coconino 20 12 45 79 0 0 0 156 2.90% Gila 13 0 30 8 1 0 0 52 0.97% Graham 7 3 18 5 0 0 0 33 0.61% Greenlee 4 2 10 0 0 0 0 16 0.30% La Paz 4 0 6 0 0 0 0 10 0.19% Maricopa 1101 403 1382 116 22 7 52 3,083 57.24% Mohave 20 9 161 6 0 2 0 198 3.68% Navajo 15 4 78 41 0 1 2 141 2.62% Pima 368 91 279 45 2 5 3 793 14.72% Pinal 122 44 118 22 1 2 0 309 5.74% Santa Cruz 95 0 4 0 0 0 0 99 1.84% Yavapai 31 2 114 9 0 1 0 157 2.91% Yuma 152 7 36 11 2 0 1 209 3.88% TOTAL 1,978 590 2,364 348 29 18 59 5,386 100.00% Table 5.12 Delinquency Risk Level: Juveniles Dismissed FY12 Low 18.7% Medium 21.5% High 59.8% TOTAL 100.00% 27 JUVENILES WITH DISPOSITION OF PENALTY ONLY IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 PENALTY ONLY B Information presented in this section characterizes individual youth (unduplicated). For those youth who received a penalty more than once during the fiscal year, information from their first instance during the time frame is reported. Table 6.1 County: Disposition of Penalty Only FY12 24B Apache 2 0.58% Cochise 28 8.14% Coconino Table 6.1 shows the distribution of youth across counties in Arizona. Demographic and offense specific information are presented in subsequent tables. 16 4.65% Gila 7 2.03% Graham 2 0.58% Greenlee 0 0.00% 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. Maricopa In previous years, dispositions of penalty only have remained stable (approximately 400). Recently however, totals have decreased and in FY12 only 344 youth received a penalty only disposition. La Paz 0 0.00% 189 54.94% Mohave 0 0.00% Navajo 10 2.91% Pima 27 7.85% Pinal 10 2.91% 4 1.16% Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma TOTAL 37B 5 1.45% 44 12.79% 344 100.00% Table 6.2 Sex: Disposition of Penalty Only FY12 Male Female TOTAL 271 78.78% 73 21.22% 344 100.0 Table 6.3 Age: Disposition of Penalty Only FY12 8 0 0.00% 9 1 0.29% 10 0 0.00% 11 2 0.58% 12 1 0.29% 13 7 2.03% 14 16 4.65% 15 25 7.27% 16 53 15.41% 17 222 64.53% 17 4.94% Unknown TOTAL 28 344 100.0 JUVENILES WITH DISPOSITION OF PENALTY ONLY IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 Table 6.4 Race: Disposition of Penalty Only FY12 Hispanic 153 44.48% African American 38 11.05% 128 37.21% 20 5.81% Asian/Pacific Islander 3 0.87% Other 1 Unknown 1 Anglo Native American TOTAL 344 Table 6.7 Severity of Most Serious Offense: Disposition of Penalty Only FY12 Felonies Against Person 8 2.30% Felonies Against Property 13 3.78% 0.29% Obstruction of Justice: Felony & Misdemeanor 85 24.71% 0.29% Misdemeanors Against Person 23 6.69% Drugs: Felony & Misdemeanor 39 11.34% 130 37.79% 41 11.92% Public Peace: Felony & Misdemeanor 100.0 Misdemeanors Against Property Table 6.5 Education Status: Disposition of Penalty Only FY12 Enrolled 126 36.63% Not Enrolled 32 9.30% Expelled 6 1.74% Suspended 1 0.29% Withdrawn 5 1.45% Graduated 3 0.87% GED Program 2 0.58% 169 49.13% 344 100.0 Unknown TOTAL 76 22.09% 1 43 12.50% 2 36 10.47% 3 30 8.72% 4 32 9.30% 5 24 6.98% 6 17 4.94% 7 20 5.81% 8 or more 66 19.19% TOTAL 344 2 0.58% Administrative 3 0.87% TOTAL 344 100.0% Table 6.8 Offense Class of Most Serious Offense: Disposition of Penalty Only FY12 Felony 69 20.06% 196 56.98% 77 22.38% Status 2 0.58% Other 0 0.00% TOTAL 344 Misdemeanor Violations of Probation & Ordinances Table 6.6 Number of Prior Referrals: Disposition of Penalty Only FY12 0 Status Offenses 100.0 Penalty Only 800 600 362 401 400 400 344 344 FY11 FY12 200 100.0 0 FY08 29 FY09 FY10 JUVENILES WITH DISPOSITION OF PENALTY ONLY IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 8B In Tables 6.9-6.11 county specific breakouts of the key demographic variables of sex, age and race are presented. Table 6.12 gives a percentage of youth by delinquency risk level. That is youth who were identified as having a low, medium, or high risk level to reoffend, within 12 months, on their first referral receiving a disposition of ‘Penalty Only’ in the fiscal year based on the delinquency risk assessment. Table 6.9 Sex by County: Disposition of Penalty Only FY12 Male Female Total % of Total Apache 2 0 2 0.58% Cochise 18 10 28 8.14% Coconino 13 3 16 4.65% Gila 6 1 7 2.03% Graham 2 0 2 0.58% Greenlee 0 0 0 0.00% La Paz 0 0 0 0.00% 151 38 189 54.94% Mohave 0 0 0 0.00% Navajo 7 3 10 2.91% Pima 20 7 27 7.85% Pinal 9 1 10 2.91% Santa Cruz 3 1 4 1.16% Yavapai 4 1 5 1.45% Yuma 36 8 44 12.79% TOTAL 271 73 344 100.00% Maricopa Table 6.10 Age by County: Disposition of Penalty Only FY12 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Unknown Total % of Total Apache 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 0.58% Cochise 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 3 5 17 0 28 8.14% Coconino 0 1 0 0 0 1 3 3 4 3 1 16 4.65% Gila 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 3 0 7 2.03% Graham 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 0.58% Greenlee 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% La Paz 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Maricopa 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 7 23 142 14 189 54.94% Mohave 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Navajo 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 7 0 10 2.91% Pima 0 0 0 0 0 2 5 2 5 13 0 27 7.85% Pinal 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 6 0 10 2.91% Santa Cruz 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 4 1.16% Yavapai 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 1 0 0 5 1.45% Yuma 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 4 8 28 2 44 12.79% TOTAL 0 1 0 2 1 7 16 25 53 222 17 344 100.00% 30 JUVENILES WITH DISPOSITION OF PENALTY ONLY IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 Table 6.11 Race by County: Disposition of Penalty Only FY12 African American Hispanic Native American Anglo Asian/PI Other Unknown Total % of Total Apache 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0.58% Cochise 5 4 18 0 1 0 0 28 8.14% Coconino 1 2 7 6 0 0 0 16 4.65% Gila 1 0 6 0 0 0 0 7 2.03% Graham 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0.58% Greenlee 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% La Paz 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% 94 25 62 4 2 1 1 189 54.94% Mohave 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Navajo 0 0 6 4 0 0 0 10 2.91% Pima 14 3 7 3 0 0 0 27 7.85% Pinal 4 3 3 0 0 0 0 10 2.91% Santa Cruz 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1.16% Yavapai 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 5 1.45% Yuma 28 1 12 3 0 0 0 44 12.79% TOTAL 153 38 128 20 3 1 1 344 100.00% Maricopa Table 6.12 Delinquency Risk Level: Disposition of Penalty Only FY12 Low 16.8% Medium 16.4% High 66.8% TOTAL 100.00% 31 JUVENILES WITH DISPOSITION OF STANDARD PROBATION IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 STANDARD PROBATION Information presented in this section characterizes individual youth (unduplicated). For those youth who were placed or continued on standard probation more than once during the fiscal year, information from their first instance during the time frame is reported. Table 7.1 County: Disposition of Standard Probation FY12 Apache 63 26B Cochise Juveniles placed on probation must comply with specific terms and conditions. Although every probation treatment plan is customized to address the needs of each individual juvenile, some standard terms and conditions apply to all cases. The standard terms and conditions include minimum scheduled contacts with a probation officer, maintaining law abiding behavior, and paying restitution to the victim. Additional terms may be imposed depending on individual juvenile needs, such as: mandatory drug testing, curfew, school attendance, community service hours, letters of apology, participation in counseling or treatment sessions, and restrictions on associates. Once a juvenile is placed on probation, the juvenile probation officer monitors the juvenile's compliance with the terms and conditions of their probation. The probation officer works closely with the juvenile and their family as well as members of the community including teachers, victims, treatment providers and others involved in the life of the juvenile. The court can impose multiple restrictions and provide resources to help the juvenile. If the youth does not choose to comply or continues violating the law, the probation officer may refer the juvenile back to court. The court may choose (continued on next page) 32 0.94% 2.36% Coconino 246 3.67% Gila 143 2.14% Graham 105 1.57% Greenlee 36 0.54% La Paz 19 0.28% 3,313 49.48% Table 7.1 shows the distribution of youth across counties in Arizona. Demographic and offense specific information are presented in subsequent tables. Probation is defined as conditional freedom granted by the juvenile court to an adjudicated juvenile on the condition of continued good behavior and regular reporting to a probation officer. The core tenets of juvenile probation are: protection of the community, the belief that youth can make positive changes in their behavior, fostering law-abiding 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. 158 Maricopa Mohave 271 4.05% Navajo 305 4.56% Pima 822 12.28% Pinal 393 5.87% Santa Cruz 131 1.96% Yavapai 282 4.21% Yuma 408 6.09% TOTAL 6,695 100.00% 38B Table 7.2 Sex: Disposition of Standard Probation FY12 Male 5,156 77.01% Female 1,539 TOTAL 6,695 22.99% 100.0% Table 7.3 Age: Disposition of Standard Probation FY12 8 2 0.03% 9 1 0.01% 10 6 0.09% 11 39 0.58% 12 138 2.06% 13 438 6.54% 14 813 12.14% 15 1,316 19.66% 16 1,744 26.05% 17 2,193 32.76% 5 0.07% Unknown TOTAL 6,695 100.0% JUVENILES WITH DISPOSITION OF STANDARD PROBATION IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 to impose more severe liberty restrictions, including detention, placement in the JIPS program or commitment to the ADJC. Table 7.7 Severity of Most Serious Offense: Disposition of Standard Probation FY12 In FY12, 6,695 juveniles were given a disposition of standard probation. Table 7.4 Race: Disposition of Standard Probation FY12 Hispanic 2,725 40.70% African American 630 9.41% 2,724 40.69% 537 8.02% Asian/Pacific Islander 35 0.52% Other 16 0.24% Unknown 28 0.42% Anglo Native American TOTAL 6,695 100.0% Felonies Against Person 685 10.23% Felonies Against Property 1,205 18.00% Obstruction of Justice: Felony & Misdemeanor 1,418 21.18% Misdemeanors Against Person 563 8.41% Drugs: Felony & Misdemeanor 1,207 18.03% Public Peace: Felony & Misdemeanor 920 13.74% Misdemeanors Against Property 542 8.10% Status Offenses 41 0.61% Administrative 114 1.70% TOTAL 6,695 Table 7.8 Offense Class of Most Serious Offense: Disposition of Standard Probation FY12 Felony 3,552 Table 7.5 Education Status: Disposition of Standard Probation FY12 Enrolled 3,692 55.15% Misdemeanor 2,239 Not Enrolled Violations of Probation & Ordinances 567 8.47% Expelled 61 0.91% Suspended 70 1.05% Withdrawn 120 1.79% Graduated 50 0.75% 6 0.09% Unknown 2,129 31.80% TOTAL 6,695 100.0 GED Program 100.0 53.05% 33.44% 11.23% 752 Status 40 Other 112 TOTAL 6,695 0.60% 1.67% 100.0 Standard Probation 12,000 Table 7.6 Number of Prior Referrals: Disposition of Standard Probation FY12 9,821 10,000 0 1,562 23.33% 1 1,242 18.55% 2 1,039 15.52% 3 810 12.10% 4 571 8.53% 5 444 6.63% 6 316 4.72% 7 195 2.91% 8 or more 516 7.71% TOTAL 10,211 9,351 8,000 7,793 6,695 6,000 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 For FY05 through FY12 data, refer to the graphs on page 5. 6,695 100.0 33 FY12 JUVENILES WITH DISPOSITION OF STANDARD PROBATION IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 9B In Tables 7.9-7.11 county specific breakouts of the key demographic variables of sex, age and race are presented. Table 7.12 gives a percentage of youth by delinquency risk level. That is youth who were identified as having a low, medium, or high risk level to reoffend, within 12 months, on their first referral disposed to ‘Standard Probation’ in the fiscal year based on the delinquency risk assessment. Table 7.9 Sex by County: Disposition of Standard Probation FY12 Male Female Total % of Total Apache 38 25 63 0.94% Cochise 115 43 158 2.36% Coconino 171 75 246 3.67% Gila 99 44 143 2.14% Graham 71 34 105 1.57% Greenlee 26 10 36 0.54% La Paz 16 3 19 0.28% 2683 630 3,313 49.48% Mohave 197 74 271 4.05% Navajo 215 90 305 4.56% Pima 652 170 822 12.28% Pinal 295 98 393 5.87% Santa Cruz 102 29 131 1.96% Yavapai 192 90 282 4.21% Yuma 284 124 408 6.09% TOTAL 5,156 1,539 6,695 100.00% Maricopa Table 7.10 Age by County: Disposition of Standard Probation FY12 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Unknown Total % of Total Apache 0 0 0 0 1 5 11 21 14 11 0 63 0.94% Cochise 0 0 0 4 6 12 19 30 54 33 0 158 2.36% Coconino 0 0 0 0 4 20 39 37 72 73 1 246 3.67% Gila 1 0 1 1 1 16 21 26 31 45 0 143 2.14% Graham 0 0 1 2 4 14 20 21 20 23 0 105 1.57% Greenlee 0 0 1 0 2 2 5 8 9 9 0 36 0.54% La Paz 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 2 5 9 0 19 0.28% Maricopa 0 0 0 8 59 161 364 643 880 1195 3 3,313 49.48% Mohave 0 0 0 3 2 26 37 70 63 70 0 271 4.05% Navajo 1 0 2 4 4 36 27 50 77 104 0 305 4.56% Pima 0 0 0 7 26 67 116 163 205 237 1 822 12.28% Pinal 0 0 0 4 13 26 43 80 103 124 0 393 5.87% Santa Cruz 0 0 0 2 2 5 11 18 31 62 0 131 1.96% Yavapai 0 1 1 2 6 17 42 54 69 90 0 282 4.21% Yuma 0 0 0 2 7 31 56 93 111 108 0 408 6.09% 2 1 6 39 138 438 813 1,316 1,744 2,193 5 6,695 100.00% TOTAL 34 JUVENILES WITH DISPOSITION OF STANDARD PROBATION IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 Table 7.11 Race by County: Disposition of Standard Probation FY12 Hispanic African American Native American Anglo Asian/PI Other Unknown Total % of Total Apache 8 0 38 14 1 0 2 63 0.94% Cochise 64 17 73 1 1 0 2 158 2.36% Coconino 36 11 78 118 1 1 1 246 3.67% Gila 34 3 83 21 1 0 1 143 2.14% Graham 26 3 71 5 0 0 0 105 1.57% Greenlee 5 0 27 3 0 0 1 36 0.54% La Paz 8 0 10 1 0 0 0 19 0.28% Maricopa 1,419 454 1,258 138 24 6 14 3,313 49.48% Mohave 43 5 215 7 0 1 0 271 4.05% Navajo 32 7 147 117 0 0 2 305 4.56% Pima 414 72 275 51 5 4 1 822 12.28% Pinal 160 37 153 36 1 4 2 393 5.87% Santa Cruz 127 0 4 0 0 0 0 131 1.96% Yavapai 44 4 222 11 0 0 1 282 4.21% Yuma 305 17 70 14 1 0 1 408 6.09% TOTAL 2,725 630 2,724 537 35 16 28 6,695 100.00% Table 7.12 Delinquency Risk Level: Disposition of Standard Probation FY12 Low 20.3% Medium 25.4% High 54.2% TOTAL 100.00% 35 JUVENILES WITH DISPOSITION TO JIPS IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 JIPS Information presented in this section characterizes individual youth (unduplicated). For those youth who were placed or continued on Juvenile Intensive Probation Supervision more than once during the fiscal year, information from their first instance during the time frame is reported. Table 8.1 County: Disposition to JIPS FY12 Apache 6 0.47% Cochise 69 5.38% Coconino 48 3.74% Gila 25 1.95% Graham 17 1.33% Greenlee 6 0.47% 25B Table 8.1 shows the distribution of youth across counties in Arizona. Demographic and offense specific information are presented in subsequent tables. 24B Juvenile Intensive Probation Supervision (JIPS) is a sentencing consequence used by the juvenile court judges for those youth in need of higher level of supervision and more structured programming. The program was enacted into law in 1987. The intent of this legislation was to create a program to allow juvenile delinquents to remain at home under increased supervision and structure rather than be placed at ADJC. Financial considerations weighed heavily in the formation of the program, as JIPS is a less costly alternative to ADJC. JIPS differs from standard probation in the increased frequency of face to face contacts between the juvenile and the JIPS officer, the requirement to actively participate in 32 hours of structured activities per week, the liberty restrictions concerning unsupervised time out of the home, random drug testing, and the lower caseload ratio. In FY12 the number of juveniles placed on JIPS was 1,282. The rate of juveniles petitioned who end up disposed to JIPS has remained stable at around 11% of the juveniles petitioned. La Paz 1 0.08% 451 35.18% Mohave 67 5.23% Navajo 34 2.65% Maricopa Pima 122 9.52% Pinal 84 6.55% Santa Cruz 24 1.87% Yavapai 99 7.72% Yuma 229 17.86% TOTAL 1,282 100.00% 37B Table 8.2 Sex: Disposition to JIPS FY12 Male 1,120 87.36% Female 162 12.64% 1,282 100.00% TOTAL Table 8.3 Age: Disposition to JIPS FY12 0 8 0 9 0.00% 10 0 0.00% 11 1 0.08% 12 6 0.47% 13 39 3.04% 14 139 10.84% 15 271 21.14% 16 387 30.19% 17 438 34.17% 1 0.08% 1,282 100.00% Unknown TOTAL 36 0.00% JUVENILES WITH DISPOSITION TO JIPS IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 Table 8.4 Race: Disposition to JIPS FY12 Hispanic 656 51.17% African American 120 9.36% Anglo 426 33.23% 72 5.62% 5 Native American Asian/Pacific Islander Other Unknown TOTAL Felonies Against Person 139 10.84% Felonies Against Property 277 21.61% 0.39% Obstruction of Justice: Felony & Misdemeanor 639 49.84% 1 0.08% Misdemeanors Against Person 43 3.35% 2 0.16% Drugs: Felony & Misdemeanor 85 6.63% Public Peace: Felony & Misdemeanor 64 4.99% Misdemeanors Against Property 25 1.95% 1,282 100.0% Table 8.5 Education Status: Disposition to JIPS FY12 Enrolled 764 59.59% Not Enrolled 148 11.54% Expelled 20 1.56% Suspended 23 1.79% Withdrawn 32 2.50% Graduated 19 1.48% 4 0.31% 272 21.22% GED Program Unknown TOTAL Table 8.7 Severity of Most Serious Offense: Disposition to JIPS FY12 1,282 100.0% Table 8.6 Number of Prior Referrals: Disposition to JIPS FY12 Status Offenses 5 0.39% Administrative 5 0.39% TOTAL Felony 642 50.08% Misdemeanor 229 17.86% Violations of Probation & Ordinances 404 31.51% Status 2 0.16% Other 5 0.39% TOTAL 1,282 61 4.76% 1 60 4.68% 2 92 7.18% 3 99 7.72% 4 139 10.84% 5 121 9.44% 6 140 10.92% 7 109 8.50% 2,500 8 or more 461 35.96% 2,000 1,282 100.0% 100.0% Table 8.8 Offense Class of Most Serious Offense: Disposition to JIPS FY12 0 TOTAL 1,282 100.0% Juvenile Intensive Probation (JIPS) 3,000 1,967 1,869 1,568 1,500 1,449 1,282 1,000 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 For FY05 through FY12 data, refer to the graph on page 5. 37 FY12 JUVENILES WITH DISPOSITION TO JIPS IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 10B Table 8.9 Sex by County: Disposition to JIPS FY12 Male Female Total Apache 5 1 6 0.47% Cochise 49 20 69 5.38% Coconino 42 6 48 3.74% Gila 21 4 25 1.95% Graham 15 2 17 1.33% Greenlee 6 0 6 0.47% La Paz 1 0 1 0.08% 425 26 451 35.18% Mohave 57 10 67 5.23% Navajo 25 9 34 2.65% Pima 108 14 122 9.52% Pinal 79 5 84 6.55% Santa Cruz 17 7 24 1.87% Yavapai 83 16 99 7.72% Yuma 187 42 229 17.86% TOTAL 1120 162 1,282 100.00% Maricopa In Tables 8.9-8.11 county specific breakouts of the key demographic variables of sex, age and race are presented. Table 8.12 gives a percentage of youth by delinquency risk level. That is youth who were identified as having a low, medium, or high risk level to reoffend, within 12 months, on their first referral disposed to JIPS in the fiscal year based on the delinquency risk assessment. % of Total Table 8.10 Age by County: Disposition to JIPS FY12 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Unknown Total % of Total Apache 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 6 0.47% Cochise 0 0 0 0 1 1 7 20 18 22 0 69 5.38% Coconino 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 13 10 22 0 48 3.74% Gila 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 6 4 11 0 25 1.95% Graham 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 6 4 0 17 1.33% Greenlee 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 6 0.47% La Paz 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0.08% Maricopa 0 0 0 0 1 5 41 85 155 163 1 451 35.18% Mohave 0 0 0 0 0 4 8 15 20 20 0 67 5.23% Navajo 0 0 0 1 0 2 7 5 7 12 0 34 2.65% Pima 0 0 0 0 0 8 14 25 35 40 0 122 9.52% Pinal 0 0 0 0 2 3 16 14 25 24 0 84 6.55% Santa Cruz 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 5 6 10 0 24 1.87% Yavapai 0 0 0 0 0 6 7 20 37 29 0 99 7.72% Yuma 0 0 0 1 8 29 55 58 78 0 229 17.86% 0 1 6 39 139 271 387 438 1 1,282 100.00% TOTAL 0 0 38 JUVENILES WITH DISPOSITION TO JIPS IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 Table 8.11 Race by County: Disposition to JIPS FY12 African Hispanic American Anglo Native American Asian/PI Other Unknown Total % of Total Apache 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 6 0.47% Cochise 35 5 27 0 0 0 2 69 5.38% Coconino 12 0 14 22 0 0 0 48 3.74% Gila 4 0 19 2 0 0 0 25 1.95% Graham 7 2 8 0 0 0 0 17 1.33% Greenlee 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 6 0.47% La Paz 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0.08% 246 72 113 16 3 1 0 451 35.18% Mohave 16 3 47 1 0 0 0 67 5.23% Navajo Maricopa 2 3 16 13 0 0 0 34 2.65% Pima 71 10 38 2 1 0 0 122 9.52% Pinal 33 12 34 4 1 0 0 84 6.55% Santa Cruz 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 1.87% Yavapai 23 2 67 7 0 0 0 99 7.72% 178 9 37 5 0 0 0 229 17.86% 656 120 426 72 5 1 2 1,282 100.00% Yuma TOTAL Table 8.12 Delinquency Risk Level: Disposition to JIPS FY12 Low 3.5% Medium 9.2% High TOTAL 87.3% 100.00% 39 FY 2012 Additional Topics Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections Adult Court Sex JUVENILES WITH DISPOSITIONS TO ADJC IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 ADJC Information presented in this section characterizes individual youth (unduplicated). For those youth who were committed or awarded to the Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections (ADJC) more than once during the fiscal year, information from their first instance during the time frame is reported. Table 9.1 shows the distribution of youth across counties in Arizona. Demographic and offense specific information are presented in subsequent tables. In FY12, 584 juveniles received a judicial decision involving commitment to ADJC. This number shows a consistent decline since a historical high of 1,670 in FY98. Over the last five years commitments to ADJC have ranged from a low of 584 in FY12 to a high of 924 (FY08). This year commitments decreased by 16.9% from the previous fiscal year. • 51.79% of the juveniles were committed for Disposition of a juvenile to the ADJC is governed by obstruction of justice offenses such as statute and the Arizona Code of Judicial probation and parole violations, however most Administration. Arizona Revised Statutes §8-342 (A) severe offense is generally not the only provides: “A child under the age of eight years shall consideration in the commitment (i.e., prior not be committed to the department of juvenile offense history, prior placement, risk to the corrections nor shall a dependent or incorrigible community and need for a more secure child be awarded to the department of juvenile placement). corrections.” Arizona Revised Statutes §8-246(C), as amended, mandates: 1) the use of risk and • 50.77% of the juveniles committed to ADJC needs assessment to determine appropriate had eight or more prior referrals, suggesting disposition of juveniles; 2) development of that the majority of commitments are chronic commitment guidelines for use by juvenile court offenders. judges for dispositions of juveniles to ADJC; and 3) development of length of stay guidelines consistent with treatment and public safety concerns. Table 9.1 County: Disposition to ADJC FY12 28B 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 ADJC. The legislative intent of commitment to ADJC should be reserved for juveniles whom the court believes need placement in a secure care facility for the protection of the public. 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 at the end of this document.6 The ADJC tables in this section were produced using the traditional reporting method used in Arizona’s Juvenile Court Counts, a commitment decision made on a juvenile within a county during the fiscal year. While this method of counting is useful as a workload measure of commitment, the actual number of juveniles involved is a smaller number. The table includes all juveniles who were processed through the courts within each County during FY12 within each county. 40 Apache 5 0.85% Cochise 37 6.32% Coconino 12 2.05% Gila 5 0.85% Graham 5 0.85% Greenlee 0 0.00% La Paz 0 0.00% 342 58.29% Maricopa Mohave 22 3.76% Navajo 2 0.68% Pima 39 6.67% Pinal 32 5.47% 5 0.85% Yavapai 21 3.59% Yuma 57 9.74% TOTAL 584 100.00% Santa Cruz Table 9.2 Sex: Disposition to ADJC FY12 Male 493 84.44% Female 15.56% TOTAL 91 584 100.0% JUVENILES WITH DISPOSITIONS TO ADJC IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 Table 9.3 Age: Disposition to ADJC FY12 8 0 0.00% 9 0 0.00% 10 0 0.00% 11 0 0.00% 12 1 0.17% 13 4 0.68% 14 35 5.98% 15 92 15.73% 16 192 32.65% 17 260 44.79% 0 0.00% 584 100.00% Unknown TOTAL 47.86% African American 76 12.99% 198 33.85% 22 4.10% Asian/Pacific Islander 1 Other Unknown Native American TOTAL Felonies Against Person 70 11.97% Felonies Against Property 89 15.21% Obstruction of Justice: Felony & Misdemeanor 302 51.79% Misdemeanors Against Person 24 4.10% Drugs: Felony & Misdemeanor Public Peace: Felony & Misdemeanor 45 28 7.69% 4.79% Misdemeanors Against Property 25 2.70% 1 4.27% 584 100.00% Administrative TOTAL Table 9.8 Offense Class of Most Serious Offense: Disposition to ADJC FY12 Table 9.4 Race: Disposition to ADJC FY12 Hispanic 281 Anglo Table 9.7 Severity of Most Serious Offense: Disposition to ADJC FY12 Felony 246 42.05% Misdemeanor 101 17.26% 0.17% Violations of Probations & Ordinances 237 40.68% 4 0.68% TOTAL 584 2 0.34% 584 100.00% Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections (ADJC) Table 9.5 Education Status: Disposition to ADJC FY12 Enrolled 197 33.50% 65 10.60% Expelled 3 0.34% Suspended 5 0.85% Withdrawn 12 1.88% Graduated 4 0.51% GED Program 2 0.34% Unknown 296 51.97% TOTAL 584 100.00% Not Enrolled 1,200 900 924 600 848 751 703 300 3.93% 1 16 2.74% 2 25 4.27% 3 31 5.30% 4 34 5.81% 5 52 8.72% 6 59 10.09% 49 8.38% 8 or more 295 50.77% TOTAL 584 100.00% 584 0 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 For FY05 through FY12 data, refer to the graph on page 5. Table 9.6 Number of Prior Referrals: Disposition to ADJC FY12 0 23 7 100.0% 41 FY12 JUVENILES WITH DISPOSITIONS TO ADJC IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 Table 9.9 Sex by County: Disposition to ADJC FY12 Male Apache Cochise Coconino Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Maricopa Mohave Navajo Pima Pinal Santa Cruz Yavapai Yuma TOTAL Female Total In Tables 9.9-9.11 county specific breakouts of the key demographic variables of sex, age and race are presented. Table 9.12 gives a percentage of youth by delinquency risk level. That is youth who were identified as having a low, medium, or high risk level to reoffend, within 12 months, on their first referral committed to ADJC in the fiscal year based on the delinquency risk assessment. % of Total 4 1 5 0.85% 27 10 37 6.32% 9 3 12 2.05% 5 0 5 0.85% 2 3 5 0.85% 0 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0.00% 298 44 342 58.29% 18 4 22 3.76% 1 1 2 0.68% 32 7 39 6.67% 27 5 32 5.47% 5 0 5 0.85% 18 3 21 3.59% 47 10 57 9.74% 493 91 584 100.00% Table 9.10 Age by County: Disposition to ADJC FY12 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Unknown Total % of Total Apache 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 0 5 0.85% Cochise 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7 11 16 0 37 6.32% Coconino 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 8 0 12 2.05% Gila 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 1 0 5 0.85% Graham 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 1 0 5 0.85% Greenlee 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% La Paz 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Maricopa 0 0 0 0 1 2 24 46 101 168 0 342 58.29% Mohave 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 9 7 0 22 3.76% Navajo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 0.68% Pima 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11 17 10 0 39 6.67% Pinal 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 6 9 15 0 32 5.47% Santa Cruz 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 0 5 0.85% Yavapai 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 10 0 21 3.59% Yuma 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 11 21 20 0 57 9.74% TOTAL 0 0 0 0 1 4 35 92 192 260 0 584 100.00% 42 JUVENILES WITH DISPOSITIONS TO ADJC IN THE ARIZONA COURT SYSTEM IN FY12 Table 9.11 Race by County: Disposition to ADJC FY12 Hispanic African American Native American Anglo Asian/PI Other Unknown Total % of Total Apache 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 5 0.85% Cochise 23 2 10 0 0 0 2 37 6.32% Coconino 2 0 3 7 0 0 0 12 2.05% Gila 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 5 0.85% Graham 2 0 2 0 0 1 0 5 0.85% Greenlee 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% La Paz 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Maricopa 154 63 111 11 1 2 0 342 58.29% Mohave 2 2 18 0 0 0 0 22 3.76% Navajo 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0.68% Pima 25 3 10 1 0 0 0 39 6.67% Pinal 13 3 14 2 0 0 0 32 5.47% 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0.85% Santa Cruz Yavapai 9 0 12 0 0 0 0 21 3.59% Yuma 43 3 11 0 0 0 0 57 9.74% TOTAL 281 76 198 22 1 4 2 584 100.00% Table 9.12 Delinquency Risk Level: Disposition to ADJC FY12 Low 1.4% Medium 4.6% High TOTAL 94.0% 100.00% 43 ADJC & AOC COMPARISON ADJC & AOC COMPARISON Original Commitments on a Statewide Basis The previous section regarding ADJC is the traditional reporting method used in Arizona’s Juvenile Court Counts, a commitment decision made on a juvenile within a county during the fiscal year. While this method of counting is useful as a workload measure of commitment, it over counts the actual number of juveniles involved. It counts juveniles who were processed through the courts during FY12 within each county. Thus, juveniles committed during a previous time frame or from another county are counted again during this time frame if they received a decision of recommitment or award to ADJC. These tables present the number of juveniles involved in the commitment decision. The most important consideration is the original commitment and transfer to ADJC. These are the juveniles who become the responsibility of that department for confinement and rehabilitation purposes. Table 10.1 shows juveniles who were committed for the first time ever during the fiscal year (original commitment) and these juveniles arrived at an ADJC facility. Subsequent commitment means that these juveniles received a commitment decision within a county but they had previously been committed from a different county; or that a juvenile was committed in a prior fiscal year and received another disposition of commitment or award to ADJC during FY12. The last column, (Never Arrived at ADJC), are juveniles who received an Table 10.1 Commitments FY12, 7/1/2011 – 6/30/2012 Never Original Subsequent Arrived Commitment Commitment At ADJC TOTAL Apache 5 0 0 5 Cochise 34 3 0 37 Coconino 7 4 1 12 Gila 3 1 1 5 Graham 5 0 0 5 Greenlee 0 0 0 0 La Paz 0 0 0 0 Maricopa 251 86 5 342 Mohave 18 3 1 22 Navajo 2 0 0 2 Pima 29 7 3 39 Pinal 22 9 1 32 5 0 0 5 Yavapai 18 3 0 21 Yuma 53 4 0 57 452 120 12 584 Santa Cruz TOTAL (continued on next page) 44 ADJC & AOC COMPARISON original decision of commitment but they either turned 18 within a detention center and were therefore never transported to an ADJC facility or they were being processed in an adult court at the time of commitment and were placed in adult confinement (jail or correctional facility). Table 10.1 Commitments FY11, 7/1/2010 – 6/30/2011 Never Original Subsequent Arrived Commitment Commitment At ADJC TOTAL Apache 3 0 0 3 Cochise 24 3 0 27 Coconino 14 1 0 15 Gila 3 0 0 3 Graham 1 3 0 4 Greenlee 1 0 0 1 La Paz 0 0 0 0 311 94 9 414 Mohave 31 2 0 33 Navajo 3 0 0 3 Pima 47 16 3 66 In FY12 the number of original commitments was 452, which represents a 18.0% decrease from the previous fiscal year (551). Pinal 40 9 1 50 6 0 0 6 Yavapai 14 2 0 16 Yuma 53 9 0 62 Charts for fiscal years 2011 and 2010 are also provided for reference. TOTAL 551 139 13 703 Never Arrived At ADJC TOTAL The last group would never show as committed by ADJC as they never arrived at one of their facilities. ADJC has the ability to count “re-commitments”, a juvenile who is committed, discharged from ADJC and then receives another commitment. Those juveniles, few in number, are not reflected in these charts. It is with gratitude to ADJC that this current information is available. By using the ADJC juvenile identifier, we were able to track duplicates in the JOLTS system. Maricopa Santa Cruz Table 10.2 Commitments FY10, 7/1/2009– 6/30/2010 Original Commitment Subsequent Commitment Apache 4 0 0 4 Cochise 16 1 0 17 Coconino 11 8 0 19 Gila 3 0 0 3 Graham 4 2 0 6 Greenlee 2 0 0 2 La Paz 1 0 0 1 296 128 12 436 Mohave 33 9 0 42 Navajo 3 3 0 6 Pima 53 19 4 76 Pinal 31 7 0 38 4 1 0 5 Yavapai 11 4 0 15 Yuma 72 9 0 81 TOTAL 544 191 16 751 Maricopa Santa Cruz 45 JUVENILES DIRECT FILED & TRANSFERRED TO ADULT COURT IN FY12 DIRECT FILED & TRANSFERRED 12B Statutory provisions specify circumstances for prosecuting juveniles as if they were adults in criminal court. Juveniles may be either direct filed in or transferred to adult court. The provisions (presented here as pathways) are summarized below, with more detail in the two sections that follow on the subsequent pages: 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. Direct Filed in Adult Court Transferred to Adult Court Table 11.1 Pathways for Juveniles Filed in Adult Court FY121 29B This section provides an overview of two groups of youth who are sent to adult court via one of the five pathways identified. They are briefly described below. The numbers of youth who were filed in adult court through one of these pathways are presented in table 11.1. Pathways Mandatory 37.55% 18 6.50% 32 11.55% 105 37.91% Chronic Discretionary Mandatory: A juvenile aged fifteen, sixteen, or seventeen who commit a violent crime specified in Arizona Revised Statutes §13-501 A. must be filed in adult court. Transfer TOTAL % of Total 104 Mandatory Prior Conviction Pathways to Adult Court • Number of Juveniles 18 6.50% 277* 100.0% Table 11.2 County: Direct Filed in and Transferred to Adult Court FY121 Apache 0 29B • • • • Mandatory Prior: A juvenile previously convicted in adult court must be returned to adult court for any subsequent crimes or violations of probation. 0.00% Cochise 3 1.08% Coconino 2 0.72% Gila 0 0.00% Graham 1 0.36% Chronic: 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. Greenlee 0 0.00% La Paz 0 0.00% 192 69.31% Discretion: 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 Arizona Revised Statutes §13-501 B. Transfer: Juveniles who do not meet the above criteria may still be transferred by the juvenile court depending on a number of factors, such 46 Maricopa Mohave 0 0.00% Navajo 0 0.00% Pima 51 18.41% Pinal 12 4.33% Santa Cruz 2 0.72% Yavapai 0 0.00% 14 5.05% 277* 100.00% Yuma TOTAL 41B *The number of juveniles in these tables may be a duplicate count due to the possibility of being both direct filed and transferred to adult court during a single fiscal year. JUVENILES DIRECT FILED & TRANSFERRED TO ADULT COURT IN FY12 DIRECT FILED IN ADULT COURT 13B Information presented in this section characterizes individual youth (unduplicated). For youth who were direct filed in adult court more than once during the fiscal year, information from their first instance during the time frame is reported. Table 11.3 presents the distribution of youth across counties in Arizona. Demographic and offense specific information are presented in subsequent tables. A historic high occurred in the direct file process in FY99 when 804 juveniles were sent to adult court in this manner. Since then, the number of juveniles involved has decreased and in FY12, 259 juveniles were involved in the direct file process, a 23.8% decrease from FY11 (340). (See graph on page 48 for FY08-FY12) Table 11.3 County: Juveniles Direct Filed in Adult Court FY12 Apache 0 0.00% 30B 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”: 1. First degree murder; 2. Second degree murder; 3. Forcible sexual assault; 4. Armed robbery; 5. 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. These offense categories are used to define pathways to (or filings in) adult court referred to as mandatory (1 through 5 and 7) and chronic (6). Cochise 3 1.16% Coconino 2 0.77% Gila 0 0.00% Graham 1 0.39% Greenlee 0 0.00% La Paz 0 0.00% 185 71.43% Mohave 0 0.00% Navajo 0 0.00% Pima 41 15.83% Pinal Maricopa 12 4.63% Santa Cruz 2 0.77% Yavapai 0 0.00% Yuma 13 5.02% TOTAL 259 100.00% Table 11.4 Sex: Juveniles Direct Filed FY12 Male 242 93.44% Female Furthermore, 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 class 1 or class 2 felonies or of selected class 3, 4, 5, and 6 felonies. These 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. TOTAL A legislative change creating the direct file process became effective in 1997. The result has been a reduction in the transfer decision. 47 17 259 6.56% 100.0% Table 11.5 Age: Juveniles Direct Filed FY12 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 2 0.77% 15 18 6.95% 16 58 22.39% 17 178 68.73% 3 1.16% 259 100.00% Unknown TOTAL JUVENILES DIRECT FILED & TRANSFERRED TO ADULT COURT IN FY12 Table 11.6 Race: Juveniles Direct Filed FY12 Hispanic 158 African American 44 61.00% Anglo 45 17.37% 9 3.47% 2 Native American Asian/Pacific Islander Other Unknown TOTAL Table 11.9 Severity of Most Serious Offense: Juveniles Direct Filed FY12 16.99% Felonies Against Person 155 59.85% 70 27.03% 0.77% Obstruction of Justice: Felony & Misdemeanor 2 0.77% 1 0.39% Misdemeanors Against Person 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Drugs: Felony & Misdemeanor 21 8.11% 7 2.70% 259 100.00% Felonies Against Property Public Peace: Felony & Misdemeanor Misdemeanors Against Property TOTAL Table 11.7 Education Status: Juveniles Direct Filed FY12 Enrolled 58 22.39% Not Enrolled 42 16.22% Expelled 0 0.00% Table 11.10 Offense Class of Most Serious Offense: Juveniles Direct Filed FY12 Suspended 3 1.16% Withdrawn Felony 6 2.32% Graduated 1 0.39% Misdemeanor GED Program TOTAL 0 0.00% Unknown 149 57.53% TOTAL 259 100.00% 4 259 253 97.68% 6 2.32% 259 Table 11.8 Number of Prior Referrals: Juveniles Direct Filed FY12 0 45 17.37% 1 25 9.65% 2 29 11.20% 3 15 5.79% 4 12 4.63% 5 13 5.02% 6 17 6.56% 7 20 7.72% 8 or more 83 32.05% 259 100.00% TOTAL For FY05 through FY12 data, refer to the graph on page 6. 48 1.54% 100.0% 100.0% JUVENILES DIRECT FILED & TRANSFERRED TO ADULT COURT IN FY12 14B In Tables 11.11-11.13 county specific breakouts of the key demographic variables of sex, age and race are presented. Table 11.14 gives a percentage of youth by delinquency risk level. That is youth who were identified as having a low, medium, or high risk level to reoffend, within 12 months, on their first referral direct filed in the fiscal year based on the delinquency risk assessment. Table 11.11 Sex by County: Juveniles Direct Filed FY12 Male Female Total % of Total Apache 0 0 0 0.00% Cochise 3 0 3 1.16% Coconino 2 0 2 0.77% Gila 0 0 0 0.00% Graham 1 0 1 0.39% Greenlee 0 0 0 0.00% La Paz 0 0 0 0.00% 174 11 185 71.43% Mohave 0 0 0 0.00% Navajo 0 0 0 0.00% Pima 37 4 41 15.83% Pinal 12 0 12 4.63% Santa Cruz 2 0 2 0.77% Yavapai 0 0 0 0.00% 11 2 13 5.02% 242 17 259 100.00% Maricopa Yuma TOTAL Table 11.12 Age by County: Juveniles Direct Filed FY12 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Unknown Total % of Total Apache 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Cochise 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 3 1.16% Coconino 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 0.77% Gila 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Graham 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0.39% Greenlee 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% La Paz 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Maricopa 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 16 47 118 2 185 71.43% Mohave 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Navajo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Pima 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 34 1 41 15.83% Pinal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11 0 12 4.63% Santa Cruz 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0.77% Yavapai 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Yuma 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 3 9 0 13 5.02% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 18 58 202 3 259 100.00% TOTAL 49 JUVENILES DIRECT FILED & TRANSFERRED TO ADULT COURT IN FY12 Table 11.13 Race by County: Juveniles Direct Filed FY12 African Native Hispanic American Anglo American Asian/PI Other Unknown Total % of Total Apache 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Cochise 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 1.16% Coconino 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0.77% Gila 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Graham 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0.39% Greenlee 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% La Paz 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% 107 38 30 7 2 1 0 185 71.43% Mohave 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Navajo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Pima 29 4 8 0 0 0 0 41 15.83% Pinal 6 1 5 0 0 0 0 12 4.63% Santa Cruz 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0.77% Yavapai 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Yuma 12 0 1 0 0 0 0 13 5.02% TOTAL 158 44 45 9 2 1 0 259 100.00% Maricopa Table 11.14 Delinquency Risk Level: Juveniles Direct Filed FY12 Low 4.0% Medium 11.0% High 85.0% TOTAL 100.00% 50 JUVENILES DIRECT FILED & TRANSFERRED TO ADULT COURT IN FY12 TRANSFERRED TO ADULT COURT Prior to FY97 and the passage of Proposition 102, the sole pathway to adult court for juveniles was through the judicial transfer process. The implementation of Senate Bill (SB) 1446 initiated the shift from judicial transfers to direct filing in adult court by the county attorney as the primary pathway to adult court. SB 1446 also changed A.R.S. §8327 which details the process for transferring juveniles to adult court. These provisions were effective July 21, 1997. An order to transfer a juvenile is based on findings of a preponderance of evidence of probable cause that: the offense was committed, the juvenile committed the offense, and a transfer would best serve public safety. The determination of whether public safety would be served is based on the following factors as stated in A.R.S. §8-327 D: 1. The seriousness of the offense involved; 2. 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. Table 11.15 County: Juveniles Transferred to Adult Court FY12 Apache 0 0.00% Cochise 0 0.00% 31B Coconino 0 0.00% Gila 0 0.00% Graham 0 0.00% Greenlee 0 0.00% La Paz 0 0.00% Maricopa 7 38.89% Mohave 0 0.00% Navajo 0 0.00% Pima 10 55.56% Pinal 0 0.00% Santa Cruz 0 0.00% Yavapai 0 0.00% Yuma 1 5.56% TOTAL 18 100.00% In FY12 transfers declined from FY11, which is consistent with the trend over the last 5 years. Since the direct filing process began, the judicial transfer process has been utilized less. During the current fiscal year, the direct filing process accounted for over 9 out of every 10 juveniles prosecuted in adult court. Table 11.16 Sex: Juveniles Transferred FY12 Male 18 100.0% Female 0 0.0% TOTAL 100.0% Table 11.17 Age: Juveniles Transferred FY12 8 0 0.00% 9 0 0.00% 10 0 0.00% 11 0 0.00% 12 0 0.00% 13 14 0 0 0.00% 15 1 5.56% 16 1 5.56% 17 15 83.33% Unknown TOTAL 51 18 0.00% 1 5.56% 18 100.00% JUVENILES DIRECT FILED & TRANSFERRED TO ADULT COURT IN FY12 Table 11.18 Race: Juveniles Transferred FY12 Hispanic 11 61.11% Table 11.21 Severity of Most Serious Offense: Juveniles Transferred FY12 African American 4 22.22% Felonies Against Person 9 50.00% Anglo 3 16.67% Felonies Against Property 8 44.44% Native American 0 0.00% Obstruction of Justice: Felony & Misdemeanor 0 0.00% Misdemeanors Against Person 0 0.00% Drugs: Felony & Misdemeanor 0 0.00% Public Peace: Felony & Misdemeanor 1 Misdemeanors Against Property 0 5.56% 0.00% Status Offenses 0 0.00% Citations/Administrative 0 0.00% 18 100.00% 17 94.44% Misdemeanor 1 5.56% Administrative 0 0.00% Asian/Pacific Islander Other Unknown TOTAL 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 18 100.00% TOTAL Table 11.19 Education Status: Juveniles Transferred FY11 Enrolled 7 38.89% Not Enrolled 4 22.22% Expelled 0 0.00% Suspended Table 11.22 Offense Class of Most Serious Offense: Juveniles Transferred FY12 0 0.00% Felony Withdrawn 0 0.00% Graduated 0 0.00% GED Program 0 0.00% Unknown 7 38.89% 18 100.00% TOTAL Table 11.20 Number of Prior Referrals: Juveniles Transferred FY12 0 2 11.11% 3 16.67% 2 2 11.11% 3 0 0.00% 4 0 0.00% 5 0 0.00% 6 2 11.11% 7 1 5.56% TOTAL 8 18 18 100.0 Juveniles Transferred to Adult Court 1 8 or more TOTAL 70 55 45 50 34 24 30 18 44.44% 10 100.0% FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 For FY05 through FY12 data, refer to the graph on page 6. 52 FY12 JUVENILES DIRECT FILED & TRANSFERRED TO ADULT COURT IN FY12 In Tables 11.19-11.21 county specific breakouts of the key demographic variables of sex, age and race are presented. Table 11.23 gives a percentage of youth by delinquency risk level. That is youth who were identified as having a low, medium, or high risk level to reoffend, within 12 months, on their first referral transferred in the fiscal year based on the delinquency risk assessment. Table 11.23 Sex by County: Juveniles Transferred FY12 Male Female Total % of Total Apache 0 0 0 0.00% Cochise 0 0 0 0.00% Coconino 0 0 0 0.00% Gila 0 0 0 0.00% Graham 0 0 0 0.00% Greenlee 0 0 0 0.00% La Paz 0 0 0 0.00% Maricopa 7 0 7 38.89% Mohave 0 0 0 0.00% Navajo 0 0 0 0.00% Pima 10 0 10 55.56% Pinal 0 0 0 0.00% Santa Cruz 0 0 0 0.00% Yavapai 0 0 0 0.00% Yuma 1 0 1 5.56% TOTAL 18 0 18 100.00% Table 11.24 Age by County: Juveniles Transferred FY12 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Unknown Total % of Total Apache 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Cochise 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Coconino 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Gila 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Graham 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Greenlee 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% La Paz 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Maricopa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 7 38.89% Mohave 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Navajo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Pima 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8 1 10 55.56% Pinal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Santa Cruz 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Yavapai 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Yuma 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 5.56% TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 16 4 18 100.00% 53 JUVENILES DIRECT FILED & TRANSFERRED TO ADULT COURT IN FY12 Table 11.25 Race by County: Juveniles Transferred FY12 Hispanic African American Native American Anglo Asian/PI Other Unknown Total % of Total Apache 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Cochise 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Coconino 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Gila 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Graham 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Greenlee 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% La Paz 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Maricopa 3 3 1 0 0 0 0 7 38.89% Mohave 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Navajo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Pima 7 1 2 0 0 0 0 10 55.56% Pinal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Santa Cruz 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Yavapai 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Yuma 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5.56% TOTAL 11 4 3 0 0 0 0 18 100.00% Table 11.26 Delinquency Risk Level: Juveniles Transferred FY12 Low 0.0% Medium 7.7% High TOTAL 92.3% 100.00% 54 16B This page intentionally left blank. SEX FY12 SEX JUVENILES REFERRED IN FY12 In January, 2005, the Child Welfare League hosted a conference National Girls Table 12.1 Percentage of Each Sex at Stages in the Juvenile Justice System FY12 45B Initiative: Florence Crittendon Roundtable 2005. This section was prompted by that conference and other work being done in Arizona. This section offers an initial analysis of the differences 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 FY12. This was first published in Juveniles Processed FY04 and has been replicated annually since. 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 have been increasing in most categories faster than males’ arrests. In Arizona, the proportions of males and females arrested have been constant Traditionally, males are seen as committing more delinquent and serious offenses than females. The proportions of males and females in the Arizona juvenile justice system confirm this view. The following tables indicate males continue to account for a large proportion of offenses. 55 Female Male Referral 33.99% 66.01% Detention 23.05% 76.95% Diversion 39.45% 60.55% Petitioned 24.78% 75.22% Dismissed 28.44% 71.56% Penalty Only 21.22% 78.78% Standard Probation 22.99% 77.01% JIPS 12.64% 87.36% ADJC 15.56% 84.44% Direct Filed 6.56% 93.44% Transferred 0.00% 100.00% SEX FY12 Average Age For the juveniles referred in FY12, the average age of referral for the initial referral was slightly higher for females (14.35) than males (13.99). Table 12.2 Average Age at First Referral FY12 Female 14.35 Male 13.99 33.99% Offense Severity and Type Females and males differ in the distribution of their referral offenses. Three offense categories make up more than two-thirds of female referrals: public peace (27.0%); misdemeanors against property (22.6%); and status (16.8%);. On the other hand, apart from public peace offenses (24.1%) and drugs (16.8%), males’ referral offenses are more equally distributed across severity categories. TOTAL 100.0% 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 stable. Misdemeanors Against Person 66.01% Table 12.3 Severity of Most Serious Referral Offense: Percentage By Sex FY12 Female Male Felonies Against Person 2.6% 6.7% Felonies Against Property 3.2% 9.9% Obstruction of Justice * 6.1% 9.8% 11.9% 9.7% 9.0% 16.8% Public Peace* 27.0% 24.1% Misdemeanors Against Property 22.6% 13.2% Status Offenses 16.8% 8.8% Administrative 0.9% 0.9% 100% 100% Drugs:* TOTAL *Includes both felonies and misdemeanors. Table 12.4 Offense Type of Most Serious Referral Offense: Percentage By Sex FY2008 to FY2012 Female Male Felony 2008 (15.8%) (37.5%) 2009 (15.6%) (37.1%) 2010 (14.8%) (35.8%) 2011 (16.9%) (37.8%) 2012 (16.7%) (37.9%) 2008 (56.8%) (45.0%) 2009 (59.4%) (46.6%) 2010 (62.6%) (47.9%) 2011 (61.9%) (46.9%) 2012 (62.5%) (47.8%) Misdemeanor 56 SEX FY12 Table 12.5 Juveniles Referred in FY12 Who Received Court Funded Treatment (Tx) in FY12 Total Rec’d Court Percentage Referred Funded Tx Female Male TOTAL 11,428 2,661 23.2% 22,189 7,075 31.8% 33,617 9,736 29.0% Court Funded Treatment Received Of the 11,428 females referred in FY12, 23.2% received court funded treatment services, in the major treatment categories listed in table 12.6, during the year compared to 31.8% of the males. Juveniles may be ordered to receive treatment that funded from other sources (Title XIX, self pay, tribal funds, etc.). Only court funded treatment are reflected here. On average, $1,034.12 was spent on court funded treatment for females and $1,171.59 was spent on males through the Juveniles Probation Services Fund (JPSF). Table 12.6 FY12 Treatment Expenditures by Category Percentage of Total Dollars Spent % Female % Male Ancillary Services 0.5% 1.2% Behavioral Support Service 0.0% 0.0% Competency Restoration 0.3% 0.8% Delinquency Prevention 11.2% 7.0% Drug Court 1.5% 3.4% Education 0.1% 0.0% Evaluation and Diagnosis 6.4% 8.2% Foster Home 0.0% 0.0% Functional Family Therapy 0.8% 0.7% 61.9% 39.6% Outpatient 7.2% 6.0% R.A.F.T. 0.0% 0.0% Sex Offender 0.2% 24.8% Substance Abuse 9.8% 8.4% 100.0% 100.0% $2,751,805.55 $ 8,289,000.31 Out-of-Home TOTAL TOTAL EXPENDITURE 40,000 35,000 R e f e r r a l s b y Sex 32,426 30,000 30,906 30,339 27,004 25,000 20,000 The largest allocation of treatment monies for both males (39.6%) and females (61.9%) was for “out of home” services (residential, group homes, detention alternatives, etc.). The second largest amount of money spent on males was for sex offender treatment (24.8%) and for females it was delinquency prevention (11.2%). 16,251 15,843 15,616 15,000 24,269 22,189 14,036 12,368 11,428 10,000 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Male 57 18B This page intentionally left blank. FY 2012 Notes & Glossary ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY12 NOTES ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY12 1. The number of juveniles in each stage is an unduplicated count. Juveniles at each stage are 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 reflected in more than one county. The only exceptions to the unduplicated count of juveniles at each stage are “Table 11.1 Pathways for Juveniles Filed in Adult Court FY12” and “Table 11.2 County: Direct Filed and Transferred to Adult Court FY12". 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. Percentages in tables may not equal 100% due to rounding. Historical data presented are as previously reported in all Juveniles Processed publications and the Arizona’s Juvenile Court Counts FY2011. Although we strive to capture all direct filed juveniles, some direct filed juveniles may not be reflected in Juveniles Processed data. 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. U U 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. U U 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. U U Misdemeanor against person - Assault, simple assault, domestic violence, endangerment, threatening intimidation, lewd and lascivious acts, unlawful imprisonment. U U 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. U U 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. U U Misdemeanors against property - Criminal damage, issue bad check, shoplifting, and theft. U U Status Offenses - Curfew, incorrigible, liquor possession, runaway, tobacco possession, truancy. U U 58 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY12 Administrative - Court hold, courtesy hold, immigration, sovereignty, traffic, warrant. U U 3. 2012-2027 Population Estimates: Arizona Department of Administration, Office of Employment and Population Statistics. 4. Categories of Top Ten Offenses: a. Alcohol offenses may include consumption or possession; use of a false identification; introduction of alcohol into secure care; providing alcohol to a minor; possession or consumption in a vehicle. b. Assault-Simple offenses are typically misdemeanor assault offenses like fighting which may include assault, facilitation and solicitation of assault. c. Curfew offenses involve municipality-determined times when juveniles are not supposed to be out on the streets. Curfew laws are based on the assumption that they lessen the circumstances in which crime can occur. d. Disorderly Conduct offenses are felony and misdemeanors which may involve disturbing the peace, unlawful assembly, and disorderly conduct with a weapon. e. Drug Paraphernalia offenses involve juveniles who have been charged with possession of drug paraphernalia. f. Marijuana Possession offenses involve felony and misdemeanor possession and attempted possession of marijuana. g. Probation Violations refer to acts by a probationer (i.e., curfew violations, failure to attend school) contrary to his or her conditions or terms of probation. A petition to revoke or modify probation may be filed as a result. In some cases, a petition to revoke or modify probation is filed in conjunction with a new offense. The probation violation becomes the most serious offense when the new offense is dismissed by the county attorney or judicial officer. h. Runaway offenses involve juveniles who have either left their residences homes or without permission Parent/Guardians permission and or attempted to runaway. i. Shoplift-Misdemeanor offenses involve attempted, facilitated, and solicited shoplifting of any amount and shoplifting of less than $1000. j. Truancy offenses occur when a school files a referral based on unexcused absences. 5. Statutory requirements for diversion based on A.R.S. §8-321: 1. 2. 3. The county attorney decides which juveniles accused of committing an incorrigible or delinquent act to divert to a community based alternative program 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, §281382, §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. 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. 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. 59 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY12 d. 4. 5. 6. 6. 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. 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. 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. 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. If a juvenile complies with the consequences set forth by the probation officer or community based alternative program, the county attorney will not file a petition in juvenile court. 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. 60 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY12 This page intentionally left blank. 61 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY12 Glossary 19B JUVENILE JUSTICE TERMS Adjudication Hearing. In the juvenile court, the adjudication hearing is the proceeding in which a juvenile is found to be a delinquent, incorrigible or dependent youth. The hearing is relatively formal and is 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. U U 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 juveniles. The new 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. U U Adult Probation. Adult probation is a function of the judicial branch of government, and has as its primary responsibility the community-based supervision of adults convicted of criminal offenses who are not sentenced to prison. Juveniles prosecuted as adults and who are placed on probation, are placed on adult probation. 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 primarily aimed at more serious juvenile offenders 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 the new juvenile statutes, 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 adjudicated to diversion or probation. 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 the Juvenile Court or the Superior Court, alleging that a juvenile has violated the law. It is also called a "delinquency complaint" or "written referral" (paper referral). 62 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY12 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. If the same offense had been committed by an adult, the offense would be a criminal act. Detention. Juvenile detention is specifically defined as the temporary confinement of a juvenile in a physically restricting facility, surrounded by a locked and physically restrictive secure barrier, with restricted ingress and egress. Juveniles are typically held in detention pending court hearings for purposes of public protection, their own protection or as a consequence for their misbehavior. Discretionary Filings. The statutes permit the county attorney to bring criminal prosecution in adult court if the juvenile is fourteen years of age or older and is accused of the serious, chronic and violent offenses enumerated in the law that warrant mandatory adult prosecution for juveniles fifteen years of age or older. In addition, criminal prosecution may be brought against any juvenile with a prior conviction in adult court. Essentially, county attorneys have full discretion in these instances to file a petition in juvenile court or to seek adult prosecution. Disposition Hearing. A disposition hearing is conducted following the adjudication hearing to determine the most appropriate punishment or intervention for the juvenile. This hearing is comparable to a "sentencing hearing" in the adult criminal court. Simply stated, "disposition" refers to the process by which the juvenile court judge decides what to do with the juvenile. 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 considered to be incorrigible. 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 statutes require that all juveniles adjudicated for a second felony offense must be placed on JIPS, committed to ADJC, or sent to adult court. Mandatory Offenses. The statutes mandate that certain serious, violent and chronic offenses, when committed by juveniles of a certain age, must be prosecuted in the adult criminal division of Superior Court. These "mandatory offenses" coincide with the crimes now enumerated in the State Constitution, as amended through the provisions of Proposition 102 and approved by Arizona voters at the 1996 general election. Parole. This term refers only to those juveniles who have been committed to ADJC and are then placed on juvenile "parole" upon their release. Juvenile parole is normally considered to be "conditional liberty." Parole is an executive branch function. Petition. The legal document filed in the juvenile court alleging a juvenile is a delinquent, incorrigible, or a dependent child and requesting that the court assume jurisdiction over the youth. The petition initiates the formal court hearing process of the juvenile court. The county attorney, 63 ARIZONA’S JUVENILE COURT COUNTS FY12 who determines what charges to bring against the juvenile, prepares the delinquent or incorrigibility petition. Referrals. A report submitted to the juvenile court that alleges a child is dependent or incorrigible or that a juvenile has committed a delinquent act. Referrals can be made by police, parents, school officials, probation officers, other agencies or interested individuals requesting that the juvenile court assume jurisdiction over the juvenile's conduct. Referrals can be "paper referrals" issued as citations or police reports or "physical referrals"; an arrest and possible detention by law enforcement. Juveniles may have multiple referrals during any given year or over an extended period of time between the ages of eight and seventeen. Multiple referrals typically signal high risk, even when the referrals are for numerous incorrigible or relatively minor offenses. Risk Level: Is the categorization of Low, Medium and High risk based on the state approved tool developed to classify delinquents risk to recidivate in the ensuing twelve months among juveniles referred to the juvenile court. Standard Probation. A program of conditional freedom granted by the juvenile court to an adjudicated juvenile on the condition of continued good behavior and regular reporting to a probation officer. Transfer Hearing: A transfer hearing is held when the county attorney requests that the juvenile court consider transferring its jurisdiction of the juvenile to the adult criminal division of Superior Court. The juvenile court judge may decide to waive or retain jurisdiction in such matters based on A.R.S. §8-327, but must state on the official court record the reasons for the decision. 64 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.