The juvenile court has jurisdiction over two types of cases: delinquency and dependency.

Adjudication: Judicial determination (judgment) that a juvenile is responsible for the delinquency or status offense that is charged in a petition.

Age: Age at the time of referral to juvenile court.

Case rate: Number of cases disposed per 1,000 juveniles in the population. The population base used to calculate the case rate varies. For example, the population base for the male case rate is the total number of male youth age 10 or older who are under the jurisdiction of the juvenile courts. (See “juvenile population.”)

Delinquency: Acts or conduct in violation of criminal law. (See “reason for referral.”)

Delinquent act: An act committed by a juvenile which, if committed by an adult, would be a criminal act. The juvenile court has jurisdiction over delinquent acts. Delinquent acts include crimes against persons, crimes against property, drug offenses, and crimes against public order.

Dependency case: Those cases covering neglect or inadequate care on the part of parents or guardians, such as abandonment or desertion; abuse or cruel treatment; improper or inadequate conditions in the home; and insufficient care or support resulting from death, absence, or physical or mental incapacity of parents.

Detention: The placement of a youth in a secure facility under court authority at some point between the time of referral to court intake and case disposition. This Report does not include detention decisions made by law enforcement officials prior to court referral or those occurring after the disposition of a case.

Disposition: Sanction ordered or treatment plan decided upon or initiated in a particular case. Case dispositions are coded into the following categories:

• Waived to criminal court—Cases that were transferred to criminal court as the result of a judicial waiver hearing in juvenile court.

• Placement—Cases in which youth were placed in a residential facility for delinquents or status offenders, or cases in which youth were otherwise removed from their homes and placed elsewhere.

• Probation—Cases in which youth were placed on informal/voluntary or formal/court- ordered supervision.

• Dismissed/released—Cases dismissed or otherwise released (including those warned and counseled) with no further sanction or consequence anticipated. Among cases handled informally (see “manner of handling”), some cases may be dismissed by the juvenile court because the matter is being handled in another court or agency.

• Other—Miscellaneous dispositions not included above. These dispositions include fines, restitution, community service, referrals outside the court for services with minimal or no further court involvement anticipated, and dispositions coded as “other” in a jurisdiction’s original data.

Informal handling: See “manner of handling.”

Intake decision: The decision made by juvenile court intake that results in the case either being handled informally at the intake level or being petitioned and scheduled for an adjudicatory or transfer hearing.

Judicial decision: The decision made in response to a petition that asks the court to adjudicate or transfer the youth. This decision is generally made by a juvenile court judge or referee.

Judicial disposition: The disposition rendered in a case after the judicial decision has been made.

Juvenile: Youth at or below the upper age of original juvenile court jurisdiction. (See “juvenile population” and “upper age of jurisdiction.”)

Juvenile court: Any court that has jurisdiction over matters involving juveniles.

"Juvenile population: For delinquency and status offense matters, the juvenile population is defined as the number of children between the age of 10 and the upper age of jurisdiction. For dependency matters, it is defined as the number of children at or below the upper age of jurisdiction. In all States, the upper age of jurisdiction is defined by statute. Thus, when the upper age of jurisdiction is 17, the delinquency and status offense juvenile population is equal to the number of children ages 10 through 17 living within the geographical area serviced by the court. (See “upper age of jurisdiction.”)

Manner of handling: A general classification of case processing within the court system. Petitioned (formally handled) cases are those that appear on the official court calendar in response to the filing of a petition, complaint, or other legal instrument requesting the court to adjudicate a youth as a delinquent, status offender, or dependent child or to waive jurisdiction and transfer a youth to criminal court for processing as a criminal offender. In non-petitioned (informally handled) cases, duly authorized court personnel, having screened the case, decide not to file a formal petition. Such personnel include judges, referees, probation officers, other officers of the court, and/or agencies statutorily designated to conduct petition screening for the juvenile court.

Nonpetitioned case: See “manner of handling.”

Petition: A document filed in juvenile court alleging that a juvenile is a delinquent or a status offender and asking that the court assume jurisdiction over the juvenile or that an alleged delinquent be transferred to criminal court for prosecution as an adult.

Petitioned case: See “manner of handling.”

Race: The race of the youth referred, as determined by the youth or by court personnel.

• White—A person having origins in any of the indigenous peoples of Europe, North Africa, or the Middle East. (In both the population and court data, nearly all youth of Hispanic ethnicity were included in the white racial category.)

• Black—A person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa.

• Other—A person having origins in any of the indigenous peoples of North America, the Far East, Southeast Asia, the Indian Subcontinent, or the Pacific Islands.

• Crimes against persons—Includes criminal homicide, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, simple assault, and other person offenses as defined below.
  • Criminal homicide—Causing the death of another person without legal justification or excuse. Criminal homicide is a summary category, not a single codified offense. In law, the term embraces all homicides in which the perpetrator intentionally kills someone without legal justification or accidentally kills someone as a consequence of reckless or grossly negligent conduct. It includes all conduct encompassed by the terms murder, nonnegligent (voluntary) manslaughter, negligent (involuntary) manslaughter, and vehicular manslaughter. The term is broader than the Index Crime category used in the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI’s) Uniform Crime Reports (UCR), in which murder/nonnegligent manslaughter does not include negligent manslaughter or vehicular manslaughter.

  • Forcible rape—Sexual intercourse or attempted sexual intercourse with a female against her will by force or threat of force. The term is used in the same sense as in the UCR Crime Index. Some States have enacted gender-neutral rape or sexual assault statutes that prohibit forced sexual penetration of either sex. Data reported by such States do not distinguish between forcible rape of females as defined above and other sexual assaults. (Other violent sex offenses are classified as “other offenses against persons.”)

  • Robbery—Unlawful taking or attempted taking of property that is in the immediate possession of another by force or threat of force. The term is used in the same sense as in the UCR Crime Index and includes forcible purse snatching.

  • Assault—Unlawful intentional infliction, or attempted or threatened infliction, of injury upon the person of another.

    • Aggravated assault—Unlawful intentional infliction of serious bodily injury or unlawful threat or attempt to inflict bodily injury or death by means of a deadly or dangerous weapon with or without actual infliction of any injury. The term is used in the same sense as in the UCR Crime Index. It includes conduct encompassed under the statutory names aggravated assault and battery, aggravated battery, assault with intent to kill, assault with intent to commit murder or manslaughter, atrocious assault, attempted murder, felonious assault, and assault with a deadly weapon.

    • Simple assault—Unlawful intentional infliction or attempted or threatened infliction of less than serious bodily injury without a deadly or dangerous weapon. The term is used in the same sense as in UCR reporting. Simple assault is not often distinctly named in statutes because it encompasses all assaults not explicitly named and defined as serious. Unspecified assaults are classified as “other offenses against persons.”

  • Other offenses against persons—Includes kidnaping, violent sex acts other than forcible rape (e.g., incest, sodomy), custody interference, unlawful restraint, false imprisonment, reckless endangerment, harassment, and attempts to commit any such acts.

• Crimes against property—Includes burglary, larceny, motor vehicle theft, arson, vandalism, stolen property offenses, trespassing, and other property offenses as defined below.
  • Burglary—Unlawful entry or attempted entry of any fixed structure, vehicle, or vessel used for regular residence, industry, or business, with or without force, with intent to commit a felony or larceny. The term is used in the same sense as in the UCR Crime Index.

  • Larceny—Unlawful taking or attempted taking of property (other than a motor vehicle) from the possession of another by stealth, without force and without deceit, with intent to permanently deprive the owner of the property. This term is used in the same sense as in the UCR Crime Index. It includes shoplifting and purse snatching without force.

  • Motor vehicle theft—Unlawful taking or attempted taking of a self-propelled road vehicle owned by another with the intent to deprive the owner of it permanently or temporarily. The term is used in the same sense as in the UCR Crime Index. It includes joyriding or unauthorized use of a motor vehicle as well as grand theft auto.

  • Arson—Intentional damage or destruction by means of fire or explosion of the property of another without the owner’s consent or of any property with intent to defraud, or attempting the above acts. The term is used in the same sense as in the UCR Crime Index.

  • Vandalism—Destroying, damaging, or attempting to destroy or damage public property or the property of another without the owner’s consent, except by burning.

  • Stolen property offenses—Unlawfully and knowingly receiving, buying, or possessing stolen property or attempting any of the above. The term is used in the same sense as the UCR category “stolen property: buying, receiving, possessing.”

  • Trespassing—Unlawful entry or attempted entry of the property of another with the intent to commit a misdemeanor other than larceny or without intent to commit a crime.

  • Other property offenses—Includes extortion and all fraud offenses, such as forgery, counterfeiting, embezzlement, check or credit card fraud, and attempts to commit any such offenses.

• Drug law violations—Includes unlawful sale, purchase, distribution, manufacture, cultivation, transport, possession, or use of a controlled or prohibited substance or drug or drug paraphernalia, or attempt to commit these acts. Sniffing of glue, paint, gasoline, and other inhalants is also included. Hence, the term is broader than the UCR category “drug abuse violations.”

• Offenses against public order—Includes weapons offenses; nonviolent sex offenses; liquor law violations, not status; disorderly conduct; obstruction of justice; and other offenses against public order as defined below.
  • Weapons offenses—Unlawful sale, distribution, manufacture, alteration, transportation, possession, or use of a deadly or dangerous weapon or accessory, or attempt to commit any of these acts. The term is used in the same sense as the UCR category “weapons: carrying, possessing, etc.”

  • Sex offenses—All offenses having a sexual element not involving violence. The term combines the meaning of the UCR categories “prostitution and commercialized vice” and “sex offenses.” It includes offenses such as statutory rape, indecent exposure, prostitution, solicitation, pimping, lewdness, fornication, and adultery.

  • Liquor law violations, not status—Being in a public place while intoxicated through consumption of alcohol or intake of a controlled substance or drug. It includes public intoxication, drunkenness, and other liquor law violations. It does not include driving under the influence. The term is used in the same sense as the UCR category of the same name. Some States treat public drunkenness of juveniles as a status offense rather than delinquency. Hence, some of these offenses may appear under the status offense code “status liquor law violations.” (When a person who is publicly intoxicated performs acts that cause a disturbance, he or she may be charged with disorderly conduct.)

  • Disorderly conduct—Unlawful interruption of the peace, quiet, or order of a community, including offenses called disturbing the peace, vagrancy, loitering, unlawful assembly, and riot.

  • Obstruction of justice—Intentionally obstructing court or law enforcement efforts in the administration of justice, acting in a way calculated to lessen the authority or dignity of the court, failing to obey the lawful order of a court, escape from confinement, and violating probation or parole. This term includes contempt, perjury, obstruction of justice, bribery of witnesses, failure to report a crime, and nonviolent resistance of arrest.

  • Other offenses against public order—Other offenses against government administration or regulation, such as bribery; violations of laws pertaining to fish and game, gambling, health, hitchhiking, and immigration; and false fire alarms.

• Status offenses—Includes acts or types of conduct that are offenses only when committed or engaged in by a juvenile and that can be adjudicated only by a juvenile court. Although State statutes defining status offenses vary and some States may classify cases involving these offenses as dependency cases, for the purposes of this Report the following types of offenses were classified as status offenses:
  • Runaway—Leaving the custody and home of parents, guardians, or custodians without permission and failing to return within a reasonable length of time, in violation of a statute regulating the conduct of youth.

  • Truancy—Violation of a compulsory school attendance law.

  • Ungovernability—Being beyond the control of parents, guardians, or custodians or being disobedient of parental authority. This classification is referred to in various juvenile codes as unruly, unmanageable, and incorrigible.

  • Status liquor law violations—Violation of laws regulating the possession, purchase, or consumption of liquor by minors. Some States treat consumption of alcohol and public drunkenness of juveniles as status offenses rather than delinquency. Hence, some of these offenses may appear under this status offense code.

  • Miscellaneous status offenses—Numerous status offenses not included above (e.g., tobacco violation, curfew violation, and violation of a court order in a status offense proceeding) and those offenses coded as “other” in a jurisdiction’s original data.

• Dependency offenses—Includes actions that come to the attention of a juvenile court involving neglect or inadequate care of minors on the part of the parents or guardians, such as abandonment or desertion; abuse or cruel treatment; improper or inadequate conditions in the home; and insufficient care or support resulting from death, absence, or physical or mental incapacity of the parents.

Offenses may also be grouped into categories commonly used in the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports. These groupings are:

• Crime Index—Includes all offenses contained within the violent crime and property crime categories defined below.
  • Violent Crime Index—Includes the offenses of murder/nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault.

  • Property Crime Index—Includes the offenses of burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson.

Source of referral: The agency or individual filing a complaint with intake that initiates court processing.

• Law enforcement agency—Includes metropolitan police, State police, park police, sheriffs, constables, police assigned to the juvenile court for special duty, and all others performing a police function, with the exception of probation officers and officers of the court.

• Other—Includes the youth’s own parents, foster parents, adoptive parents, stepparents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, other legal guardians, counselors, teachers, principals, attendance officers, social agencies, district attorneys, probation officers, victims, other private citizens, and miscellaneous sources of referral that are often only defined by the code other in the original data.

Status offense: Behavior that is considered an offense only when committed by a juvenile (e.g., running away from home). (See “reason for referral.”)

Unit of count: A case disposed by a court with juvenile jurisdiction during the calendar year. Each case represents a youth referred to the juvenile court for a new referral for one or more offenses. (See “reason for referral.”) The term disposed means that during the year some definite action was taken or some treatment plan was decided on or initiated. (See “disposition.”) Under this definition, a youth could be involved in more than one case during a calendar year.

Upper age of jurisdiction: The oldest age at which a juvenile court has original jurisdiction over an individual for law-violating behavior. For the time period covered by this Report, the upper age of jurisdiction was 15 in 3 States (Connecticut, New York, and North Carolina), and 16 in 10 States (Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Texas, and Wisconsin). In the remaining 37 States and the District of Columbia, the upper age of jurisdiction was 17. It must be noted that within most States, there are exceptions in which youth at or below the State’s upper age of jurisdiction can be placed under the original jurisdiction of the adult criminal court. For example, in most States, if a youth of a certain age is charged with an offense from a defined list of “excluded offenses,” the case must originate in the adult criminal court. In addition, in a number of States, the district attorney is given the discretion of filing certain cases in either the juvenile court or the criminal court. Therefore, while the upper age of jurisdiction is commonly recognized in all States, there are numerous exceptions to this age criterion.

Page 2

Information on the courts’ petitioned and nonpetitioned delinquency, status, and dependency caseloads for the year is presented in the following table. The total population of each reporting jurisdiction, its population age 10 through the upper age of jurisdiction, and its population age 0 through the upper age of jurisdiction are also presented. Case rates (the number of cases per 1,000 juveniles in the population) are presented for each case type for the State (or jurisdiction). Delinquency and status offense case rates are based on the population age 10 through upper age, while rates for dependency cases are based on the population age 0 through upper age.

Table notes follow the table. The notes associated with each data presentation identify the source of the data, the mode of transmission, and the characteristics of data reported.

State and local agencies responsible for the collection of their juvenile court statistics compiled the data found in this table. Agencies transmitted these juvenile court caseload data to the National Juvenile Court Data Archive in one of four different modes. First, many jurisdictions were able to provide the project with an automated data file that contained a detailed description of each case processed by their juvenile courts. Second, some agencies completed a juvenile court statistics (JCS) survey form provided by the project. The survey requested information about each county jurisdiction, asking for the number of delinquency, status offense, and dependency cases disposed and for the number of petition and nonpetition cases. Third, statistics for some jurisdictions were abstracted from their annual reports. In these instances, the report name and the page containing the information are listed. Finally, a few States simply sent statistical pages to the National Center for Juvenile Justice that contained counts of their courts’ handling of juvenile matters.

The units of count for the court statistics vary across jurisdictions. Although many States used cases disposed as the unit of count, other States reported cases filed, children disposed, petitions filed, hearings, juvenile arraignments, and charges. The unit of count is identified in the notes for each data set. The unit of count for each source should be reviewed before any attempt is made to compare statistics either across or within data sets. Variations in administrative practices, differences in upper ages of jurisdiction, and wide ranges in available community resources affect the number of cases handled by individual counties and States. Therefore, the data displayed in this table should not be used to make comparisons among the delinquency, status offense, or dependency workloads of counties or States without carefully studying the definitions of the statistics presented. States that have indicated incomplete reporting of data also are noted.

Furthermore, caution must be taken when interpreting the case rates appearing at the end of each State table. Case rate is defined as the number of juvenile court cases per 1,000 juveniles in the population in the reporting counties. For example, not all California counties reported statistics on nonpetitioned delinquency cases. The California nonpetitioned delinquency case rate was generated from the total number of nonpetitioned delinquency cases from reporting counties.

The figures within a column relate only to the specific case type. However, some jurisdictions were unable to provide statistics that distinguish delinquency and status offense cases from dependency matters or, at times, from other court activities. Such information is presented in this appendix in a column labeled “All Reported Cases.” By its nature, this column contains a heterogeneous mixture of units of count and case types. These variations are identified in the notes associated with each presentation of data. Furthermore, due to the nature of these data, case rates are not calculated for the “All Reported Cases” column.

Finally, although the majority of the data presented in the appendix are for calendar year 1996, several reporting jurisdictions were not able to aggregate data for this timeframe. In those instances, the data cover fiscal year 1996. The period of coverage is indicated in the notes.

Page 3

Source: Alabama Department of Youth Services Mode: Automated data file Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed.

2. Status figures are cases disposed.

Alaska

Source: Alaska Court System Mode: 1996 Annual Report Data: 1. Total figures are children’s matters dispositions. They include delinquency, status offense, and dependency cases for fiscal year 1996.

2. The majority of juvenile cases are processed at the superior court level. The following district courts also handled and reported children’s matters in fiscal year 1996: Cordova, Craig, Dillingham, Glennallen, Naknek, Seward, Tok, and Unalaska.

Arizona

Source: Supreme Court of Arizona, Administrative Office of the Courts Mode: The Arizona Courts Data Book 1996 General Jurisdiction Data: 1. Delinquency figures are petitions filed.

2. Status figures are petitions filed.

Arizona: Maricopa County

Source: Maricopa County Juvenile Court Center (delinquency and status cases) and the Supreme Court of Arizona, Administrative Office of the Courts Mode: Automated data file (delinquency and status cases) Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed.

2. Status figures are cases disposed.

Arkansas

Source: Administrative Office of the Courts Mode: Automated data file Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed. 2. Status figures are cases disposed.

3. Dependency figures are cases disposed.

California

Source: Administrative Office of the Courts, Judicial Council of California Mode: Statistical pages sent to NCJJ Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed. 2. Status figures are cases disposed.

3. Dependency figures are cases disposed. The AOC supplied dependency figures for all counties, including those counties that independently provided their automated delinquency and status offense data to NCJJ.

California: Alameda County

Source: Alameda County Probation Department (delinquency and status cases) Mode: Automated data file (delinquency and status cases) Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed.

2. Status figures are cases disposed.

California: Kings County

Source: Kings County Probation Department (delinquency and status cases) Mode: Automated data file (delinquency and status cases) Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed.

2. Status figures are cases disposed.

California: Los Angeles County

Source: Los Angeles County Probation Department (delinquency and status cases) Mode: Automated data file (delinquency and status cases) Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed.

2. Status figures are cases disposed.

California: Orange County

Source: Orange County Probation Department (delinquency and status cases) Mode: Automated data file (delinquency and status cases) Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed.

2. Status figures are cases disposed.

California: San Bernardino County

Source: San Bernardino County Probation Department (delinquency and status cases) Mode: Automated data file (delinquency and status cases) Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed.

2. Status figures are cases disposed.

California: San Diego County

Source: San Diego County Probation Department (delinquency and status cases) Mode: Automated data file (delinquency and status cases) Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed.

2. Status figures are cases disposed.

California: San Francisco County

Source: San Francisco County Juvenile Probation Department (delinquency and status cases) Mode: Automated data file (delinquency and status cases) Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed.

2. Status figures are cases disposed.

California: San Joaquin County

Source: San Joaquin County Probation Department (delinquency and status cases) Mode: Automated data file (delinquency and status cases) Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed.

2. Status figures are cases disposed.

California: Santa Barbara County

Source: Santa Barbara County Probation Department (delinquency and status cases) Mode: Automated data file (delinquency and status cases) Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed.

2. Status figures are cases disposed.

California: Santa Clara County

Source: Santa Clara County Probation Department (delinquency and status cases) Mode: Automated data file (delinquency and status cases) Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed.

2. Status figures are cases disposed.

California: Santa Cruz County

Source: Santa Cruz County Probation Department (delinquency and status cases) Mode: Automated data file (delinquency and status cases) Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed.

2. Status figures are cases disposed.

California: Stanislaus County

Source: Stanislaus County Probation Department (delinquency and status cases) Mode: Automated data file (delinquency and status cases) Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed.

2. Status figures are cases disposed.

California: Ventura County

Source: Correction Services Agency (delinquency and status cases) Mode: Automated data file (delinquency and status cases) Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed.

2. Status figures are cases disposed.

Colorado

Source: Colorado Judicial Department Mode: FY 1996 Annual Report: Statistical Supplement Data: 1. Delinquency figures are petitioned case filings for fiscal year 1996. They include delinquency and status offense cases.

2. Status figures were reported with delinquency cases.

Connecticut

Source: Chief Court Administrator’s Office Mode: Automated data file Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed. 2. Status figures are cases disposed.

3. Juvenile venue districts established by the State report data.

Delaware

Source: Court Administrator, Family Court, Administrative Office of the Courts Mode: Statistical page sent to NCJJ Data: 1. Total figures are petitioned and nonpetitioned delinquency and petitioned dependency filings received in fiscal year 1996.

2. There is no statute on status offenders in this State; therefore, the court handles no status offense cases.

District of Columbia

Source: District of Columbia Superior Court Mode: JCS survey form Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed. They include status offenses and interstate compact figures. 2. Status figures are cases disposed.

3. Dependency figures are cases disposed.

Florida

Source: Department of Juvenile Justice Mode: Automated data file Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed. 2. Status figures are cases disposed. They represent only those cases disposed by the Department of Juvenile Justice. Cases disposed by the Florida Network, the Department of Juvenile Justice’s major contracted provider of CINS/FINS centralized intake, are not included in these figures. 3. The figures represent the number of cases disposed by Intake during 1996, which captures only those disposed cases reported to the Department of Children and Family Services by caseworkers correctly completing and submitting a “Client Information Form–CINS/FINS and Delinquency Intake.” The Department of Children and Family Services, having a broad range of operations, reports information on other childcare services not part of the typical juvenile court system. Therefore, the number of nonpetitioned cases may appear higher and fluctuate more than those reported by other information systems that report only juvenile court activity. 4. Florida reported its data by Department of Children and Family Services districts. Therefore, these districts were used as the reporting area. The following is a list of counties within districts. District 1: Escambia, Okaloosa, Santa Rosa, and Walton. District 2: Bay, Calhoun, Franklin, Gadsden, Gulf, Holmes, Jackson, Jefferson, Leon, Liberty, Madison, Taylor, Wakulla, and Washington. District 3: Alachua, Bradford, Columbia, Dixie, Gilchrist, Hamilton, Lafayette, Levy, Putnam, Suwannee, and Union. District 4: Baker, Clay, Duval, Nassau, and St. Johns. District 5: Pasco and Pinellas. District 6: Hillsborough and Manatee. District 7: Brevard, Orange, Osceola, and Seminole. District 8: Charlotte, Collier, De Soto, Glades, Hendry, Lee, and Sarasota. District 9: Palm Beach. District 10: Broward. District 11: Dade and Monroe. District 12: Flagler and Volusia. District 13: Citrus, Hernando, Lake, Marion, and Sumter. District 14: Hardee, Highlands, and Polk. District 15: Indian River, Martin, Okeechobee, and St. Lucie.

5. On October 1, 1994, Juvenile Justice separated from the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services to become the Department of Juvenile Justice.

Georgia

Source: Administrative Office of the Courts Mode: Statistical pages sent to NCJJ Data: 1. Delinquency figures are the number of children disposed with a petition for calendar year 1996. 2. Status figures are the number of children disposed with a petition for calendar year 1996. 3. Dependency figures are the number of children disposed with a petition for calendar year 1996.

4. Delinquency, status, and dependency figures may include a small percentage of children disposed without a petition.

Hawaii

Source: The Judiciary Mode: Automated data file Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed. 2. Status figures are cases disposed.

3. Dependency figures are cases disposed.

Idaho

Source: Administrative Office of the Courts Mode: Idaho Courts 1996 Annual Report Appendix Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed. They include status offense cases. 2. Status figures are reported with delinquency cases.

3. Dependency figures are cases disposed.

Illinois

Source: Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts, Probation Division Mode: 1996 Probation Statistics Data: 1. Delinquency figures are the number of petitions filed. 2. Status figures are the number of petitions filed. Minor requiring authoritative intervention (MRAI) and truancy counts were summed to determine status figures.

3. Dependency figures are the number of petitions filed. Neglect/abuse and dependency counts were summed to determine dependency figures.

Illinois: Cook County

Source: Circuit Court of Cook County, Juvenile Division (delinquency and status cases) Mode: Automated data file (delinquency and status cases) Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed.

2. Status figures are cases disposed.

Indiana

Source: Division of State Court Administration Mode: 1996 Indiana Judicial Report, Volume II Data: 1. Delinquency figures are petitioned cases disposed. 2. Status figures are petitioned cases disposed.

3. Dependency figures are petitioned cases disposed.

Iowa

Source: State Court Administrator Mode: Statistical pages sent to NCJJ Data: 1. Delinquency figures are the number of petitions. 3. Dependency figures are the number of petitions. 4. Iowa reported its data by judicial district. The following is a list of counties within judicial districts. District 1: Allamakee, Black Hawk, Buchanan, Chickasaw, Clayton, Delaware, Dubuque, Fayette, Howard, and Winneshiek. District 2: Boone, Bremer, Butler, Calhoun, Carroll, Cerro Gordo, Floyd, Franklin, Greene, Grundy, Hamilton, Hancock, Hardin, Humboldt, Marshall, Mitchell, Pocahontas, Sac, Story, Webster, Winnebago, Worth, and Wright. District 3: Buena Vista, Cherokee, Clay, Crawford, Dickinson, Emmet, Ida, Kossuth, Lyon, Monona, O’Brien, Osceola, Palo Alto, Plymouth, Sioux, and Woodbury. District 4: Audubon, Cass, Fremont, Harrison, Mills, Montgomery, Page, Pottawattamie, and Shelby. District 5: Adair, Adams, Clarke, Dallas, Decatur, Guthrie, Jasper, Lucas, Madison, Marion, Polk, Ringgold, Taylor, Union, Warren, and Wayne. District 6: Benton, Iowa, Johnson, Jones, Linn, and Tama. District 7: Cedar, Clinton, Jackson, Muscatine, and Scott. District 8: Appanoose, Davis, Des Moines, Henry, Jefferson, Keokuk, Lee, Louisa, Mahaska, Monroe, Poweshiek, Van Buren, Wapello, and

Washington.

Kansas

Source: Kansas Bureau of Investigation Mode: JCS survey form Data: 1. Delinquency figures are petitioned cases disposed. 2. Status figures are petitioned cases disposed and include dependency/neglect petition figures.

3. Data for 1996 are incomplete due to reporting difficulties at the county level.

Kentucky

Source: Kentucky Administrative Office of the Courts Mode: Statistical pages sent to NCJJ Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed.

2. Status figures are cases disposed.

Louisiana

Source: Judicial Council of the Supreme Court of Louisiana Mode: 1996 Annual Report Data: 1. Total figures are new cases filed in district court. They include petitioned and nonpetitioned delinquency, dependency, status offense, special proceeding, and traffic cases.

2. Figures shown for Caddo, East Baton Rouge, Jefferson, and Orleans Parishes include juvenile felony and misdemeanor charges and status offense cases filed.

Maine

Source: Administrative Office of the Courts Mode: JCS survey form Data: 1. Delinquency figures are all offenses committed by juveniles for fiscal year 1996 and include traffic cases and civil violations. 2. Status offenses are not handled in the juvenile court system.

3. The numbers for the district courts were summed to determine county figures. The following is a list of district courts within counties. Androscoggin: Lewiston and Livermore Falls. Aroostook: Caribou, Fort Kent, Houlton, Madawaska, Presque Isle, and Van Buren. Cumberland: Bridgton and Portland. Franklin: Farmington. Hancock: Bar Harbor and Ellsworth. Kennebec: Augusta and Waterville. Knox: Rockland. Lincoln: Wiscasset. Oxford: Rumford and S. Paris. Penobscot: Bangor, Lincoln, Millinocket, and Newport. Piscataquis: Dover-Foxcroft. Sagadahoc: Bath/ Brunswick. Somerset: Skowhegan. Waldo: Belfast. Washington: Calais and Machias. York: Biddeford, Springvale, and York.

Maryland

Source: Department of Juvenile Justice Mode: Automated data file Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed.

2. Status figures are cases disposed.

Massachusetts

Source: Administrative Office of the Courts Mode: Annual Report on the State of Massachusetts Court System, FY 1996 Data: 1. Delinquency figures are complaints disposed and include motor vehicle violations. 2. Status figures are petitions disposed. 3. Dependency figures are cases disposed. 4. Figures for Briston, Hampden, Suffolk, and Worcester Counties are incomplete because the units of counts for the corresponding Juvenile Court Departments were not compatible with the rest of the courts’ unit of count. Essex County data are incomplete because the Amesbury district court data were not reported.

5. Each defendant is counted as a single criminal case.

Michigan

Source: State Court Administrative Office Mode: Automated data file and statistical pages sent to NCJJ Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed for the following counties: Alcona, Alpena, Barry, Bay, Cass, Charlevoix, Chippewa, Crawford, Emmet, Genesee, Grand Traverse, Huron, Isabella, Jackson, Lapeer, Macomb, Marquette, Monroe, Montmorency, Muskegon, Otsego, Presque Isle, Roscommon, Sanilac, Shiawassee, and Tuscola. 2. Delinquency figures for the remaining counties are petitions filed. 3. Status figures are petitions filed.

4. Dependency figures are petitions filed.

Minnesota

Source: Minnesota Supreme Court Information System Mode: Automated data file Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed.

2. Status figures are cases disposed.

Mississippi

Source: Mississippi Department of Human Services, Division of Youth Services Mode: Automated data file Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed. 2. Status figures are cases disposed.

3. Dependency figures are cases disposed. Only those dependency cases that came to the attention of the Office of Youth Services via court processing are included.

Missouri

Source: Department of Social Services, Division of Youth Services Mode: Automated data file Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed. 2. Status figures are cases disposed.

3. Dependency figures are cases disposed.

Montana

Source: Montana Board of Crime Control (petitioned and nonpetitioned cases) and Office of Court Administration (all reported cases) Mode: Automated data file (petitioned and nonpetitioned cases) and 1996 Annual Caseload Statistics Report (all reported cases) Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed. 2. Status figures are cases disposed.

3. Cascade county figures are petition dispositions. They include delinquency, status offense, dependency, and special proceedings cases. Due to the differing unit of count, these figures cannot be compared to those of the other counties.

Nebraska

Source: Nebraska Crime Commission Mode: Automated data file Data: 1. Delinquency figures are petitioned cases disposed. 2. Status figures are petitioned cases disposed. 3. Dependency figures are petitioned cases disposed.

4. In Douglas County, only those cases processed through the county attorney’s office (petitioned cases) were reported.

New Hampshire

Source: New Hampshire Supreme Court, Administrative Office of the Courts Mode: Statistical pages sent to NCJJ Data: 1. Delinquency figures are petitions filed. 2. Status figures are petitions filed.

3. Dependency figures are petitions filed.

New Jersey

Source: Administrative Office of the Courts Mode: Automated data file Data:

1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed.

New Mexico

Source: Children, Youth and Families Department Mode: Statistical pages sent to NCJJ Data: 1. Delinquency figures are juvenile cases closed for fiscal year 1996. 2. Status figures are juvenile cases closed for fiscal year 1996. 3. Dependency figures are petitioned cases closed for fiscal year 1996.

4. New Mexico reported its data by judicial district. The following is a list of counties within judicial districts. District 1: Los Alamos, Rio Arriba, and Santa Fe. District 2: Bernalillo. District 3: Dona Ana. District 4: Guadalupe, Mora, and San Miguel. District 5: Chaves, Eddy, and Lea. District 6: Grant, Hidalgo, and Luna. District 7: Catron, Sierra, Socorro, and Torrance. District 8: Colfax, Taos, and Union. District 9: Curry and Roosevelt. District 10: De Baca, Harding, and Quay. District 11: McKinley and San Juan. District 12: Lincoln and Otero. District 13: Cibola, Sandoval, and Valencia.

New York

Source: Office of Court Administration (petitioned cases) and the State of New York, Division of Probation and Correctional Alternatives (nonpetitioned cases) Mode: Statistical pages sent to NCJJ (petitioned cases) and JCS survey form (nonpetitioned cases) Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed. 2. Status figures are cases disposed. 3. Dependency figures are cases disposed.

4. The petition information reflects data reported to the Office of Court Administration. It may not necessarily reflect the total number of cases processed through the court system.

North Carolina

Source: Administrative Office of the Courts Mode: Statistical pages sent to NCJJ Data: 1. Delinquency figures are offenses alleged in juvenile petitions during fiscal year 1996. 2. Status figures are offenses alleged in juvenile petitions during fiscal year 1996.

3. Dependency figures are conditions alleged in juvenile petitions during fiscal year 1996. They include dependent, neglected, and abused conditions.

North Dakota

Source: Supreme Court, Office of State Court Administrator Mode: Automated data file Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed. 2. Status figures are cases disposed.

3. Dependency figures are cases disposed.

Ohio

Source: Supreme Court of Ohio Mode: Ohio Courts Summary, 1996 Data: 1. Delinquency figures are petition terminations. 2. Status figures are unruly petition terminations.

3. Dependency figures include dependency, neglect, and abuse petition terminations.

Ohio: Cuyahoga County

Source: Cuyahoga County Juvenile Court Division Mode: Automated data file Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed. 2. Status figures are cases disposed.

3. Dependency figures are cases disposed.

Oregon

Source: Judicial Department Mode: Statistical pages sent to NCJJ Data:

1. Total figures are juvenile petitions filed. They include delinquency, status offense, dependency, special proceedings, and termination of parental rights cases.

Pennsylvania

Source: Juvenile Court Judges’ Commission Mode: Automated data file Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed. 2. Status offenses in Pennsylvania are classified as dependency cases, which were not reported.

3. Figures presented here do not match those found in the 1996 Pennsylvania Juvenile Court Disposition Report, due to differing units of count.

Rhode Island

Source: Administrative Office of State Courts
Mode: Report on the Judiciary 1996 Data: 1. Total figures are the number of wayward, delinquent, dependency, neglect, and abuse filings.

2. The data were reported at the State level; no county breakdown was available.

South Carolina

Source: Department of Juvenile Justice Mode: Automated data file Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed.

2. Status figures are cases disposed.

South Dakota

Source: Unified Judicial System Mode: Automated data file Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed. 2. Status figures are cases disposed.

3. Shannon County is an American Indian reservation that handles juvenile matters in the tribal court, which is not part of the State’s juvenile court system.

Tennessee

Source: Tennessee Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges Mode: Automated data file Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed. 2. Status figures are cases disposed.

3. Dependency figures are cases disposed.

Texas

Source: Texas Juvenile Probation Commission Mode: Automated data file Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed.

2. Status figures are cases disposed.

Utah

Source: Utah Administrative Office of the Courts Mode: Automated data file Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed. 2. Status figures are cases disposed.

3. Dependency figures are cases disposed.

Vermont

Source: Supreme Court of Vermont, Office of the Court Administrator Mode: Statistical pages sent to NCJJ Data: 1. Delinquency figures are petitioned cases disposed. 2. Status figures are petitioned cases disposed.

3. Dependency data are included in the status figures.

Virginia

Source: Department of Family and Youth Services Mode: Automated data file Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed. 2. Status figures are cases disposed. 3. Bedford City reports with Bedford County; Fairfax City reports with Fairfax County; South Boston City reports with Halifax County.

4. Data for 1996 are incomplete due to reporting difficulties at the local level.

Washington

Source: Office of the Administrator for the Courts Mode: Automated data file (delinquency and status) and Caseloads of the Courts of Washington 1996 (dependency) Data: 1. Delinquency figures are petitioned and nonpetitioned cases disposed. 2 Status figures are petitioned and nonpetitioned cases disposed. 3. Dependency figures are petitioned cases disposed. They include dependency, termination of parent/child relationship, truancy, at-risk youth, and alternative residential placement cases. 4. Wakiakum County reports with Pacific County; Garfield County reports with Asotin County; Franklin County reports with Benton County. 5. King County reports only delinquency data that contribute to an individual’s criminal history record information.

6. Differences in data entry practices among the juvenile courts may contribute to variations in the data.

West Virginia

Source: West Virginia Juvenile Justice Committee Mode: Automated data file Data: 1. Delinquency figures are cases disposed.

2. Status figures are cases disposed.

Wyoming

Source: Supreme Court of Wyoming, Court Coordinator’s Office Mode: Wyoming District Courts 1996 Caseload Statistics Data: 1. Delinquency figures are petitions filed. 2. Status figures are petitions filed. 3. Dependency figures are petitions filed.

4. Washakie County data were not available for the 1996 report.

Page 4

Mechanisms of transfer to criminal court vary by States, a prosecutor has the authority to file juvenile cases that meet specified criteria directly in criminal court. This Report, however, includes only cases that were transferred as a result of judicial waiver.
For more detailed analyses of the JCS national estimates and their accuracy see: Jeffrey A. Butts and Howard N. Snyder. 1995. A Study to Assess the Validity of the National Estimates Developed for the Juvenile Court Statistics Series. Pittsburgh, PA: National Center for Juvenile Justice.
The annual series of reports from the FBI, Crime in the United States, provides information on arrests in offense categories that have become part of the common vocabulary of criminal justice statistics. The Crime in the United States series tracks changes in the general nature of arrests through the use of two indexes, the Violent Crime Index and the Property Crime Index. While not containing all violent or all property offenses, the indexes serve as a barometer of criminal activity in the United States.
The upper age of juvenile court jurisdiction is defined by statute in each State. See the Glossary of Terms section for a more detailed discussion on upper age of juvenile court jurisdiction. Case rates presented in this Report Control for State variations in juvenile population.
The percent change in the number of cases disposed may not be equal to the percent change in case rates, because of the changing size of the juvenile population.
Most youth in out-of home placements are also technically on formal probation. For this Report, however, case disposition is characterized by the most severe sanction. Therefore, cases resulting in an out-of-home placement are not included in the formal probation group.
In 1996, whites made up approximately 79% of the juvenile population. Nearly all youth of Hispanic ethnicity are included in the white racial category.
A number of other behaviors may be considered status offenses (e.g., curfew violations, tobacco offenses). All such offenses are combined within a "miscellaneous" category in this Report. Because of the heterogeneity of these offenses, these cases are not discussed independently. However, all totals include the "miscellaneous status offenses."
This Report presents analyses only of formally handled status offenses. See the Introduction to this Report for further explanation.
The remaining flow diagrams in this chapter present only percentages rather than estimates of case counts for the specific adjudication and disposition branches, because of the relatively low volumes of cases in many of the branches.
In 1996, whites made up approximately 79% of the juvenile population. Nearly all youth of Hispanic ethnicity are included in the white racial category.
County-level intercensal estimates were obtained from the Bureau of the Census for the years 1987-1996. The following data files were used:

U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1994). 1980-1989 Preliminary Estimates of the Population of Counties by Age, Sex, and Race [machine-readable data file]. Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of the Census.

U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1998). Estimates of the Population of Counties by Age and Gender: 1990-1996 [machine-readable data file]. Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of the Census.

U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1998). Estimates of the Population of Counties by Age, Sex, and Race/Hispanic Origin: 1990-1996 [machine-readable data file]. Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of the Census.

"Other races" are Asians, Native Americans, and Pacific Islanders. Most individuals of Hispanic ancestry are coded as white.
The only information used in this Report that cannot be aggregated by county is data contributed by the Florida Department of Juvenile Justice, which identifies only the district in which each case is handled. To utilize the Florida data, the aggregation criterion is relaxed to include districts. In 1996, there were 3,141 counties in the United States. By replacing Florida's counties with districts, the total number of aggregation units for this report becomes 3,085. There fore, while the report uses the term "county" to describe its aggregation unit, the reader should be aware of the exception made for Florida's data.