Race/Ethnicity and the Effects of Prior Case Outcomes on Current Dispositions: Continuity and Change in the Dispositional Careers of Juvenile Offenders

Abstract

This study draws upon the labeling perspective to examine whether there are patterns of continuity and/or change in the severity of juvenile court dispositions, and if these patterns vary by race/ethnicity. Using data on youth referred five times to the Pennsylvania Department of Juvenile Justice between 2000 and 2010 (n = 9089), we examine the presence of latent trajectories of sanction severity across referrals, and whether youth with statistically matched criminal/disposition histories, but of different race/ethnicities, receive disparate future dispositions. Results suggest that juvenile dispositional trajectories are more complex than previously reported, largely in alignment with labeling theory predictions (i.e. escalation in sanction severity). However, trajectories representing stability and de-escalation in sanction severity were also identified. Further, certain youth, predominately of minority status, received more severe dispositions over time, despite having similar histories as White youth, supportive of “sticky labels.” Implications for theory and the juvenile justice system are discussed.

Keywords:

• Dispositions
• juvenile offenders
• propensity score matching
• race
• trajectories

Acknowledgements

We would like to sincerely thank Editor Krohn and the anonymous reviewers for their beneficial feedback, which greatly improved this article. We would also like to dedicate this article to the memory of Dr Michael J. Leiber, who sadly passed away in January 2020, but without whom this study would not have been possible.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1 Most theories, including developmental perspectives, are silent on race/ethnicity and the effects past decisions of the juvenile justice system may have over the life-course (Piquero, 2015).

2 Our review of the labeling/societal reaction perspective is not meant to be comprehensive or is it the intent to empirically test the perspective. Rather, the labeling perspective and the emphasis on stereotyping is used as a framework for the inquiry into the relationships between race/ethnicity, history of prior court dispositions, and future juvenile court outcomes. In addition, it is important to point out that labeling theory and its variants have been subject to criticism (Goode, 1975; Gove, 1980; Krohn & Lopes, 2015; Paternoster & Iovanni, 1989).

3 The effects of prior record and the impact for Blacks in adult criminal justice sentencing have been studied to some extent more so than in the juvenile justice system (see Crow, 2008; Ortiz and Spohn, 2014). In literature addressing offender reintegration, prior criminal record has been studied and identified as a barrier to engaging in civic activities, such as voting (e.g. Uggen et al., 2006; Wheelock, 2005) and the ability to find work (Pager, 2003; Stoll & Bushway, 2008). The inability to re-enter social institutions because of laws and policies that restrict access has been described as a form of “invisible punishment” (Wheelock, 2005) while for some as an example of “The New Jim Crow” (Alexander, 2010).

4 Our focus is on dispositions given within the juvenile court and exclude youth transferred or waived to adult criminal justice proceedings. Youth waived to adult court at referrals 1 through 5, respectively, are as follows: 112 (0.2%), 271 (0.4%), 302 (0.9%), 235 1.4%), and 202 (2.2%).

5 While not as detailed as the use of specific offenses, which can lead to extremely low sample sizes due to the number of factors two cases need to be matched upon (i.e. finding two cases where the youth committed the exact same five offenses and are matched on all other criteria), this approach matches youth who commit the same type of offense, severity of offense, and total severity, which are highly similar in the courts’ perspective.

6 In order to account for the cumulative effect of multiple referrals, particularly for offenses increasing in severity, and the impact it may have on the severity of dispositions, the severity score was used to match juveniles with similar cumulative severity of offenses over their juvenile court career.

7 While the observed sample in certain cells in the contingency table appear low, this is not problematic for the proposed analyses. ASR values calculate the deviation in observed cell values from the expected cell values. Therefore, low or zero cases in certain cells often indicate a strong deviation from the expected distribution, and result in a higher ASR value than cells with larger observed cell values. Analyses conducted using an earlier referral with a larger total sample produced similar results, and are available from the authors upon request.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Michael J. Leiber

Michael J. Leiber was a Professor in the Department of Criminology at the University of South Florida. He earned his PhD in criminal justice from the State University of New York, Albany. Dr Leiber sadly passed away in January 2020. His main research interests and publications were in juvenile delinquency, juvenile justice, and race/ethnicity. He served as an Equal Protection Monitor for Shelby County (Memphis) Juvenile Court, appointed by the Department of Justice (DOJ), Civil Rights Division.

Bryanna Fox

Bryanna Fox is an Associate Professor in the Department of Criminology at the University of South Florida. Dr Fox earned her PhD in criminology from the University of Cambridge and a former FBI Special Agent. She received the 2017 Early Career Award from the American Society of Criminology’s Division of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology. Her research interests include developmental and life-course theory, psychological criminology, and policing.

Melanie Escue

Melanie Escue is a doctoral student in the Department of Sociology at the University of South Florida. Ms Escue earned her MS in criminal justice from the University of Central Florida, and currently studies the development of criminal behavior among juvenile offenders, processes and opinions of criminal justice systems, and the use of advanced methodologies and statistical analyses to advance criminological research.

Julie M. Krupa

Julie M. Krupa is an Assistant Professor in the School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University. Dr Krupa earned her PhD in Criminology from the University of South Florida. Her research interests include juvenile corrections, the intersection between public health and juvenile justice, and juvenile risk behaviors.

John K. Cochran

John K. Cochran is Professor and Chair in the Department of Criminology at the University of South Florida. Dr Cochran earned his PhD in Sociology at the University of Florida. He has over 100 peer-reviewed manuscripts, most of which involve tests of micro-social theories of criminal behavior and macro-social theories of crime and crime control. His current research interests involve tests of micro-social theories of criminal behavior and issues associated with the death penalty.