Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1183022
 
 

Footnotes (268)



 


 



North Carolina, Juvenile Court Jurisdiction, and the Resistance to Reform


Tamar R. Birckhead


University of North Carolina (UNC) at Chapel Hill - School of Law


North Carolina Law Review, Vol. 86, No. 6, 2008
UNC Legal Studies Research Paper No. 1183022

Abstract:     
North Carolina is the only state in the United States that treats all sixteen- and seventeen-year-olds as adults when they are charged with criminal offenses and then denies them the ability to appeal for return to the juvenile system. Thirty-seven states cap juvenile court jurisdiction at age eighteen, while ten do so at seventeen. In addition, as reflected by international treaties and instruments, many nations of the world consider eighteen to be the most appropriate age for delineating between juvenile and adult court jurisdiction. Not surprisingly, the consequences of North Carolina's scheme for prosecuting minors can be particularly severe. The approximately 26,000 sixteen- and seventeen-year-olds who are convicted each year in North Carolina's criminal court system encounter significant barriers when attempting to secure employment or access higher education. According to empirical research, a less punitive approach to youth crime lowers recidivism rates and better protects public safety. Further, providing intensive probationary supervision and rehabilitation to young offenders, rather than incarcerating them with adults, is consistent with recent findings in the areas of brain development and adolescent psychology. Nonetheless, resistance to raising the age of juvenile court jurisdiction in North Carolina has been steadfast, with vocal opposition from law enforcement and prosecutors.

This Article examines the repeated attempts by advocates and lawmakers to raise the age of juvenile court jurisdiction in North Carolina. Grounded in primary source materials and legislative records, the Article demonstrates that there has been a recurring pattern over the past century: despite the backing of scholars, child welfare experts, and prominent legislators, proposals to extend jurisdiction from age sixteen to ages seventeen or eighteen have been consistently defeated. Although the precise reasons for North Carolina's refusal to join the majority are difficult, if not impossible, to identify, this Article suggests several likely causes: the self-perpetuating claim by opponents of raising the age that an already-underfunded system should not be expanded; the enduring power of the specter of youth violence; and the continued reluctance of the bench and bar to view juvenile court as a critical forum requiring specialization and commitment from its participants, rather than a mere training ground for inexperienced judges and lawyers. Finally, the Article argues that an appreciation and understanding of the historical context should cause lawmakers to revisit the issue with a greater sense of urgency, providing them with the momentum needed to break with the status quo and to raise the age of juvenile court jurisdiction in North Carolina.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 55

Keywords: North Carolina, juvenile court, jurisdiction, age, legal history, recidivism, reentry, adolescent psychology, brain development, empirical research, public safety, probation, rehabilitation, legislation, court funding, youthful offender

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: July 31, 2008  

Suggested Citation

Birckhead, Tamar R., North Carolina, Juvenile Court Jurisdiction, and the Resistance to Reform. North Carolina Law Review, Vol. 86, No. 6, 2008; UNC Legal Studies Research Paper No. 1183022. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1183022

Contact Information

Tamar R. Birckhead (Contact Author)
University of North Carolina (UNC) at Chapel Hill - School of Law ( email )
Van Hecke-Wettach Hall, 160 Ridge Road
CB #3380
Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3380
United States

Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 2,372
Downloads: 193
Download Rank: 91,652
Footnotes:  268

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo7 in 1.422 seconds