Skip to content
Advertisement

AV youth court changing lives

Advertisement
AV Program gives young offenders a second chance (47241)
AV Program gives young offenders a second chance
AV youth court (47239)

In these days of “Three Strikes,” “lock ‘em up . . . throw away the key” or the growing awareness of the so-called “school-to-prison pipeline,” a unique program underway in the Antelope Valley has for three years tried to keep youthful offenders off the prison rolls and onto a viable path to self respect and accomplishment.

The Antelope Valley Community Youth Court (AYCYC) is designed to give first-time, non-violent offenders between the ages of 12 and 17 years a second chance to begin a productive life without a permanent record. Also called “First Time/Second Chance,” the program was organized and is administered by the City of Lancaster to provide an alternative response for juvenile offenders, diverting them out of the criminal justice system without any criminal record. The program also teaches life skills that will help young people make better decisions down the road.

No matter what they  look like or where they may be reared, teenagers typically don’t look too far into the future. But for some youth, the lure of hanging out with their “posse” or “crew” can sometimes result in them subdued and sobbing in the back of a police squad car.

The AYCYC was established to address the needs of local youth who exhibit the type of “low-level” criminal behavior that may lead to bigger problems later.

Nationally, youth court criminologists work within law enforcement to spot young people who, they predict, might commit a felony by their mid-teens and eventually become a criminal justice statistic. Program officials found that the strongest results in reducing youth crime have come from peer youth courts using a restorative justice philosophy. The goal is repair early the harm done by the crime; where the offender must acknowledge the harm caused by his/her actions; take responsibility for those actions, and address the causes of the behavior.

Historically, the clergy has traditionally been at the forefront of providing direction to youth. Often pastors will mentor and counsel troubled youth in an effort to instill good character traits and to help produce upstanding citizens. Teachers usually don’t have time for after-school lectures in conduct. By the time a troubled teen comes into contact with law enforcement or the court system, it may be too late to save them from jail. Rev. V. Jesse Smith, president of the Antelope Valley NAACP, stepped in when the AV Youth Court was created three years ago to fill a void that existed between adults and at-risk youth in the Antelope Valley.

“The program was designed to assist ‘at-risk’ youth who found themselves caught up in the criminal justice system due to being with the wrong crowd, engaging in non-violent offenses, and/or finding themselves doing something in their youth that if they had some guidance, they would not have been involved in,” Smith said. He saw “too many” youth–Black and Latino—being “swallowed up” in the criminal justice system which renders harsh sentences.

Given a second chance, he explained, they can become productive citizens “. . . with guidance and mentorship from the community.”

Smith added that the NAACP as well as a number of local civic organizations have worked with the Sheriff’s Department and the District Attorney’s office to make the program a success. “The significant progress we have made on this program has largely been due to the unwavering commitment of Mayor R. Rex Parris and the city of Lancaster in their desire to see this program as a shining success. They have worked side-by-side with us in making this program happen.”

The cases that come to the court are usually referred by the Sheriff’s Department and typically consist of infractions or misdemeanors such as fighting, stealing, skipping school and minor drug possessions. A caseworker steps in at this point, and this person will contact the parents for permission to enroll the child in the program. With parental consent, the juvenile comes in for an initial screening where the caseworker determines if the youth is willing to accept full responsibility for the crime. The caseworker will then help the youth design a personal development plan. This includes explaining that what they did was wrong; it was a crime under juvenile statutes, and then the individual questions the youngster on what he/she may do to avoid another visit to court. Here, the caseworker wants to see what the child has in mind other than continued delinquency. A court appearance is set before a judge and peer jury, and there a series of questions are posed to the youth or, sometimes, the parents.

Individuals can participate in the program only once, and the District Attorney’s office has sole discretion over whom they will accept. The eligible offenses include: petty theft, second degree commercial burglary, breaking into a car, joyriding, stealing a bicycle, driving without a permit or license, receiving stolen property and possession of burglary tools. The program is also made available to individuals 18 to 25 years, providing these persons have no previous criminal record. In this scenario, only specific “low-level” offenses make them eligible for participation.

The goals of the program are to ensure restitution to the victims, ensure that a participant is sufficiently punished to deter him/her from committing a future crime, and to give each first-time offender the rare opportunity to avoid a felony and/or misdemeanor conviction. The participant must make a plea of guilty, but judgment will not be entered at the time of the plea. After this, the judge agrees to postpone judgment and sentencing for a year. During this time period, participants may be ordered to do the following: take classes, get counseling, write essay assignments, perform community service and, occasionally, write a letter of apology. Often, offending youth are ordered to serve on a future jury in youth court. When the boys and girls complete their sentences, no further action is taken regarding their offense and the case is expunged from the criminal justice system.

However, if the participant is charged with a criminal offense prior to within the year (or fails to complete the program requirements), a guilty plea is entered and a sentence imposed.

It will cost the youth a $175 court processing fee to participate in the program and this is used to sustain the program. The court partners with the Cal State University Bakersfield department of social work, and also is assisted by Lancaster’s Paving the Way foundation to provide therapy, skills, personal character, and educational opportunities to keep the youth out of trouble with the law.

Lancaster Mayor R. Rex Parris told Our Weekly this summer that youth are the most valuable resource in the community. “This program gives children a second chance by teaching them to become productive citizens, while reducing the drain on our criminal justice system.” Since 2010, the AYCYC has processed more than 270 cases; records indicate that 87 percent of juvenile offenders who complete the program do not reoffend. He praised the program as a way to dramatically alter the conviction rates as well as the life paths and future of the large numbers of at-risk youth.

Parris is accurate about juvenile crime being a “drain” on the justice system. In 1995, the California Youth Authority spent about $32,000 annually to jail a teenager, compared to the state Department of Education spending $4,000 per student each year. By 2000, California spent some $13.8 billion in crime prevention, including the varying costs of: police, prosecution, incarceration and parole/probation; medical costs to victims and law enforcement personnel; property stolen or damaged; loss of productivity (work time) for victims, and a loss of a productive “citizen” when a juvenile offender is not rehabilitated.

The Department of Justice reported in 2009 that juvenile crime costs the nation several hundred billion dollars annually. These costs include police, prosecution, incarceration and parole/probation. Medical costs to the victims and law enforcement also play a large part in the expense. Property stolen or damaged is also tabulated, as is the time the victim loses at work. Then comes the future loss in work (no state or federal income tax can be expected) and societal productivity when a juvenile offender is not rehabilitated, begins early a life of crime and, by then, lands in prison for an extended period of time.

In 1995, the Legislative Analyst’s Office (a fiscal and policy advisor to the state legislature) reported only a small number of juveniles commit the majority of criminal offenses. These youth, the report found, often begin delinquency at 11 years of age, and most are not jailed until they have a “well established” pattern of criminal activity. So-called “alternative punishments” after a first offense (i.e. ordering a tagger to clean away graffiti) have been shown to be more effective at deterring juvenile crime than the possibility of detention after multiple offenses. This could be among the reasons the number of juvenile offenses nation wide has steadily fallen during the past decade. In 2006, the California Department of Justice reported that assault among juveniles is down 7.6 percent, robbery is down 13.1 percent, property crimes dropped (20.4 percent), drug possession dipped (5.6 percent) and misdemeanors, in general, fell by 6.2 percent.

“Youth court is our attempt to catch the kids before they get into the system,” said Senior Criminal Justice Analyst James Kobolt in a 2011 published interview. “This court is for youth who believe they did something wrong and want to accept responsibility for it.”

The program is the brainchild of a group of African American and Latino community activists who contacted the Sheriff’s department and the District Attorney’s office to fashion a “second chance” for local at-risk youth, most of whom are minorities, who may be tempted by the wrong friends to join a gang and begin a downward spiral of truancy, petty theft, drug and alcohol use, assault, reprisal and, in a near certainty, either arrest and incarceration or early death.

Alternative sentencing for juveniles is being used more frequently by judges nationwide primarily because of  tight budgets, jail overcrowding and a renewed effort at rehabilitation and education. In the United States, there are about 2,500 prisoners serving sentences of life without parole for homicides committed when the inmate was under the age of 18; most were sentenced under mandatory sentencing guidelines. Most of these inmates had compiled an early juvenile record prior to killing someone; these “rap sheets” began in their early years with misdemeanors—precisely the time frame that the AYCYC wants to address.

John Morris, a veteran assistant district attorney in Palmdale, said that mandatory sentencing guidelines simply do little more than fill the jails, and don’t address the issue of prevention and rehabilitation. “An 18-year-old picks up a felony, and can’t get a job,” Morris said. “Without a job, they are more likely to go and do something that will end up with more time in prison. We need to grow the middle class, avoid a two-tier society, and that’s why this program is important.”

The website Federal Prison Alternatives in June reported that alternative sentencing for juveniles can help produce better citizens. Rehabilitation among juveniles, the article found, is more effective in preventing recidivism. It transforms the lives of juveniles in the direction of social productivity by instituting individual and/or group counseling in order to integrate a juvenile offender back into the social order, while also emphasizing community involvement and service. The webs site notes that this sort of sentencing, involving personal guidance, is far more effective than prison sentences, fines and probation at preventing recidivism and contributing to the health of the society.

The National Association of Youth Courts reported this year that programs like “Second Chance” can help nurture in youth a respect for the rule of law, helps develop positive citizenship attitudes, encourages civic engagement and can promote educational success. Youth courts are structured to provide positive alternative sanctions for first-time offenders by providing a peer-driven sentencing mechanism that allows young people to take responsibility, to be held accountable and to make restitution. In short, positive peer pressure is used in youth court to exert influence over adolescent behavior. According to the National Youth Court database, in 1994 there were only 78 youth court programs in operation. By March 2010, there were more than 1,050 youth court programs in operation in 49 states and the District of Columbia.

Advertisement

Latest