Juvenile Crime in Pennsylvania: General Deterrence Theory Research Proposal
Juvenile Crime in Pennsylvania: General Deterrence Theory
A dissertation on the effect that Pennsylvania's juvenile transfer law has on juvenile violent crime.
# 129202
| 40,202 words
| 214 sources
| APA
| 2006
| 
Published
on Sep 16, 2010
in
Criminology
(Juvenile Justice)
$19.95
Buy and instantly download this paper now
Description:
This paper is a dissertation research proposal that outlines assessments of the effect of Pennsylvania's juvenile transfer law on juvenile violent crime, and proposes a time series analysis to answer the research questions. The paper explains that although the execution of juveniles who committed their crimes under age 18 now is prohibited, there are still a number of unresolved and controversial issues with respect to the treatment of juveniles under the law. A few examples of these issues given include the age at which juveniles should be held legally accountable for their behavior; the age at which, and conditions under which, their degree of accountability should be likened to that of an adult; and whether age should be a consideration (a mitigating factor) in the punishment of juveniles in adult court. This paper contains a list of thematic categories, an introductory letter to interviewees, a consent form, and interview protocol for law enforcement officers.
Table of Contents:
Chapter 1 Introduction
Past Literature
Present Study
Historical and Legal Contexts of Juvenile Transfer
Evolution of Juvenile Justice
Juvenile Institutions
Juvenile Courts
Juvenile Crime Rates and the Youth Violence Epidemic
Policy Responses to Violent Juvenile Crime Rates
The Juvenile Transfer Response
Pennsylvania's Transfer Legislation
3 Predictors of Transfer and Implications Thereafter
Predictors of Transfer: Offender and Offense Characteristics
The Criminal Justice Process and Implications of Juvenile Transfer
Pre-trial or Pre-dispositional Release
Case Processing Time
Conviction
Sentencing
Summary
Theories of Juvenile Behavior and Treatment
Psychological Theories of Juvenile Offending
Deterrence Theory
The Classical School of Criminology
Evolution of Deterrence Theory
Chapter 5
Specific Deterrence
General Deterrence
Conclusion
Methodology
Quantitative Methodology
Qualitative Methodology
Content Analysis
Semi-Structured Interviews
Analytic Strategy
References
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Table of Contents:
Chapter 1 Introduction
Past Literature
Present Study
Historical and Legal Contexts of Juvenile Transfer
Evolution of Juvenile Justice
Juvenile Institutions
Juvenile Courts
Juvenile Crime Rates and the Youth Violence Epidemic
Policy Responses to Violent Juvenile Crime Rates
The Juvenile Transfer Response
Pennsylvania's Transfer Legislation
3 Predictors of Transfer and Implications Thereafter
Predictors of Transfer: Offender and Offense Characteristics
The Criminal Justice Process and Implications of Juvenile Transfer
Pre-trial or Pre-dispositional Release
Case Processing Time
Conviction
Sentencing
Summary
Theories of Juvenile Behavior and Treatment
Psychological Theories of Juvenile Offending
Deterrence Theory
The Classical School of Criminology
Evolution of Deterrence Theory
Chapter 5
Specific Deterrence
General Deterrence
Conclusion
Methodology
Quantitative Methodology
Qualitative Methodology
Content Analysis
Semi-Structured Interviews
Analytic Strategy
References
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
From the Paper:
"In recent decades, primarily in the early to mid-1990s, states made it much easier for accused juvenile offenders to be tried in adult court. Rather than protection of other youth, however, the modern transfer movement appeared to be motivated by desires for increased accountability, retribution, general and specific deterrence, and longer periods of incapacitation (Bishop, 2000; Fagan et al., 1987; Feld, 1998; Mears, 2003; Mears & Feld, 2000; Myers, 2003a; Redding, 2003; Sanborn, 1994; Singer, 1996a; Snyder & Sickmund, 1999; Thomas & Bilchik, 1981). These sentencing philosophies were not absent in the earlier evolution of the juvenile court. In fact, the promotion of judicial waiver, particularly during the 1920s and 1930s, was a response to the criticism that juvenile courts coddled offenders (Myers, 2005). Importantly, however, the advocacy and practice of transferring juveniles to adult court was largely limited to rare cases of very serious offending."Sample of Sources Used:
- Agnew, R. (1992). Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency. Criminology, 30, 47-87.
- Agnew, R. (1995). Testing the leading crime theories: An alternative strategy focusing on motivational processes. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 32(4), 363-398.
- Agnew, R. (2001). An overview of general strain theory. In R. Paternoster & R. Bachman (eds.), Explaining criminals and crime (pp. 161-174). Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury.
- Akers, R.L. (1985). Deviant Behavior: A social learning approach, 3rd ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
- Andenaes, J. (1966). The general preventive effects of punishment. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 114, 949-983.
Cite this Research Proposal:
APA Format
Juvenile Crime in Pennsylvania: General Deterrence Theory (2010, September 16)
Retrieved December 02, 2023, from https://www.academon.com/research-proposal/juvenile-crime-in-pennsylvania-general-deterrence-theory-129202/
MLA Format
"Juvenile Crime in Pennsylvania: General Deterrence Theory" 16 September 2010.
Web. 02 December. 2023. <https://www.academon.com/research-proposal/juvenile-crime-in-pennsylvania-general-deterrence-theory-129202/>