When Does Race Matter in Juvenile Court Outcomes? A Test of the “Type of Offense” Hypothesis

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/jfcj.12118
• Date: 01 December 2018
• Published date: 01 December 2018

When Does Race Matter in Juvenile Court

Outcomes? A Test of the “Type of

Offense” Hypothesis

By Lori Guevara, Zahra Shekarkhar, and Kenethia Fuller

ABSTRACT

The current study examined the influence of race on juvenile court outcomes

across various offense types. This study builds on previous research in the field by uti-

lizing the symbolic threat perspective as a foundation for understanding differences in

juvenile disposition. It is hypothesized that the influence of race varies across offense

types (misdemeanors and felonies) for the pre-detention and disposition outcomes.

Data from a sample of juvenile court referrals from two Midwestern juvenile courts

were utilized and partitioned by race. Results were mixed and not always in the

hypothesized direction. However, the results indicated that race did have an influence

on both pre and post adjudication juvenile court outcomes, an effect which varied by

type of offense and race. This study illustrates the importance of examining juvenile

court outcomes froma multi-stage approach that includes legal and extra-legal factors.

Key words: race, sentencing, juveniles, symbolic threat.

INTRODUCTION

The over-representation of minority youth in the juvenile justice system is

well-documented (Devine, et. al., 1998; Hsia, Bridges, & McHale, 2004; Piquero, 2008;

Lori Guevara is an Associate Professor in the Department of Criminal Justice at Fayetteville State

University. She earned her PhD from the University of Nebraska at Omaha and her research focuses on juvenile

justice processing. She has published in Crime and Delinquency, Feminist Criminology, Youth Violence and Juvenile Jus-

tice: An International Journal, Race and Justice: An International Journal, and Journal of Ethnicity in Criminal Justice.

Zahra Shekarkhar is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Criminal Justice at Fayetteville

State University. She earned her PhD from the University of Florida. Her research focuses on the educational

and behavioral outcomes of youth across immigrant generation, gender, race, and ethnicity. She has pub-

lished in journals such as Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences,Education and Urban Society, the Journal of

Immigrant & Refugee Studies.

Kenethia Fuller is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Criminal Justice at North Carolina

Central University. She earned her PhD from Indiana University of Pennsylvania. She participated in the

RDCJN’s Summer Research Institute in 2013. Her research focuses on personality and crime, and fear of

crime. She has published in the Security Journal.

Juvenile and Family Court Journal 69, No. 4

©2018 National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges

5

Poe-Yamagata & Jones, 2000; Pope & Feyerhem, 1990; Pope, Lovell, & Hsia, 2002).

Identifying the factors contributing to the over-representation may be difficult due to

inconsistent results from previous research. The inconsistent findings in earlier research

are largely credited to the examination of one stage of decision-making or the compar-

ison of findings from different stages of decision-making. Some studies have analyzed the

police decision to arrest or release the youth (Bell & Lang, 1985; Black and Reiss, 1970;

Piliavin & Briar, 1964; Thomas & Sieverdes, 1975), while other studies have examined

the decision to detain a youth after arrest, and yet other studies have evaluated the

disposition decision (Bailey, 1981; Cohen & Klugel, 1979a; Frazier & Cochran, 1987;

Hawkins 2011; Holman & Ziedenberg, 2006; Leiber & Fox, 2005; Marshall & Thomas,

1983; Phillipi, 2012; Thornberry & Christensen, 1984).

While previous research contributed to our understanding of minority over-

representation in the juvenile justice system, there are additional theoretical perspectives

that could be applicable. The symbolic threat perspective can be used to identify the

effects of when race matters. For this study, the concept from the symbolic threat per-

spective that will be examined is the “type of offense” hypothesis (Tittle & Curran,

1988). This hypothesis suggests that “social disadvantages have greater effects on court

dispositions when the person has committed or is accused of less serious, more ambigu-

ous types of behavior” (Tittle & Curran, 1988; pg. 32). This study will utilize the “type

of offense” hypothesis to examine the effect of race on juvenile court outcomes across

offense type in two Midwestern juvenile courts.

THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE

Symbolic threat helps to identify when race matters and under what conditions race

matters when examining juvenile court outcomes. A key concept in this perspective is

the emphasis on racial stereotyping and negative perceptions of minority youths by juve-

nile justice decision makers. Therefore, this perspective hypothesizes that minority youth

are responded to differently than comparably situated white youth because they are per-

ceived as more dangerous (Bridges et al, 1995; Leiber et al, 2007; Sampson & Laub,

1993).

It is important to note that the theory posits this “threat” is symbolic and general-

ized. It does not necessarily indicate that a legitimate threat exists, but rather reflects the

perception that non-whites are inherently linked to crime and deviance. Specifically,

Tittle and Curran (1988) emphasize the perceptions of the threat that “provoke jealousy,

envy, or personal fear among elites rather than the actual threat these groups represent to

the political positions of the elite” (pg. 53). In addition, Sampson and Laub (1993) pro-

pose that “groups which threaten the hegemony of middle and upper-class rule are more

likely to be subjected to intensified social control compared with groups that are per-

ceived as less threatening and that minorities, and the poor represent such threatening

groups” (pg. 288).

The symbolic threat perspective predicts that race and offense type will have signif-

icant associations with juvenile court outcomes even after legally relevant factors are

6 | JUVENILE AND FAMILY COURT JOURNAL