27 Fall 2000 • Juvenile and Family Court Journal Are Teen Courts An Answer to Our Juvenile Delinquency Problems? BY PAIGE HARRISON, JAMES R. MAUPIN, PH.D., AND G. LARRY MAYS, PH.D. I Paige Harrison received her Master of Criminal Justice degree from New Mexico State University. She currently works for the Bureau of Justice Statistics and is a doctoral student in Justice, Law and Society at American University. Her main focus is in the juvenile courts and corrections areas. James R. Maupin, Ph.D., is an assistant professor and director of the Master of Criminal Justice program in the Department of Criminal Justice at New Mexico State University. He has published several articles on decision making within the juvenile justice systems of the southwestern United States. G. Larry Mays, Ph.D., is professor of criminal justice at New Mexico State University. He has presented nearly 70 research papers at professional meetings, and he is author or coauthor of 60 articles. He also has contributed nine chapters to edited books and has published nine coauthored or coedited books, the most recent of which are Contemporary Corrections (Wadsworth) and Juvenile Justice (McGraw-Hill), both with L. Thomas Winfree. INTRODUCTION Crime across the country appears to be on the decline, according to recent statistics by the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report (UCR) and National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). However, such reports paint a misleading picture of juvenile crime. There was a slight drop in the arrest rate of juveniles between 1997 and 1998, but juveniles still constituted 18% of all persons arrested in 1998, and 29% of those arrested for UCR Crime Index offenses (Uniform Crime Reports 1998). 1 Such numbers inevitably inundate the juvenile justice system and increase the need for alternative methods of processing juvenile cases.Teen court, also known as peer court or youth court, is becoming one of the most popular meth- ods of alternative processing. Teen courts mainly serve first-time misdemeanor delinquents who admit guilt and are subsequently sentenced by a jury of their peers. 2 But do teen courts deserve the resources the state and local governments are pouring into them? This study examines the population served by the teen court process and the rate of success, measured by recidivism rates, of a partic- ular teen court in Dona Ana County, New Mexico. Before describing the study and results, it is necessary to outline the origin and goals of teen court and the teen court process, and to provide a brief overview of the data available regarding the successes and shortcomings of teen courts across the country. Origin and Goals of Teen Court The concepts behind teen courts date back to the notion of parens patriae first established in England and implemented in the first juvenile court in 1899. Parens patriae is best defined as the duty of the court to act in the best interests of the child. As with any vague definition within the law, the interpretation of “best interests”has changed according to the times.“Best inter- ABSTRACT Teen courts are being implemented across the country at a speed that surpasses the celerity with which research of program effectiveness can be performed. This study attempts to evaluate the effectiveness of the Dona Ana County, New Mexico, Teen Court by looking at the rate of recidivism for program participants as well as possible influential factors upon the rate of recidivism. The subjects were 478 randomly selected participants who were traced though the Juvenile Probation and Parole Office to detect any referrals following teen court participation. The study found a recidivism rate of 25% between 1994 and 1998, which was affected by several factors, including gender, age, prior offenses, and program completion. The study was not a comprehensive evaluation, but it did reinforce the need for further research in the area.