U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Caren Harp, OJJDP Administrator • David B. Muhlhausen, NIJ Director

JUVENILE JUSTICE

STATISTICS

NATIONAL REPORT SERIES FACT SHEET

ojjdp.gov nij.gov

 

December 2020 

Delinquency Cases in Juvenile Court, 2018 

Sarah Hockenberry 

Counts and trends 

In 2018, juvenile courts in the United States handled 744,500 delinquency 

cases that involved juveniles charged with criminal law violations, 5% 

less than the number of cases handled in 2017. From 2005 through 2018, 

the number of delinquency cases declined 55%, with decreases in all 

four offense categories: property offense cases (down 63%), public order 

offense cases (down 57%), person offense cases (down 46%), and drug 

law violation cases (down 45%). In 2018, person offense cases accounted 

for the largest proportion (31%) of the delinquency caseload, followed by 

property offense cases (30%), public order offense cases (25%), and drug 

offense cases (14%). 

The decline in juvenile court caseloads since the mid-1990s is 

the most substantial decline since 1960 

Number of cases 

2,000,000 

1,600,000 

1,200,000 

800,000 

400,000 

0 

Year 

Total delinquency 

62 66 70 74 78 82 86 90 94 98 02 06 10 14 18 

Total delinquency 

Person offenses 

Criminal homicide 

Rape 

Robbery 

Aggravated assault 

Simple assault 

Other violent sex offenses 

Property offenses 

Burglary 

Larceny-theft 

Motor vehicle theft 

Arson 

Vandalism 

Trespassing 

Stolen property offenses 

Drug law violations 

Public order offenses 

Obstruction of justice 

Disorderly conduct 

Weapons offenses 

Liquor law violations 

Nonviolent sex offenses 

Between 2005 and 2018, the number of cases handled by 

juvenile courts decreased for all offenses 

Percent change 

Most serious offense 

Number 

of cases 

2005–

 2018 

5-year

2014–

2018

1-year

2017–

2018

744,500 –55% –20% –5%

232,400 –46 –7 0

1,100 –3 35 2

8,000 –27 4 2

19,200 –26 0 –6

26,100 –45 8 2

146,800 –47 –11 0

7,800 –43 –11 8

225,900 –63 –30 –12

42,600 –57 –24 –16

96,200 –65 –40 –12

15,200 –53 30 –8

2,200 –70 –36 –9

35,600 –65 –23 –11

20,200 –62 –25 –13

7,500 –64 –24 –11

101,000 –45 –19 –3

185,100 –57 –22 –4

90,500 –53 –23 –8

48,000 –63 –25 –3

16,400 –61 –18 –6

3,900 –74 –33 –12

11,100 –11 7 0

•n	Although the number of juvenile court cases for most offenses

decreased in the 5 years between 2014 and 2018, the number

involving criminal homicide and motor vehicle theft increased 

considerably (35% and 30%, respectively). 

Notes: Totals include offenses not detailed. Percent change calculations are based 

on unrounded numbers. 
2 National Report Series Fact Sheet 

Gender 

Nearly three-quarters of the overall delinquency caseload involved males. 

In 2018, juvenile courts handled 541,700 cases involving males, compared 

with 202,800 cases involving females. Between 2005 and 2018, the 

relative decline in delinquency cases overall was the same for males and 

females (down 55% each); however, the decline in property cases was 

greater for females while the decline in drug cases was greater for males. 

Percent change 2005–2018 

Most serious offense Male Female

Total delinquency –55% –55% 

Person –46 –45 

Property –61 –66 

Drugs –48 –31 

Public order –57 –58 

The female proportion of the delinquency caseload changed little between 

2005 and 2018. 

Female proportion 

Most serious offense 2005 2018

Total delinquency 28% 27% 

Person 30 30 

Property 28 25 

Drugs 20 25 

Public order 28 28 

Race 

Forty-four percent of delinquency cases handled in 2018 involved white 

youth, 35% black youth, 18% Hispanic youth, 2% American Indian youth 

(including Alaska Natives), and 1% Asian youth (including Native Hawaiians 

and Other Pacific Islanders). In 2018, white youth accounted for 53% of the 

U.S. juvenile population, black youth 15%, Hispanic youth 24%, American 

Indian youth 2%, and Asian youth 6%. 

Race profile of cases, 2018 

Most serious offense 

Race 

Total 

delinquency Person Property Drugs 

Public 

order 

Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 

White 44 41 43 55 43 

Black 35 38 38 19 36 

Hispanic 18 18 16 23 19 

American Indian 2 2 2 2 1 

Asian 1 1 1 1 1 

Note: Detail may not add to totals because of rounding. 

The racial disproportionality in delinquency cases varied across offense 

categories. White youth accounted for a larger proportion of drug offense 

cases (55%) than any of the other general offense categories. In contrast, 

black youth were involved in only 19% of drug offense cases, accounting 

for larger proportions of person and property offense cases (38% each) 

than public order or drug offense cases. Hispanic youth were involved 

in 23% of drug offense cases, accounting for their largest share across 

offense categories. Asian and American Indian youth accounted for a small 

proportion of cases across all offense categories. 

Variations in case processing by race can be examined by looking at the 

rate at which cases involving different groups of youth proceed from one 

decision point to the next as they move through the court system. The 

referral rate (per 1,000 youth at risk of juvenile court involvement) for 

delinquency cases involving black youth (55.5) was about three times the 

rates for white (19.3) and Hispanic (18.0) youth. Cases were more likely to 

be petitioned for formal processing for black youth (64%) than white (52%) 

or Hispanic (55%) youth. Once petitioned, cases involving black youth were 

less likely to be adjudicated (49%) than cases involving white (52%) and 

Hispanic (57%) youth, and slightly more likely to be waived to criminal court 

(1.1%) than white and Hispanic youth (0.7% each). Once adjudicated, cases 

involving black or Hispanic youth were more likely to result in residential 

placement (32% each) than cases involving white youth (23%). Conversely, 

adjudicated cases involving white and Hispanic youth were more likely to 

result in probation (65% and 64%, respectively) than cases involving black 

youth (61%). 

Age 

In 2018, juveniles younger than age 16 at the time of referral to court 

accounted for 53% of all delinquency cases handled. This age group 

accounted for 60% of person offense cases, 54% of property offense 

cases, 51% of public order offense cases, and 38% of drug law violation 

cases. Person offense cases had the largest proportion (12%) of very young 

juveniles (younger than age 13 at referral), followed by property and public 

order offense cases (9% each). For drug offense cases, a smaller proportion 

(5%) involved juveniles younger than age 13. 

Detention 

A juvenile may be placed in secure detention at various times during case 

processing. Detention is primarily used for temporary holding while youth 

await adjudication, disposition, or placement elsewhere. Many states detain 

youth if there is reason to believe they are a threat to the community, 

Delinquency Estimates 

The estimates are based on data from more than 2,500 courts with 

jurisdiction over 87% of the nation’s juvenile population (youth age 

10 through the upper age of original juvenile court jurisdiction in 

each state) in 2018. The unit of count is a case disposed. Each case 

represents the most serious offense of one youth that a court with 

juvenile jurisdiction processed on a new referral, regardless of the 

number of offenses contained in that referral. A youth may be involved 

in more than one case during the calendar year. Although the National 

Juvenile Court Data Archive houses historical data, the estimates in this 

fact sheet are anchored to 2005 to accommodate consistent reporting 

of racial/ethnic data and to focus on recent trends. 
December 2020 3 

will be at risk if returned to the community, or may fail to appear at an 

upcoming hearing. Intake staff may also detain juveniles for diagnostic 

evaluation purposes. All states require that a detention hearing be held 

within a few days of placement in detention (usually within 24 hours). 

At the detention hearing, the judge reviews the initial detention decision, 

considers what is in the best interests of the community and/or the youth, 

and decides whether to continue the youth’s detention. Most states also 

use detention for sanctioning purposes—juveniles may be committed 

to a detention facility as part of a disposition order or as a sanction for a 

probation violation. Actual detention practices vary substantially across 

jurisdictions. These court data count the number of cases that involve 

detention of the juvenile at some point between referral to court and case 

disposition. A youth may be detained and released more than once between 

referral to court and case disposition. In most delinquency cases, the 

juvenile is not detained (74% in 2018). 

The likelihood of detention varies by general offense category. In 2018, 

person offense cases were the most likely to involve detention (32%), 

followed by public order offense cases (28%). In comparison, juveniles were 

less likely to be detained in property offense cases (24%) and drug offense 

cases (17%). Similar to the overall delinquency caseload trend, between 

2005 and 2018, the number of delinquency cases in which the juvenile was 

detained decreased 52%. 

Intake decision 

The juvenile court intake function is typically the responsibility of the 

juvenile probation department or the prosecutor’s office. At intake, 

authorities decide whether to dismiss the case, handle it informally (without 

filing a petition), or file a petition to formally request an adjudicatory 

hearing or waiver hearing. In 2018, 18% of all delinquency cases (130,400 

cases) were dismissed at intake, generally for lack of legal sufficiency. An 

additional 26% (192,000 cases) were handled informally, with the juvenile 

agreeing to some sort of voluntary sanction (e.g., restitution). In more than 

half of all delinquency cases (57% or 422,100 cases), authorities filed a 

petition and handled the case formally. The proportion of delinquency cases 

petitioned for formal handling changed little between 2005 and 2018. 

Waiver to criminal court 

In most states, juvenile court judges may waive juvenile court jurisdiction in 

certain cases and transfer jurisdiction to criminal court so the juvenile can 

be tried as an adult. The court decision in these matters follows a review 

of the case and a determination that probable cause exists to believe the 

juvenile committed the criminal act. The judge’s decision generally centers 

on the issue of whether the juvenile is amenable to treatment in the juvenile 

justice system. The prosecutor may argue that the juvenile has been 

adjudicated several times previously and that interventions the juvenile 

court ordered have not prevented the youth from committing subsequent 

criminal acts. The prosecutor may also argue that the crime is so serious 

that the juvenile court cannot intervene for the time period necessary 

to rehabilitate the youth. (For more information, see Delinquency Cases 

Waived to Criminal Court, 2018, at https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/library/publications/ 

list, in press.) 

In 2018, juvenile court judges waived jurisdiction over an estimated 3,600 

delinquency cases, sending them to criminal court. This represents 1% of 

all formally handled delinquency cases. The number of cases waived was 

relatively flat from 2005 to 2008, then declined 49% through 2015 before 

increasing 11% by 2018. 

For each year between 2005 and 2018, person offenses accounted for the 

largest proportion of waived cases. In 2018, more than half (56%) of all 

waived cases involved person offenses. 

Offense profile of cases waived to criminal court 

Number Percentage 

2005 2018 2005 2018 

Most serious 

offense 

Total delinquency 6,500 3,600 100% 100% 

Person 3,000 2,000 46 56 

Property 2,000 900 31 26 

Drugs 900 400 14 10 

Public order 600 300 9 8 

Note: Detail may not add to totals because of rounding. 

Adjudication and disposition 

Adjudicatory hearings establish responsibility for an alleged delinquent 

act. When a juvenile is adjudicated (judged delinquent), it is analogous to 

conviction in criminal court. In 2018, juveniles were adjudicated delinquent 

in 52% (220,000) of petitioned cases. The court holds disposition hearings 

to decide which sanctions it should impose on a juvenile who has been 

adjudicated delinquent and whether it should place the juvenile under 

court supervision. Many cases result in multifaceted dispositions, and 

most involve some type of supervision. A probation order often includes 

additional requirements, such as drug counseling, restitution to the victim, 

or community service. In 2018, formal probation was the most severe 

disposition ordered in 63% of cases in which the juvenile was adjudicated 

delinquent, and in 28% of cases, residential placement was the most 

severe disposition. A smaller proportion of cases received some other 

sanction as their most severe disposition. The proportion of adjudicated 

cases ordered to residential placement has remained steady in recent 

years, 28% in both 2005 and 2018, as has the proportion ordered to 

probation, 63% in 2005 and 2018. The proportion receiving other sanctions 

has also remained level, 9% in both 2005 and 2018. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Case flow for a typical 1,000 delinquency cases in 2018 

567 Petitioned 

433 Not petitioned 

Case flow for 744,500 delinquency cases in 2018 

Petitioned 

422,100 57% 

Not petitioned 

322,400 43% 

5 Waived 

83 Placed 

Adjudicated 

296 delinquent 187 Probation 

25 Other sanction 

97 Probation 

Not adjudicated 

267 delinquent 24 Other sanction 

146 Dismissed 

66 Probation 

192 Other sanction 

175 Dismissed 

Waived 

3,600 1% 

Placed 

62,100 28% 

Adjudicated 

delinquent Probation 

220,000 52% 139,000 63% 

Other sanction 

19,000 9% 

Probation 

71,900 36% 

Not adjudicated 

delinquent Other sanction 

198,400 47% 17,900 9% 

Dismissed 

108,600 55% 

Probation 

49,400 15% 

Other sanction 

142,600 44% 

Dismissed 

130,400 40% 

Notes: Cases are categorized by their most severe or restrictive sanction. Detail may not add to totals because of rounding. Annual case-processing flow diagrams for 2005 through 

2018 are available at ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/court/faqs.asp. 

For more information 

This fact sheet is based on the report Juvenile Court Statistics 2018, 

which is available at ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/njcda/pdf/jcs2018.pdf. To learn 

more about juvenile court cases, visit OJJDP’s online Statistical Briefing 

Book (ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb) and click on “Juveniles in Court.” OJJDP also 

supports Easy Access to Juvenile Court Statistics, a web-based application 

that lets users analyze the data from the Juvenile Court Statistics report. 

This application is available from the “Data Analysis Tools” section of the 

Statistical Briefing Book. 

Acknowledgments 

Sarah Hockenberry, Research Associate with the National Center for 

Juvenile Justice, prepared this document as a product of the National 

Juvenile Court Data Archive, which is supported by OJJDP grant 

2018–JX–FX–0002. 

To ensure the efficiency and coordination of all Office of Justice Programs 

research activities, the juvenile justice research, evaluation, and statistical 

data collection projects funded by OJJDP are managed by the National 

Institute of Justice (NIJ). 

Points of view or opinions expressed in this document are those of the 

author and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of 

NIJ, OJJDP, or the U.S. Department of Justice. 

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention and the 

National Institute of Justice are components of the Office of Justice 

Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance; the 

Bureau of Justice Statistics; the Office for Victims of Crime; and 

the Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, 

Registering, and Tracking. 

NCJ 254792