U.S. Department of Justice 

Office of Justice Programs 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention 

J. Robert Flores, Administrator November 2008

Office of Justice Programs Innovation • Partnerships • Safer Neighborhoods	 www.ojp.usdoj.gov 

Juvenile Arrests 2006 

A Message From OJJDP 

Juvenile Arrests 2006 summarizes 

juvenile data cited in the FBI report 

Crime in the United States 2006. 

Juvenile arrests for violent crimes 

increased modestly in 2005 and 

2006. However, as the number of 

such arrests in 2004 was smaller than 

in any year since 1987, the number of 

juvenile arrests for violent crimes for 

2006 was relatively low. Juvenile 

arrests for property crimes continued 

to decline and in 2006 were at their 

lowest level since at least 1980 (the 

first year of available data for this 

report). 

The proportion of female offenders 

entering the juvenile justice system 

has grown. Although juvenile arrests 

for violent crimes declined 22% for 

males between 1997 and 2006, they 

decreased only 12% for females in 

the same period. 

The Violent Crime Index rate for black 

juveniles in 2006 was 5 times the rate 

for white and American Indian juveniles and 12 times the rate for Asian 

juveniles. Although this represents an 

increase in the black/white juvenile 

violent arrest rate disparity of 4-to-1 in 

1999, it is less than that of the 1980s, 

when it was between 6- and 7-to-1. 

As evidenced by the preceding examples, this Bulletin provides baseline 

information that can be used in monitoring America's progress in addressing juvenile crime. 

Howard N. Snyder 

In 2006, law enforcement agencies in the 

United States made an estimated 2.2 million arrests of persons under age 18.* Juveniles accounted for 17% of all violent 

crime arrests and 26% of all property 

crime arrests in 2006. The substantial 

growth in juvenile violent crime arrests 

that began in the late 1980s and peaked in 

1994 was followed by 10 consecutive 

years of decline. Between 1994 and 2004, 

the juvenile arrest rate for Violent Crime 

Index offenses fell 49%, reaching its lowest 

level since at least 1980. However, this 

long-term downward trend was broken in 

2005 with a 2% annual increase in Violent 

Crime Index arrests followed by a 4% increase in 2006. More specifically, 2005 and 

2006 saw increases in juvenile arrests for 

murder and robbery but continued declines in arrests for forcible rape and aggravated assault. 

These findings are derived from data that 

local law enforcement agencies across the 

country report annually to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program. 

Based on these data, the FBI prepares its 

annual Crime in the United States report, 

which summarizes crimes known to the 

police and arrests made during the reporting calendar year. This information is used 

to characterize the extent and nature of 

juvenile crime that comes to the attention 

of the justice system. Other recent findings from the UCR Program include the 

following: 

* Throughout this Bulletin, persons under age 18 are 

referred to as juveniles. See Notes on page 12. 

◆	 In 2006, 10% (or 1,780) of all murder 

victims were under age 18. Although 

33% of all juvenile murder victims were 

under age 5, this proportion varied 

widely across demographic groups. 

◆	 After about a decade of substantial 

decline, the number of juveniles murdered with firearms increased in 2004, 

2005, and 2006, while murders by other 

means continued to decline. 

◆	 In 1994, 1 of 6 alleged murder offenders 

known to law enforcement was under 

age 18. In 2006, this ratio was 1 in 11. 

◆	 Juveniles were involved in 13% of all 

violent crimes cleared in 2006— 

specifically, 6% of murders, 12% of 

forcible rapes, 17% of robberies, and 

12% of aggravated assaults. 

◆	 The growth in the juvenile murder 

arrest rate from 2004 to 2006 returned 

it to near its 2002 level, but even with 

this increase the rate in 2006 was still 

73% below its 1993 peak. 

◆	 Between 1997 and 2006, juvenile arrests 

for aggravated assault decreased more 

for males than for females (24% vs. 

10%). During this period, while juvenile 

male arrests for simple assault declined 

4%, female arrests grew 19%. 

◆	 In 2006, although the juvenile population was only 17% black, black juveniles were involved in 51% of juvenile 

Violent Crime Index arrests and 31% of 

juvenile Property Crime Index arrests. 

Access OJJDP publications online at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ojjdp 
2 

What do arrest statistics 

count? 

To interpret the material in this Bulletin 

properly, the reader must have a clear 

understanding of what these statistics 

count. Arrest statistics report the number 

of arrests that law enforcement agencies 

made in a particular year—not the number of individuals arrested nor the number of crimes committed. The number of 

arrests is not equivalent to the number of 

people arrested because an unknown 

number of individuals are arrested more 

than once in the year. Nor do arrest 

statistics represent counts of crimes that 

arrested individuals commit because a 

series of crimes that one individual commits may culminate in a single arrest or a 

single crime may result in the arrest of 

more than one person. This latter situation, where many arrests result from one 

crime, is relatively common in juvenile 

law-violating behavior because juveniles 

are more likely than adults to commit 

crimes in groups. This is the primary reason why one should not use arrest statistics to indicate the relative proportion of 

crime that juveniles and adults commit. 

Arrest statistics are most appropriately a 

measure of flow into the criminal and juvenile justice systems. 

Arrest statistics also have limitations in 

measuring the volume of arrests for a 

particular offense. Under the UCR Program, the FBI requires law enforcement 

agencies to classify an arrest by the 

most serious offense charged in that 

arrest. For example, the arrest of a youth 

charged with aggravated assault and 

possession of a controlled substance 

would be reported to the FBI as an arrest 

for aggravated assault. Therefore, when 

arrest statistics show that law enforcement agencies made an estimated 

196,700 arrests of young people for drug 

abuse violations in 2006, it means that a 

drug abuse violation was the most serious charge in these 196,700 arrests. An 

unknown number of additional arrests in 

2006 included a drug charge as a lesser 

offense. 

What do clearance 

statistics count? 

Clearance statistics measure the proportion of reported crimes that were resolved by an arrest or other, exceptional 

means (e.g., death of the offender, unwillingness of the victim to cooperate). 

A single arrest may result in many clearances. For example, 1 arrest could clear 

40 burglaries if the person was charged 

with committing all 40 of these crimes. 

Or multiple arrests may result in a single 

clearance if a group of offenders committed the crime. For those interested in juvenile justice issues, the FBI also reports 

on the proportion of clearances that 

involved offenders under age 18. This 

statistic is a better indicator of the proportion of crime that this age group commits than is the proportion of arrests, 

although there are some concerns that 

even the clearance statistic overestimates the proportion of crimes committed by juveniles. 

For example, the FBI reports that persons under age 18 accounted for 28% 

of all robbery arrests but only 17% of all 

robberies that were cleared in 2006. If it 

can be assumed that offender characteristics of cleared robberies are similar to 

those of robberies that were not cleared, 

then it would be appropriate to conclude 

that persons under age 18 were responsible for 17% of all robberies in 2006. 

However, the offender characteristics of 

cleared and noncleared robberies may 

differ for a number of reasons. For example, research has shown that juvenile 

robbers are more easily apprehended 

than adult robbers; consequently, the 

juvenile proportion of cleared robberies 

probably overestimates juveniles’ responsibility for all robberies. To add to the difficulty in interpreting clearance statistics, 

the FBI’s reporting guidelines require the 

clearance to be tied to the oldest offender in the group if more than one person 

is involved in the crime. 

In summary, although the interpretation 

of reported clearance proportions is not 

straightforward, these data are the closest measure generally available of the 

proportion of crime known to law enforcement that is attributed to persons 

under age 18. 

The juvenile proportion of arrests exceeded the juvenile proportion of 

crimes cleared by arrest or exceptional means in each offense category, 

reflecting that juveniles are more likely to commit crimes in groups and 

are more likely to be arrested than are adults 

Data source: Crime in the United States 2006 (Washington, DC: Federal Bureau of Investigation, 

2007), tables 28 and 38. 

Arson 

Motor vehicle theft 

Larceny-theft 

Burglary 

Aggravated assault 

Robbery 

Forcible rape 

Murder 

Property Crime Index 

Violent Crime Index 

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 

Percent involving juveniles 

13% 

17% 

19% 

26% 

6% 

10% 

12% 

15% 

17% 

28% 

12% 

14% 

18% 

28% 

20% 

26% 

16% 

25% 

40% 

49% 

Clearance Arrest 
The number of juveniles 

murdered increased in 

2004, 2005, and 2006 

Each Crime in the United States report 

presents estimates of the number of 

crimes reported to law enforcement agencies. A large number of crimes are never 

reported to law enforcement. Murder, 

however, is one crime that is nearly always reported. 

An estimated 17,030 murders were reported to law enforcement agencies in 2006, 

or 5.7 murders for every 100,000 U.S. residents. The murder rate in the U.S. was essentially constant between 1999 (the year 

with the fewest murders in the last three 

decades) and 2006. Prior to 1999, the last 

year in which the U.S. murder rate was 

under 6.0 was 1966. 

Of all murder victims in 2006, 90% (or 

15,250 victims) were 18 years of age or 

older. The other 1,780 murder victims 

were under age 18 (i.e., juveniles). The 

number of juveniles murdered in 2006 was 

10% above the average number of juveniles murdered in the prior 5-year period, 

and 38% below the peak year of 1993, 

when an estimated 2,880 juveniles were 

murdered in the U.S. During this same period, the estimated number of adults murdered fell 30%. 

Of all juveniles murdered in 2006, 33% 

were under age 5, 73% were male, and 

49% were white. Of all juveniles murdered 

in 2006, 26% of male victims, 50% of female victims, 39% of white victims, and 

27% of black victims were under age 5. 

In 2006, 68% of all murder victims were 

killed with a firearm. Adults were more 

likely to be killed with a firearm (70%) 

than were juveniles (54%). However, the 

involvement of a firearm depended greatly 

on the age of the juvenile victim. In 2006, 

18% of murdered juveniles under age 13 

were killed with a firearm, compared with 

82% of murdered juveniles age 13 or older. 

The most common method of murdering 

children under age 5 was by physical assault: in 50% of these murders, the offenders’ only weapons were their hands 

and/or feet, compared with only 2% of juvenile victims age 13 or older and 4% of 

adult victims. In 2006, knives or other cutting instruments were used in 7% of juvenile murders and 13% of adult murders. 

The 2.2 million arrests of juveniles in 2006 was 24% fewer than the 

number of arrests in 1997 

2006 Percent of Total 

Estimated Juvenile Arrests Percent Change 

Most Serious Number of Under 1997– 2002– 2005– 

Offense Juvenile Arrests Female Age 15 2006 2006 2006 

Total 2,219,600 29% 29% –24% –3% 1% 

Violent Crime Index 100,700 17 29 –20 8 4 

Murder and nonnegligent 

manslaughter 1,310 5 8 –42 18 3 

Forcible rape 3,610 2 36 –31 –20 –10 

Robbery 35,040 9 23 –16 34 19 

Aggravated assault 60,770 23 32 –21 –1 –2 

Property Crime Index 404,700 32 33 –44 –17 –5 

Burglary 83,900 11 32 –37 –6 5 

Larceny-theft 278,100 41 34 –45 –19 –8 

Motor vehicle theft 34,600 17 23 –53 –28 –8 

Arson 8,100 14 58 –22 –5 0 

Nonindex 

Other assaults 249,400 34 39 2 5 –1 

Forgery and counterfeiting 3,500 33 11 –59 –34 –20 

Fraud 8,100 34 15 –31 –14 –5 

Embezzlement 1,400 45 4 3 –3 20 

Stolen property (buying, 

receiving, possessing) 21,300 15 25 –45 –12 1 

Vandalism 117,500 13 41 –14 10 11 

Weapons (carrying, 

possessing, etc.) 47,200 10 33 –10 31 2 

Prostitution and 

commercialized vice 1,600 74 14 15 16 9 

Sex offense (except forcible 

rape and prostitution) 15,900 10 47 –16 –18 –9 

Drug abuse violations 196,700 16 15 –11 1 2 

Gambling 2,200 3 15 –43 20 –14 

Offenses against the 

family and children 5,200 37 31 –48 –40 –6 

Driving under the influence 20,100 23 3 1 –8 9 

Liquor laws 141,400 36 9 –15 –5 9 

Drunkenness 16,300 25 11 –30 –7 12 

Disorderly conduct 207,700 33 39 7 8 0 

Vagrancy 5,000 30 33 –36 4 10 

All other offenses 

(except traffic) 386,000 27 25 –19 –3 2 

Suspicion (not included 

in totals) 500 22 22 –74 –72 –15 

Curfew and loitering 152,900 31 27 –31 6 4 

Runaways 114,200 57 33 –45 –11 –2 

◆	 In 2006, there were an estimated 60,770 juvenile arrests for aggravated assault. 

Between 1997 and 2006, the annual number of such arrests fell 21%. 

◆	 Between 1995 and 2004, juvenile robbery and aggravated assault arrests declined 

substantially (down 44% and 23%, respectively). However, in the next two years, 

while juvenile aggravated assault arrests continued to fall (slightly), juvenile arrests 

for robbery increased (11% in 2005 and 19% in 2006). 

◆	 In 2006, females accounted for 17% of juvenile Violent Crime Index arrests, 32% 

of juvenile Property Crime Index arrests, and 16% of juvenile drug abuse arrests. 

◆	 In 2006, youth under the age of 15 accounted for about one-third of all violent 

(29%) and property crime (33%) arrests. 

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

Data source: Crime in the United States 2006 (Washington, DC: Federal Bureau of 

Investigation, 2007), tables 29, 32, 34, 36, 38, and 40. Arrest estimates were developed by the 

National Center for Juvenile Justice. 

3 
1 in 8 violent crimes 

were attributed to 

juveniles 

The relative responsibility of juveniles and 

adults for crime is difficult to determine. 

Law enforcement is more likely to clear 

crimes that juveniles commit. Therefore, 

law enforcement records are likely to 

overestimate juvenile responsibility for 

crime. 

Clearance data show that the proportion 

of violent crimes that law enforcement attributes to juveniles has been rather constant in recent years, holding between 

12% and 13% from 1996 through 2006. The 

proportions of both forcible rapes and aggravated assaults fluctuated between 11% 

and 12% over this period, while the proportion of murders attributed to juveniles 

ranged between 5% and 6% between 1998 

and 2006. In contrast, the proportion of 

robberies attributed to juveniles varied, 

falling from 18% to 14% between 1996 and 

2002 and then increasing gradually to 17% 

by 2006. 

In 2006, 19% of Property Crime Index offenses cleared by arrest or exceptional 

means were cleared by the arrest of a juvenile. This was one percentage point 

above the level in 2005, which was the 

lowest level since at least the mid-1960s. 

For comparison, the proportion of Property Crime Index offenses that law enforcement attributed to juveniles was 28% 

in 1980 and 22% in both 1990 and 2000. 

Juvenile arrests for 

violence increased in 

2005 and 2006 

The FBI assesses trends in violent crimes 

by monitoring four offenses that are consistently reported by law enforcement 

agencies nationwide. These four crimes— 

murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, 

forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault—form the Violent Crime Index. 

Following 10 years of declines between 

1994 and 2004, juvenile arrests for Violent 

Crime Index offenses increased 2% from 

2004 to 2005, and 4% from 2005 to 2006. 

Given that the number of arrests in 2004 

was smaller than in any year since 1987, 

the number of juvenile Violent Crime Index arrests in 2006 was still relatively low. 

In fact, the number of juvenile violent 

crime arrests in 2006 was lower than any 

year in the 1990s, and just 7% above the 

average annual number of such arrests 

between 2000 and 2005. 

The number of juvenile arrests in 2006 for 

forcible rape was lower than in any year 

since at least 1980. With one exception 

(2004), the number of juvenile aggravated 

assault arrests in 2006 was lower than in 

any year since 1988. In contrast, after also 

falling to a relatively low level in 2004, juvenile arrests for murder increased in 

2005 and again in 2006. To put it in perspective, if the 2004–2006 increase was to 

continue annually into the future, it would 

take another 25 years for the annual number of juvenile murder arrests to return to 

its peak level of the mid-1990s. However, 

juvenile arrests for robbery increased by 

19% from 2005 to 2006 following an 11% 

increase in the previous year. If this pace 

continues, the annual number of juvenile 

robbery arrests will return to its 1995 

peak in just 4 years. 

Between 1997 and 2006, the number of arrests in most offense categories declined 

more for juveniles than for adults: 

Percent Change 

in Arrests 

Most Serious 1997–2006 

Offense Juvenile Adult 

Violent Crime Index –20% –11% 

Murder –42 –12 

Forcible rape –31 –8 

Robbery –16 –3 

Aggravated assault –21 –12 

Property Crime Index –44 –14 

Burglary –37 0 

Larceny-theft –45 –18 

Motor vehicle theft –53 –2 

Simple assault 2 –6 

Weapons law violations –10 –5 

Drug abuse violations –11 23 

Data source: Crime in the United States 2006, 

table 32. 

In 2006, juveniles were involved in 1 in 10 arrests for murder and drug 

abuse violations and 1 in 4 arrests for a weapons violation, robbery, 

motor vehicle theft, larceny-theft, and burglary 

Total
 

Violent Crime Index
 

Property Crime Index
 

Arson 49% 

Vandalism 

Disorderly conduct
 

Robbery
 

Burglary
 

Larceny-theft
 

Motor vehicle theft
 

Weapons
 

Liquor laws
 

Other assaults
 

Sex offenses
 

Gambling
 

Stolen property
 

Forcible rape
 

Vagrancy
 

Aggravated assault
 

Drug abuse violations
 

Murder
 

Offenses against the family
 

Drunkenness
 

Fraud
 

Prostitution
 

Driving under the influence
 

4% 

3% 

3% 

2% 

1% 

16% 

17% 

26% 

30% 

28% 

28% 

26% 

25% 

24% 

22% 

19% 

18% 

18% 

17% 

15% 

14% 

14% 

10% 

10% 

39% 

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 

Percent of arrests involving juveniles 

Data source: Crime in the United States 2006 (Washington, DC: Federal Bureau of 

Investigation, 2007), table 38. 

4 
Juvenile arrests for 

property crimes in 2006 

were the lowest in at 

least three decades 

As with violent crime, the FBI assesses 

trends in the volume of property crimes 

by monitoring four offenses that are consistently reported by law enforcement 

agencies nationwide and are pervasive in 

all geographical areas of the country. 

These four crimes, which form the Property Crime Index, are burglary, larceny-theft, 

motor vehicle theft, and arson. 

For the period 1980–1994, during which juvenile violent crime arrests increased substantially, juvenile property crime arrests 

remained relatively constant. After this 

long period of relative stability, juvenile 

property crime arrests began to fall. Between 1994 and 2006, the number of juvenile Property Crime Index arrests fell by 

half, to their lowest level since at least the 

1970s. This period also saw large declines 

in juvenile arrests for individual property 

offenses—burglary (41%), larceny-theft 

(45%), and motor vehicle theft (61%)— 

making arrests for each property crime in 

2006 at or near their lowest level since at 

least the 1970s. 

Most arrested juveniles 

were referred to court 

In most states, some persons younger 

than age 18 are, because of their age or by 

statutory exclusion, under the jurisdiction 

of the criminal justice system. For arrested 

persons younger than age 18 and under 

the original jurisdiction of their State’s juvenile justice system, the FBI’s UCR Program monitors what happens as a result of 

the arrest. This is the only instance in the 

UCR Program in which the statistics on arrests coincide with State variations in the 

legal definition of a juvenile. 

In 2006, 21% of arrests involving youth eligible in their State for processing in the juvenile justice system were handled within law 

enforcement agencies and the arrestees 

were released, 69% were referred to juvenile 

court, and 8% were referred directly to 

criminal court. The others were referred to 

a welfare agency or to another police 

agency. In 2006, the proportion of juvenile 

arrests sent to juvenile court in cities with 

a population of more than 250,000 (69%) 

was similar to the proportion sent to juvenile court in smaller cities (70%). 

Following 2004, when it fell to its lowest level since at least 1980, the
 

juvenile Violent Crime Index arrest rate increased in 2005 and 2006
 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
 

600
 

500
 

Violent Crime Index
 

400
 

300 

200 

100 

0 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

◆	 The juvenile Violent Crime Index arrest rate increased 12% between 2004 and 

2006. This increase follows a year in which the rate had reached a historically low 

level. To place the extent of this increase in perspective, if the rate continued to increase annually by the same amount, it would be almost 14 years before it once 

again reached the peak level of 1994. 

Data source: Analysis of arrest data from the FBI and population data from the U.S. Census 

Bureau and the National Center for Health Statistics. [See data source note on p. 12 for detail.] 

After years of relative stability, the juvenile Property Crime Index arrest 

rate began a decline in the mid-1990s that continued through 2006 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
 

3,000
 

2,500 

2,000
 

Property Crime Index
 

1,500
 

1,000 

500 

0 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

◆	 The juvenile arrest rate for Property Crime Index offenses in 2006 was less than 

half of what it was in 1980—down 53% over the period. The large declines over the 

last decade in the two arrest Indexes that have traditionally been used to monitor 

juvenile crime indicate a substantial reduction in the law-violating behavior of America’s youth over this period. 

Data source: Analysis of arrest data from the FBI and population data from the U.S. Census 

Bureau and the National Center for Health Statistics. [See data source note on p. 12 for detail.] 

5 
6 

In 2006, the juvenile arrest rates for murder, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault were each well 

below their peak levels of the 1990s 

Aggravated Assault 

◆ The juvenile arrest rate for aggravated assault doubled between 1980 and 1994 and then fell substantially and consistently through 2004, down 39% from its 1994 peak. 

◆ After many years of decline, the juvenile arrest rate for aggravated assault increased slightly in both 2005 and 2006 (up 2% 

for the period). This pattern of relative stability between 2002 

and 2006 is in contrast to the relatively large increase in the juvenile robbery arrest rate over the same period. 

Murder 

◆ From the mid-1980s to the peak in 1993, the juvenile arrest 

rate for murder more than doubled. 

◆ Then, with one exception (2001), the juvenile arrest rate for 

murder fell each year through 2004, dropping the rate to 77% 

below its peak in 1993. 

◆ The growth in the juvenile murder arrest rate between 2004 

and 2006 returned it to near its 2002 level; but even with this 

increase, the rate in 2006 was 73% below its 1993 peak. 

Forcible Rape 

◆ Following the general pattern of other assaultive offenses, the 

juvenile arrest rate for forcible rape increased from the early 

1980s through the early 1990s and then fell substantially. 

◆ Over the 1980–2006 period, the juvenile arrest rate for forcible 

rape peaked in 1991, 44% above its 1980 level. 

◆ From 1991, with minor exceptions, the juvenile arrest rate for 

forcible rape dropped annually through 2006. By 1999, it had 

returned to its 1980 level. By 2006, the rate had fallen to a point 

35% below the 1980 level, 55% below its 1991 peak, and to its 

lowest level in more than a generation. 

Robbery 

◆ Unlike the juvenile arrest rates for other violent crimes, the rate 

for robbery declined through much of the 1980s, reaching a low 

point in 1988. Then, like the violent crime arrest rate in general, 

the juvenile robbery arrest rate grew by the mid-1990s to a 

point above the 1980 level. 

◆ The juvenile robbery arrest rate declined substantially (62%) 

between 1995 and 2002. However, in each of the next four 

years the arrest rate increased, so that by 2006 the rate was 

43% above its low point in 2002 but still 46% below its 1995 

peak. 

Data source: Analysis of arrest data from the FBI and population data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the National Center for Health Statistics. [See 

data source note on p. 12 for detail.] 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

0 

2 

4 

6 

8 

10 

12 

14 

16 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

Murder 

0 

25 

50 

75 

100 

125 

150 

175 

200 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

Robbery 

0 

50 

100 

150 

200 

250 

300 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

Aggravated assault 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

Forcible rape 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 
7 

Juvenile arrest rate trends for the four offenses that make up the Property Crime Index show very different 

patterns over the 1980–2006 period 

Burglary 

◆ Unique in the set of Property Crime Index offenses, the juvenile arrest rate for burglary declined almost consistently and 

fell substantially between 1980 and 2006, down 69%. 

◆ This large fall in juvenile arrests from 1980 through 2006 was 

not replicated in the adult statistics. For example, between 

1997 and 2006, the number of juvenile burglary arrests fell 

37%, while adult burglary arrests remained essentially the 

same. In 1980, 45% of all burglary arrests were arrests of a juvenile; in 2006, reflecting the greater decline in juvenile arrests, 

just 28% of burglary arrests were juvenile arrests. 

Larceny-Theft 

◆ The juvenile arrest rate for larceny-theft remained essentially 

constant between 1980 and 1997, then fell 47% between 1997 

and 2006. 

◆ In 2006, 69% of all juvenile arrests for Property Crime Index 

offenses were for larceny-theft. Therefore, the annual trends 

of juvenile arrests for Property Crime Index offenses largely 

reflect the pattern of larceny-theft arrests (which itself is dominated by shoplifting—the most common larceny-theft violation). As can be seen on this page, the juvenile arrest trends 

for individual property crimes vary considerably and, therefore, 

should be considered separately. 

Motor Vehicle Theft 

◆ The juvenile arrest rate for motor vehicle theft more than doubled between 1983 and 1990, up 137%. 

◆ After the peak years of 1990 and 1991, the juvenile arrest rate 

for motor vehicle theft declined substantially and consistently 

through 2006, falling 70%. In 2006, the juvenile arrest rate for 

motor vehicle theft was lower than in any year in the 

1980–2006 period. 

◆ This large decline in juvenile arrests was not replicated in the 

adult statistics. Between 1996 and 2006, the number of juvenile 

motor vehicle theft arrests fell more than 53%, while adult motor vehicle theft arrests decreased just 2%. 

Arson 

◆ After being relatively stable for most of the 1980s, the juvenile 

arrest rate for arson grew 33% between 1990 and 1994. 

◆ The juvenile arrest rate for arson declined substantially between 1994 and 2006, falling 33%. 

◆ In the 27 years from 1980 through 2006, only 6 years had a 

lower juvenile arrest rate for arson than did 2006. The 2006 

rate was just 7% above the lowest rate in the period. 

Data source: Analysis of arrest data from the FBI and population data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the National Center for Health Statistics. [See 

data source note on p. 12 for detail.] 

0 

250 

500 

750 

1,000 

1,250 

1,500 

1,750 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

Larceny-theft 

0 

50 

100 

150 

200 

250 

300 

350 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

Motor vehicle theft 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

Arson 

0 

100 

200 

300 

400 

500 

600 

700 

800 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

Burglary 
Juvenile male and female arrest trends were similar for robbery and 

drug law violations but differed for aggravated and simple assault 

0 

100 

200 

300 

400 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

Male 

Female 

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

Female 

0 

200 

400 

600 

800 

1,000 

1,200 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

Male 

Female 

◆ A similar growth and subsequent decline in juvenile male and female robbery arrest 

rates between 1980 and 2006 left each below their 1980s levels (36% and 12%, 

respectively). Over the period, juvenile male and female drug arrest rates both increased by half (55% and 47%, respectively). 

◆ Unlike robbery, the juvenile female arrest rate for aggravated assault did not decline 

after its 1990s peak as much as did the male rate. As a result, in 2006, the juvenile 

male arrest rate was just 13% above its 1980 level, while the female rate was almost double its 1980 rate (up 94%). Similarly, while the male arrest rate for simple 

assault over the 1980–2006 period doubled, the female rate quadrupled. 

Data source: Analysis of arrest data from the FBI and population data from the U.S. Census 

Bureau and the National Center for Health Statistics. [See data source note on p. 12 for detail.] 

0 

20 

40 

60 

80 

100 

120 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

Female 

0 

100 

200 

300 

400 

500 

600 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

Female 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

0 

100 

200 

300 

400 

500 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

Male 

Female 

Aggravated assault 

Other (simple) assault 

Robbery 

0 

200 

400 

600 

800 

1,000 

1,200 

1,400 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

Male 

Female 

0 

50 

100 

150 

200 

250 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

Female 

Drug abuse violations 

In 2006, 29% of 

juvenile arrests 

involved females 

Law enforcement agencies made 641,000 

arrests of females under age 18 in 2006. 

From 1997 through 2006, arrests of juvenile females decreased less than male 

arrests in most offense categories (e.g., 

aggravated assault); in some categories 

(e.g., simple assault), female arrests increased, while male arrests decreased. 

Percent Change in 

Juvenile Arrests 

Most Serious 1997–2006 

Offense Female Male 

Violent Crime Index –12% –22% 

Aggravated assault –10% –24% 

Simple assault 19 –4 

Property Crime Index –35 –48 

Burglary –31 –38 

Larceny-theft –34 –51 

Motor vehicle theft –49 –54 

Vandalism –4 –15 

Weapons 5 –11 

Drug abuse violations 2 –14 

Liquor law violations 1 –22 

DUI 39 –6 

Disorderly conduct 33 –2 

Data source: Crime in the United States 2006, 

table 33. 

Gender differences also occurred in the 

assault arrest trends for adults. Between 

1997 and 2006, adult male arrests for aggravated assault fell 14%, while female arrests fell 2%. Similarly, adult male arrests 

for simple assault fell 10% between 1997 

and 2006, while adult female arrests rose 

8%. Therefore, the female proportion of 

arrests grew for both types of assault. It 

is likely that the disproportionate growth 

in female assault arrests over this period 

was related to factors that affected both 

juveniles and adults. 

Gender differences in arrest trends also 

increased the proportion of arrests involving females in other offense categories for both juveniles and adults. The 

number of drug abuse violation arrests of 

juvenile females grew 2% between 1997 

and 2006, while juvenile male arrests declined 14%. Drug abuse violation arrests 

of adult females grew more than adult 

male arrests (33% and 21%, respectively). 

The greater decline in male than in female 

arrests for Property Crime Index offenses 

seen for juveniles between 1997 and 2006 

was also seen in adult arrests, with adult 

male arrests falling 15% and adult female 

arrests falling 10%. 

8 
Juvenile arrests 

disproportionately 

involved minorities 

The racial composition of the U.S. juvenile 

population in 2006 was 78% white, 17% 

black, 5% Asian/Pacific Islander, and 1% 

American Indian. Most Hispanics (an ethnic designation, not a race) were classified 

as white. Of all juvenile arrests for violent 

crimes in 2006, 47% involved white youth, 

51% involved black youth, 1% involved 

Asian youth, and 1% involved American Indian youth. For property crime arrests, 

the proportions were 66% white youth, 

31% black youth, 2% Asian youth, and 1% 

American Indian youth. Black youth were 

overrepresented in juvenile arrests. 

Most Serious Black Proportion of 

Offense Juvenile Arrests in 2006 

Murder 59% 

Forcible rape 34 

Robbery 67 

Aggravated assault 42 

Simple assault 39 

Burglary 32 

Larceny-theft 30 

Motor vehicle theft 43 

Weapons 37 

Drug abuse violations 30 

Vandalism 19 

Liquor laws 5 

Data source: Crime in the United States 2006, 

table 43. 

The Violent Crime Index arrest rate (i.e., 

arrests per 100,000 juveniles in the racial 

group) in 2006 for black juveniles (934) 

was 5 times the rates for white juveniles 

(184) and American Indian juveniles (174) 

and 12 times the rate for Asian juveniles 

(78). For Property Crime Index arrests, the 

rate for black juveniles (2,278) was double 

the rates for white juveniles (1,046) and 

American Indian juveniles (954) and 5 

times the rate for Asian juveniles (461). 

In the 1980s, the Violent Crime Index arrest rate for black juveniles was between 6 

and 7 times the white rate. This ratio declined during the 1990s, falling to 4-to-1 in 

1999. Between 1999 and 2006, the racial 

disparity in the rates increased, reaching 

5-to-1 in 2006. This increase was the result 

of an increase in the black rate, while the 

white rate declined (9% vs. –24%, respectively). More specifically, over this period, 

the robbery arrest rate increased for black 

juveniles while the white rate declined 

(38% vs. –16%, respectively), and the 

black juvenile arrest rate for aggravated 

assault declined far less than the white 

rate (–6% vs. –25%, respectively). 

Although annual arrest rates varied considerably across races, trends 

in those rates from 1980 through 2006 had many similarities 

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

Black 

White 

0 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

White 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

0 

200 

400 

600 

800 

1,000 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

Black 

White 

0 

1,000 

2,000 

3,000 

4,000 

5,000 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

Black 

White 

◆ The white juvenile murder arrest rate in 2006 was at its lowest level since at least 

1980, having fallen 69% since its peak in 1993. The black rate in 2006 was still 

73% below its 1993 peak, even though it increased between 2004 and 2006. 

◆ After peaking in the mid-1990s, robbery and aggravated assault arrest rates fell 

substantially for all four racial groups. 

◆ From 1994 through 2006, the Property Crime Index arrest rates dropped for juveniles in all racial groups. In fact, rates were cut in half or even more. 

Note: Murder rates for American Indian youth and Asian youth are not presented because the 

small number of arrests and small population sizes produce unstable rate trends. 

Data source: Analysis of arrest data from the FBI and population data from the U.S. Census 

Bureau and the National Center for Health Statistics. [See data source note on p. 12 for detail.] 

0 

20 

40 

60 

80 

100 

Amer. Indian 

Asian 

White 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

0 

50 

100 

150 

200 

250 

Amer. Indian 

Asian 

White 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

0 

500 

1,000 

1,500 

2,000 

2,500 

3,000 Amer. Indian 

Asian 

White 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

0 

200 

400 

600 

800 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

Black 

White 

Robbery 

Aggravated assault 

Property Crime Index 

Murder 

9 
10 

In 2006, the juvenile arrest rate trend for weapons 

law violations continued an increase that began 

in 2003 

◆ Between 1990 and 1997, the juvenile arrest rate for drug 

abuse violations increased 145%. The rate declined 21% 

between 1997 and 2006, but the 2006 rate was still almost double the 1990 rate. 

◆ Over the 1980–2006 period, the white juvenile arrest rate 

for drug abuse violations peaked in 1997 and then held 

relatively constant through 2006 (down 11%). In contrast, 

the black rate peaked in 1995 and by 2002 had fallen 

49%. The growth in recent years has brought the black 

rate back to within 36% of its 1995 peak. 

After a considerable rise in the 1990s, the juvenile 

arrest rate for drug abuse violations has trended 

downward from 1997 through 2006 

◆ Between 1980 and 1993, the juvenile arrest rate for 

weapons law violations increased more than 140%. Then 

the rate fell substantially, so that by 2002 the rate was just 

14% above the 1980 level. 

◆ However, between 2002 and 2006, the juvenile weapons 

arrest rate grew 35%, making the 2006 rate 53% above 

the 1980 level and 37% below its peak in 1993. During the 

recent growth period from 2002 to 2006, the white juvenile 

arrest rate for weapons law violations grew 23% and the 

black rate grew 58%. 

After about a decade of substantial decline, the 

number of juveniles murdered using a firearm 

increased in 2004, 2005, and 2006 

The juvenile proportion of alleged murder offenders known to law enforcement grew some between 

2003 and 2006 but was well below the 1994 peak 

0 

50 

100 

150 

200 

250 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

Weapons 

0 

100 

200 

300 

400 

500 

600 

700 

800 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17 

Drug abuse 

0 

250 

500 

750 

1,000 

1,250 

1,500 

1,750 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Juvenile homicide victims 

Firearm involved 

No firearm 

involved 

0% 

2% 

4% 

6% 

8% 

10% 

12% 

14% 

16% 

18% 

Percent of alleged murder offenders known to law enforcement 

Juvenile offenders 

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 

Year 

Data source: Analysis of arrest data from the FBI and population data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the National Center for Health Statistics. 

[See data source note on p. 12 for detail.] 

◆ Between 1980 and 2006, juvenile murder trends were driven by the changing number of juveniles murdered with a 

firearm. For example, between 1993 and 2003, the number of juveniles murdered in the U.S. fell 45%, with 80% of 

the decline due to the drop in firearm-related murders. 

◆ Between 2003 and 2006, while nonfirearm-related murders declined 5%, murders of juveniles by firearms increased 36%. In the early 1990s, about 61% of murdered 

juveniles were killed with a firearm; this percentage fell to 

43% in 2001 and rose to 54% in 2006. 

◆ In 1994, 1 of every 6 alleged murder offenders known to 

law enforcement was under the age of 18. In 2006, this ratio was 1 in 11. 

◆ Even following the growth between 2003 and 2006 in the 

juvenile proportion of alleged murder offenders known to 

law enforcement, the 2006 proportion was still lower than 

any year in the 1990s. 
State variations in juvenile arrest rates may reflect differences in juvenile law-violating behavior, police 

behavior, and/or community standards; therefore, comparisons should be made with caution 

2006 Juvenile Arrest Rate* 2006 Juvenile Arrest Rate* 

Violent Property Violent Property 

Reporting Crime Crime Drug Reporting Crime Crime Drug 

State Coverage Index Index Abuse Weapons State Coverage Index Index Abuse Weapons 

United States 78%† 315 1,256 600 141 Missouri 98% 341 1,650 703 127 

Alabama 80 141 592 263 37 Montana 0 NA NA NA NA 

Alaska 96 218 1,622 314 99 Nebraska 87 106 1892 638 91 

Arizona 96 240 1,394 767 80 Nevada 99 213 1211 504 180 

Arkansas 69 239 1,217 445 77 New Hampshire 79 90 886 618 17 

California 100 389 1,034 496 214 New Jersey 97 362 881 695 217 

Colorado 95 220 1,573 738 149 New Mexico 65 266 1002 618 196 

Connecticut 61 403 1,128 543 119 New York 49 314 1104 608 85 

Delaware 100 607 1,491 862 171 North Carolina 76 287 1331 454 214 

District of Columbia 0 NA NA NA NA North Dakota 90 69 1595 399 70 

Florida 100 485 1,772 789 132 Ohio 50 194 1064 432 94 

Georgia 34 377 1,243 682 188 Oklahoma 91 201 1179 473 101 

Hawaii 84 218 1,092 360 36 Oregon 84 209 1798 550 83 

Idaho 84 145 1,829 509 113 Pennsylvania 88 468 1046 543 150 

Illinois 23 1,029 1,679 2,415 308 Rhode Island 89 143 893 461 131 

Indiana 59 147 1,408 477 34 South Carolina 90 342 1043 697 204 

Iowa 83 263 1,676 396 42 South Dakota 47 27 417 171 14 

Kansas 65 164 895 425 64 Tennessee 81 321 1087 624 146 

Kentucky 23 371 2,092 1,387 136 Texas 96 185 1002 548 69 

Louisiana 48 436 1,585 772 132 Utah 79 117 1793 477 142 

Maine 100 92 1,435 456 38 Vermont 83 103 585 297 13 

Maryland 99 583 1,890 1,173 256 Virginia 77 171 905 412 105 

Massachusetts 85 362 502 387 46 Washington 82 237 1695 490 145 

Michigan 93 223 1,066 360 93 West Virginia 49 45 275 195 10 

Minnesota 89 234 1,735 567 180 Wisconsin 95 297 2583 839 261 

Mississippi 56 135 1,006 518 124 Wyoming 98 138 1521 941 87 

* Throughout this Bulletin, juvenile arrest rates are calculated by dividing the number of arrests of persons ages 10–17 by the number of persons 

ages 10–17 in the population. In this table only, arrest rate is defined as the number of arrests of persons under age 18 for every 100,000 persons 

ages 10–17. Juvenile arrests (arrests of youth under age 18) reported at the State level in Crime in the United States cannot be disaggregated into 

more detailed age categories so that the arrest of persons under age 10 can be excluded in the rate calculation. Therefore, there is a slight inconsistency in this table between the age range for the arrests (birth through age 17) and the age range for the population (ages 10–17) that are the 

basis of a State’s juvenile arrest rates. This inconsistency is slight because just 1% of all juvenile arrests involved youth under age 10. This inconsistency is preferable to the distortion of arrest rates that would be introduced were the population base for the arrest rate to incorporate the large volume of children under age 10 in a State’s population. 

† The reporting coverage for the total United States in this table (78%) includes all States reporting arrests of persons under age 18. This is greater 

than the coverage in the rest of the Bulletin (72%) for various reasons. For example, Florida provided arrest counts of persons under age 18 but did 

not provide the age detail required to support other presentations in Crime in the United States 2006. 

NA = Crime in the United States 2006 reported no arrest counts for the District of Columbia and Montana. 

Interpretation cautions: Arrest rates are calculated by dividing the number of youth arrests made in the year by the number of youth living in reporting jurisdictions. While juvenile arrest rates in part reflect juvenile behavior, many other factors can affect the size of these 

rates. For example, jurisdictions that arrest a relatively large number of nonresident juveniles would have higher arrest rates than jurisdictions where resident youth behave in an identical manner. Therefore, jurisdictions that are vacation destinations or regional centers 

for economic activity may have arrest rates that reflect more than the behavior of their resident youth. Other factors that influence the 

magnitude of arrest rates in a given area include the attitudes of its citizens toward crime, the policies of the jurisdiction’s law enforcement agencies, and the policies of other components of the justice system. Consequently, comparisons of juvenile arrest rates 

across States, while informative, should be made with caution. In most States, not all law enforcement agencies report their arrest 

data to the FBI. Rates for these States are necessarily based on partial information. If the reporting law enforcement agencies in these 

States are not representative of the entire State, then the rates will be biased. Therefore, reported arrest rates for States with less 

than complete reporting coverage may not be accurate. 

Data source: Analysis of arrest data from the FBI’s Crime in the United States 2006 (Washington, DC: Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2007), 

tables 5 and 69, and population data from the National Center for Health Statistics’ Estimates of the July 1, 2000–July 1, 2006, United States 

Resident Population From the Vintage 2006 Postcensal Series by Year, County, Age, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin [machine-readable data files 

available online at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/about/major/dvs/popbridge/popbridge.htm, released 8/16/2007]. 

11 
U.S. Department of Justice PRESORTED STANDARD 

Office of Justice Programs 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention *NCJ~221338* POSTAGE & FEES PAID 

DOJ/OJJDP 

PERMIT NO. G–91 

Washington, DC 20531 

Official Business 

Penalty for Private Use $300 

Bulletin NCJ 221338

Data source note 

Analysis of arrest data from unpublished FBI 

reports for 1980 through 1997, from Crime in 

the United States reports for 1998 through 

2003 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government 

Printing Office, 1999 through 2004, respectively), and from Crime in the United States 

reports for 2004 through 2006 that are available online at www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm#cius, 

released September 2007; population data 

for 1980–1989 from the U.S. Bureau of the 

Census, U.S. Population Estimates by Age, 

Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin: 1980 to 1999 

[machine-readable data files available online, 

released April 11, 2000]; population data for 

1990–1999 from the National Center for 

Health Statistics (prepared by the U.S. Census Bureau with support from the National 

Cancer Institute), Bridged-race Intercensal Estimates of the July 1, 1990–July 1, 1999, United 

States Resident Population by County, Singleyear of Age, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin 

[machine-readable data files available online 

at www.cdc.gov/nchs/about/major/dvs/ 

popbridge/popbridge.htm, released July 26, 

2004]; and population data for 2000–2006 

from the National Center for Health Statistics 

(prepared under a collaborative arrangement with the U.S. Census Bureau), Estimates 

of the July 1, 2000–July 1, 2006, United States 

Resident Population From the Vintage 2006 

Postcensal Series by Year, County, Age, Sex, 

Race, and Hispanic Origin [machine-readable 

data files available online at www. cdc.gov/ 

nchs/about/major/dvs/popbridge/ 

popbridge.htm, released August 16, 2007]. 

Notes 

In this Bulletin, “juvenile” refers to persons under age 18. This definition is at 

odds with the legal definition of juveniles 

in 2006 in 13 states—10 states where all 

17-year-olds are defined as adults and 3 

states where all 16- and 17-year-olds are 

defined as adults. 

FBI arrest data in this Bulletin are counts 

of arrests detailed by age of arrestee and 

offense categories from all law enforcement agencies that reported complete 

data for the calendar year. (See Crime in 

the United States for offense definitions.) 

The proportion of the U.S. population 

covered by these reporting agencies 

ranged from 63% to 94% between 1980 

and 2006, with the 2006 coverage being 72%. 

Estimates of the number of persons in 

each age group in the reporting agencies’ 

resident populations assume that the resident population age profiles are like the 

nation’s. Reporting agencies’ total populations were multiplied by the U.S. Census 

Bureau’s most current estimate of the 

proportion of the U.S. population for each 

age group. 

Acknowledgments 

This Bulletin was written by Howard 

N. Snyder, Ph.D., former Chief of 

Systems Research at the National 

Center for Juvenile Justice, with funds 

provided by OJJDP to support the 

National Juvenile Justice Data 

Analysis Project. The author gratefully 

acknowledges the assistance that the 

FBI’s Criminal Justice Information 

Services Division provided. 

This Bulletin was prepared under cooperative 

agreement number 2005–JF–FX–K022 from the 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 

Prevention (OJJDP), U.S. Department of Justice. 

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 OJJDP or the U.S. Department of 

Justice. 

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 

Prevention is a component of the Office of 

Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance; the Bureau of Justice Statistics; the Community Capacity 

Development Office; the National Institute of 

Justice; the Office for Victims of Crime; and the 

Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, 

Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking 

(SMART).