U.S. Depar tment of Justice 

Office of Justice Programs 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

National 

Report Series 

December 2013

Juvenile Arrests 2011

Charles Puzzanchera 

A Message From OJJDP 

The measurement of juvenile arrest data provides critical insights into the performance and 

functioning of the juvenile justice system. Practitioners use arrest data to evaluate the effectiveness of delinquency prevention and intervention programs and reentry programs. Arrest 

data can provide key indicators of changing juvenile offending patterns. Analysis of national 

data can highlight disparities in the system’s treatment of youth of different races. Because 

the field seeks a barometer of how well the system is working, these annual bulletins are 

among the most frequently requested in OJJDP’s publications catalog. 

As has been the case in general for the past decade, juvenile arrest data for 2011 provide reasons for encouragement. Overall, arrests in 2011 were down 11 percent from 2010 and down 

31 percent since 2002. 

Although juvenile arrest rates for many crimes are at their lowest levels in more than 30 

years, many states and communities are instituting legislative, policy, and practice changes 

to reduce juvenile arrests even further. As a growing body of evidence underscores the corrosive effects that system involvement and confinement can have on healthy adolescent emotional, mental, behavioral, and social development, many jurisdictions are examining and 

developing ways to divert nonserious offenders from entering the system. With time, the cumulative effects of these and other reform efforts, such as trauma, mental health, and substance abuse screening and assessment for youth upon intake, should result in a system 

where arrests are rare, all youth are treated fairly, and when a youth enters the system, he or 

she receives much-needed treatment and services. Such changes would undoubtedly provide 

positive and healthy outcomes for youth, families, and communities. 

Robert L. Listenbee 

Administrator 

This bulletin is part of the 

Juvenile Offenders and 

Victims National Report Series. 

The National Report offers a 

comprehensive statistical 

overview of the problems of 

juvenile crime, violence, and 

victimization and the response 

of the juvenile justice system. 

During each interim year, the 

bulletins in the National 

Report Series provide access 

to the latest information on 

juvenile arrests, court cases, 

juveniles in custody, and other 

topics of interest. Each bulletin in the series highlights 

selected topics at the forefront 

of juvenile justice policymaking, giving readers focused 

access to statistics on some 

of the most critical issues. 

Together, the National Report 

and this series provide a 

baseline of facts for juvenile 

justice professionals, policymakers, the media, and concerned citizens. 

 

Access OJJDP publications online at ojjdp.gov
Most information about law enforcement’s response 


to juvenile crime comes from the FBI’s UCR Program
 

What do arrest statistics 

count? 

Findings in this bulletin are drawn from 

data that local law enforcement agencies 

across the country report to the Federal 

Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI’s) Uniform 

Crime Reporting (UCR) Program. To 

properly interpret the material presented, 

the reader needs a clear understanding of 

what arrest statistics count. Arrest statistics report the number of arrests that law 

enforcement agencies made in a given 

year—not the number of individuals arrested nor the number of crimes committed. The number of arrests is not the 

same as the number of people arrested 

because an unknown number of individuals are arrested more than once during 

the year. Nor do arrest statistics represent 

the number of crimes that arrested individuals commit because a series of 

crimes that one person commits may 

culminate in a single arrest, and 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. For this reason, one 

should not use arrest statistics to indicate 

the relative proportions of crime that juveniles and adults commit. Arrest statistics are most appropriately a measure of 

entry into the justice system. 

Arrest statistics also have limitations in 

measuring the volume of arrests for a 

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

* In this bulletin, “juvenile” refers to persons younger 

than age 18. In 2011, this definition was at odds with 

the legal definition of juveniles in 13 states—11 

states where all 17-year-olds are defined as adults, 

and 2 states where all 16- and 17-year-olds are 

defined as adults. 

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 weapon would be reported to the 

FBI as an arrest for aggravated assault. 

Therefore, when arrest statistics show 

that law enforcement agencies made an 

estimated 28,200 arrests of young people 

for weapons law violations in 2011, it 

means that a weapons law violation was 

the most serious charge in these 28,200 

arrests. An unknown number of additional 

arrests in 2011 included a weapons 

charge as a lesser offense. 

How do arrest statistics 

differ from clearance 

statistics? 

Clearance statistics measure the proportion of reported crimes that were cleared 

(or “closed”) by either arrest or other, exceptional means (such as the death of the 

offender or unwillingness of the victim to 

cooperate). A single arrest may result in 

many clearances. For example, 1 arrest 

could clear 10 burglaries if the person 

was charged with committing all 10 

crimes, or multiple arrests may result in a 

single clearance if a group of offenders 

committed the crime. The FBI’s reporting 

guidelines require that clearances involving both juvenile and adult offenders be 

classified as clearances for crimes that 

adults commit. Because the juvenile clearance proportions include only those clearances in which no adults were involved, 

they underestimate juvenile involvement 

in crime. Although these data do not 

present a definitive picture of juvenile involvement in crime, they are the closest 

measure generally available of the proportion of crime known to law enforcement 

that is attributed to persons younger than 

age 18. 

Crime in the United States 

reports data on murder victims 

Each Crime in the United States report 

presents estimates of the number of 

crimes reported to law enforcement 

agencies. Although many crimes are 

never reported to law enforcement, 

murder is one crime that is nearly 

always reported. 

An estimated 14,610 murders were reported to law enforcement agencies in 

2011, or 4.7 murders for every 100,000 

U.S. residents. The murder rate was 

essentially constant between 1999 and 

2006 and then fell 18% through 2011, 

reaching its lowest level since at least 

1980. 

Of all murder victims in 2011, 91% (or 

13,230 victims) were 18 years old or 

older. The other 1,380 murder victims 

were younger than age 18 (i.e., juveniles). The number of juvenile murder 

victims declined annually since 2007, 

falling 23% during that 5-year period. 

By 2011, the number of juvenile murder victims was 52% less than the peak 

year of 1993, when an estimated 2,880 

juveniles were murdered. During the 

same 2007–2011 period, the estimated 

number of adult murder victims fell 13%. 

Of all juveniles murdered in 2011, 42% 

were younger than age 5, 69% were 

male, and 49% were white. Of all juveniles murdered in 2011, 35% of male 

victims, 58% of female victims, 49% of 

white victims, and 36% of black victims were younger than age 5. 

In 2011, 68% of all murder victims 

were killed with a firearm. Adults were 

more likely to be killed with a firearm 

(70%) than were juveniles (48%). 

However, the involvement of a firearm 

depended greatly on the age of the juvenile victim. In 2011, 18% of murdered juveniles younger than age 13 

were killed with a firearm, compared 

with 82% of murdered juveniles age 13 

or older. The most common method of 

murdering children younger than age 5 

was by physical assault. 

2 National Report Series Bulletin 
In 2011, law enforcement agencies in the U.S. made 


nearly 1.5 million arrests of persons under age 18
 

The number of arrests of juveniles in 2011 was 31% fewer than the number of arrests in 2002 

2011 Percent of total juvenile arrests Percent change 

estimated number Younger 2002– 2007– 2010– 

Most serious offense of juvenile arrests Female than 15 White 2011 2011 2011 

Total 1,470,000 29% 27% 66% –31% –29% –11% 

Violent Crime Index 68,150 18 27 47 –27 –29 –10 

Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter 840 9 11 45 –36 –37 –17 

Forcible rape 2,800 2 35 64 –40 –22 –2 

Robbery 23,800 9 19 30 –3 –31 –13 

Aggravated assault 40,700 25 32 56 –34 –29 –9 

Property Crime Index 334,700 36 28 62 –30 –20 –9 

Burglary 62,000 12 27 60 –28 –24 –5 

Larceny-theft 253,800 44 28 63 –25 –15 –10 

Motor vehicle theft 14,000 16 20 55 –69 –52 –11 

Arson 4,900 15 57 72 –40 –31 8 

Nonindex 

Other (simple) assaults 190,900 36 39 59 –19 –21 –9 

Forgery and counterfeiting 1,600 29 13 66 –69 –49 –7 

Fraud 5,200 35 16 60 –39 –27 –9 

Embezzlement 400 39 10 66 –70 –75 –6 

Stolen property (buying, receiving, 

possessing) 13,300 17 22 57 –48 –40 –9 

Vandalism 67,900 15 39 76 –35 –39 –12 

Weapons (carrying, possessing, etc.) 28,200 10 33 61 –20 –35 –10 

Prostitution and commercialized vice 1,000 76 9 35 –32 –34 –7 

Sex offense (except forcible rape and 

prostitution) 12,600 11 49 70 –35 –19 –3 

Drug abuse violations 148,700 17 17 74 –20 –24 –13 

Gambling 1,000 6 11 12 –35 –52 –28 

Offenses against the family and children 3,600 39 31 70 –62 –39 –6 

Driving under the influence 10,100 25 2 91 –53 –44 –16 

Liquor laws 88,300 40 9 89 –39 –37 –7 

Drunkenness 11,400 26 12 87 –39 –32 –10 

Disorderly conduct 139,200 35 38 57 –28 –31 –11 

Vagrancy 1,800 23 29 73 –10 –53 –15 

All other offenses (except traffic) 264,900 26 23 69 –33 –29 –11 

Suspicion (not included in totals) 100 28 31 51 –90 –65 8 

Curfew and loitering 76,900 30 25 61 –46 –46 –19 

 All four offenses that make up the Violent Crime Index decreased considerably between 2007 and 2011: murder (–37%), rape (–22%), 

robbery (–31%), and aggravated assault (–29%). 

 In 2011, there were an estimated 190,900 juvenile arrests for simple assault. Approximately one-third (36%) of these arrests involved 

females, 39% involved youth younger than age 15, and 59% involved white youth. 

 Youth younger than age 15 accounted for more than half (57%) of all juvenile arrests for arson in 2011 and nearly 40% of juvenile 

arrests for simple assault, vandalism, and disorderly conduct. 

 Females accounted for 9% of juvenile arrests for murder but 25% of juvenile arrests for aggravated assault. 

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

Data source: Analysis of Snyder, H., and Mulako-Wantota, J., Bureau of Justice Statistics, Arrest Data Analysis Tool [online, retrieved 6/3/13]. 

December 2013 3 
Juvenile arrests for violent crime declined for the 

fifth consecutive year 

Juvenile arrests for 

violent crimes fell 29% 

in the past 5 years 

The FBI assesses trends in violent crimes 

by monitoring four offenses that law enforcement agencies nationwide consistently report. 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 from 

2004 to 2006 and then declined each year 

through 2011. As a result, the number of 

juvenile violent crime arrests in 2011 was 

less than any of the previous 32 years and 

15% less than the previous low point in 

1984. 

In fact, with the exception of aggravated 

assault, juvenile arrests for violent crimes 

reached historically low levels in 2011. 

Following a 33% decline since 2008, the 

number of juvenile robbery arrests in 

2011 was at its lowest level since 1980. 

Similarly, the number of juvenile arrests 

for forcible rape fell 33% since 2004 to 

reach its lowest level of the 1980–2011 

period. After falling to a relatively low level 

in 2004, juvenile arrests for murder increased through 2007 and then declined 

37% by 2011 to reach the lowest level in 

three decades. The number of juvenile arrests for aggravated assault was cut in 

half between 1994 and 2011, resting at a 

level 8% above the 1983 low point. 

Between 2002 and 2011, the number of 

arrests in all offense categories declined 

for juveniles but increased in several 

offense categories for adults. 

Most serious 

Percent change 

in arrests 

2002–2011 

offense Juvenile Adult 

Violent Crime Index –27% –12% 

Murder –36 –22 

Forcible rape –40 –29 

Robbery –3 2 

Aggravated assault –34 –13 

Property Crime Index –30 15 

Burglary –28 16 

Larceny-theft –25 23 

Motor vehicle theft –69 –49 

Simple assault –19 0 

Weapons law violations –20 –3 

Drug abuse violations –20 2 

Data source: Analysis of Snyder, H., and MulakoWantota, J., Bureau of Justice Statistics, Arrest Data 

Analysis Tool [online, retrieved 6/3/13]. 

Juvenile property crime 

arrests declined for the 

third straight year 

As with violent crime, the FBI assesses 

trends in the volume of property crimes 

by monitoring four offenses that law enforcement agencies nationwide consistently report. 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 was 

cut in half, reaching its lowest level since 

at least 1980. This decline was interrupted 

briefly as the number of juvenile Property 

Crime Index arrests increased in 2007 and 

2008. By 2011, the number of juvenile 

Property Crime Index arrests fell 23%, 

reaching its lowest level since at least 

1980. Between 2008 and 2011, juvenile 

arrests declined for individual property 

offenses: burglary (26%), larceny-theft 

(21%), motor vehicle theft (44%), and 

arson (24%). Juvenile arrests for burglary, 

larceny-theft, and motor vehicle theft in 

2011 were at their lowest levels since at 

least 1980, while juvenile arrests for arson 

were 8% above the 2010 low point. 

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 2011, 22% of arrests involving youth 

who were eligible in their state for processing in the juvenile justice system 

were handled within law enforcement 

agencies and the youth were released, 

68% were referred to juvenile court, 

and 7% were referred directly to criminal court. The others were referred to a 

welfare agency or to another police 

agency. The proportion of juvenile arrests sent to juvenile court in cities with 

populations of more than 100,000 was 

more than the proportion sent to juvenile court in smaller cities (70% vs. 67%). 

Data source: Crime in the United States 2011 (Washington, DC: Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2012), 

table 68. 

4 National Report Series Bulletin 
In 2011, 1 in 5 juvenile violent crime arrests involved 

females and more than half involved minority youth 

Females accounted for 

29% of juvenile arrests 

in 2011 

Law enforcement agencies made 429,000 

arrests of females younger than age 18 in 

2011. From 2002 through 2011, arrests 

of juvenile females decreased less than 

male arrests in several offense categories 

(e.g., aggravated and simple assault, 

larceny-theft, liquor law violations, and 

disorderly conduct). 

Most serious 

Percent change in 

juvenile arrests 

2002–2011

offense Female Male 

Violent Crime Index –28% –26% 

Robbery 0 –4 

Aggravated assault –31 –35 

Simple assault –11 –23 

Property Crime Index –19 –35 

Burglary –25 –29 

Larceny-theft –16 –30 

Motor vehicle theft –72 –69 

Vandalism –30 –36 

Weapons –25 –19 

Drug abuse violations –16 –21 

Liquor law violations –28 –45 

Driving under influence –39 –57 

Disorderly conduct –17 –33 

Data source: Analysis of Snyder, H., and MulakoWantota, J., Bureau of Justice Statistics, Arrest Data 

Analysis Tool [online, retrieved 6/3/13]. 

Gender differences also occurred in the 

assault arrest trends for adults. Between 

2002 and 2011, adult male arrests for 

aggravated assault fell 16% while female 

arrests declined 1%. Similarly, adult male 

arrests for simple assault fell 5% between 

2002 and 2011 while adult female arrests 

rose 17%. 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. Between 

2002 and 2011, the number of larcenytheft arrests of juvenile females fell 16% 

while juvenile male arrests declined 30%, 

and adult female arrests grew more than 

adult male arrests (48% and 9%, respectively). For Property Crime Index offenses, 

juvenile arrests declined more for males 

than for females between 2002 and 2011, 

and adult arrests increased less for males 

(3%) than for females (42%). 

Juvenile arrests 

disproportionately 

involved minorities 

The racial composition of the U.S. juvenile 

population ages 10–17 in 2011 was 76% 

white, 17% black, 5% Asian/Pacific Islander, and 2% American Indian. Most juveniles of Hispanic ethnicity were included 

in the white racial category. More than half 

(51%) of all juvenile arrests for violent 

crimes in 2011 involved black youth, 47% 

involved white youth, 1% involved Asian 

youth, and 1% involved American Indian 

youth. For property crime arrests, the proportions were 62% white youth, 35% 

black youth, 2% Asian youth, and 1% 

American Indian youth. Black youth were 

overrepresented in juvenile arrests. 

Black proportion 

Most serious of juvenile arrests 

offense in 2011 

Murder 54% 

Forcible rape 35 

Robbery 68 

Aggravated assault 42 

Simple assault 38 

Burglary 38 

Larceny-theft 33 

Motor vehicle theft 42 

Weapons 37 

Drug abuse violations 23 

Vandalism 21 

Liquor laws 7 

Data source: Analysis of Snyder, H., and MulakoWantota, J., Bureau of Justice Statistics, Arrest Data 

Analysis Tool [online, retrieved 6/3/13]. 

In 2011, juveniles were involved in about 1 in 13 arrests for murder 

and about 1 in 5 arrests for robbery, burglary, and larceny-theft 

Juvenile arrests as a percentage 

of total arrests 

Most serious offense All Male Female White Black 

Total 11% 11% 13% 11% 13% 

Violent Crime Index 13 13 12 10 17 

Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter 8 8 6 7 8 

Forcible rape 14 14 26 14 16 

Robbery 22 23 17 16 28 

Aggravated assault 10 10 11 9 13 

Property Crime Index 20 21 20 19 24 

Burglary 21 22 16 19 25 

Larceny-theft 20 20 20 18 24 

Motor vehicle theft 21 22 19 18 27 

Arson 42 43 34 42 42 

Nonindex 

Other (simple) assaults 15 14 20 14 19 

Vandalism 29 30 22 30 25 

Weapons (carrying, possessing, etc.) 18 18 24 19 17 

Drug abuse violations 10 10 8 11 7 

Data source: Analysis of Snyder, H., and Mulako-Wantota, J., Bureau of Justice Statistics, Arrest Data 

Analysis Tool [online, retrieved 6/3/13]. 

December 2013 5 
The 2011 juvenile Violent Crime Index arrest rate 


was at its lowest level in more than three decades
 

Violent crime arrest 

rates declined each 

of the past 3 years 

The juvenile Violent Crime Index arrest 

rate (i.e., the number of arrests per 

100,000 juveniles in the population) was 

essentially constant through the late 

1980s and then increased sharply through 

1994. This rapid growth led to speculation 

about changes in the nature of juvenile 

offenders—concerns that spurred state 

legislators to pass laws that facilitated an 

increase in the flow of youth into the adult 

justice system. Since the 1994 peak, however, the juvenile violent crime arrest rate 

generally declined each year since the 

mid-1990s. Following 3 years of decline, 

the rate in 2011 was about 60% below the 

1994 peak, resting at its lowest level since 

at least 1980. 

Declines in violent crime 

arrest rates were evident 

across gender and racial 

groups 

Male juvenile violent crime arrest rates exceed the rates for females. For example, 

during the 1980s, the male violent crime 

arrest rate was nearly 8 times greater than 

the female rate. However, by 2011, the 

male rate was only 4 times greater. This 

convergence of male and female arrest 

rates is due to the large relative increase 

in the female rate. Between 1980 and 

1994, the male rate increased 60% while 

the female rate more than doubled. By 

2011, the male rate was 61% below its 

1994 peak and at its lowest level in at 

least three decades. Although the female 

rate also declined since the mid-1990s 

(down 47%), the rate in 2011 was 23% 

above its 1983 low point. 

With few exceptions, violent crime arrest 

rates have declined for all racial groups for 

nearly two decades. In fact, violent crime result of these declines, the rates in 2011 

arrest rates for each racial group declined for each racial group were at their lowest 

59% or more since the mid-1990s. As a level since at least 1980. 

The juvenile Violent Crime Index arrest rate fell 30% between 2006 and 

2011 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10−17 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 

Violent Crime Index 

81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 07 09 11 

Year 

Violent Crime Index arrest rate trends by gender and race 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10−17 Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10−17 

1,000 160 

800 Female 

Male 120 

600 

80 

400 

40 200 Female 

0 0 

81 84 87 90 93 96 99 02 05 08 11 81 84 87 90 93 96 99 02 05 08 11 

Year Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10−17 Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10−17 

1,600 350 Amer. Indian 

Black 300 

1,200 White 250 

200 800 

150 

100 400 Asian White 50 

0 0 

81 84 87 90 93 96 99 02 05 08 11 81 84 87 90 93 96 99 02 05 08 11

Year Year 

 The Violent Crime Index arrest rate declined considerably for all racial subgroups in the last 

10 years. The relative decline between 2002 and 2011 was greatest for Asian youth (56%), 

followed by American Indian (42%), white (35%), and black (15%) youth. 

Data source: Analysis of arrest data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics and population data from the U.S. 

Census Bureau. (See arrest rate data source note on page 11 for details.) 

6 National Report Series Bulletin 
Juvenile arrest rates for property crimes in 2011 


reached historic lows for all demographic groups
 

Property crime arrest 

rates have fallen steadily 

for nearly two decades 

After years of relative stability between 

1980 and the mid-1990s, the juvenile 

Property Crime Index arrest rate began 

a decline that continued annually until 

reaching a then-historic low in 2006, 

down 54% from its 1988 peak. This nearly two-decade decline was interrupted by 

a slight increase over the next 2 years, 

followed by a 22% decline between 2008 

and 2011. As a result, juveniles were less 

likely to be arrested for property crimes in 

2011 than at any point in the past 30 

years. 

The juvenile Property Crime Index arrest rate fell 22% between 2008 

and 2011 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10−17 

3,000 

2,500 

Property Crime Index 

2,000 

1,500 

1,000 

500 

0 

81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 07 09 11 

Year 

Property Crime Index arrest rate trends by gender and race 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10−17 Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10−17 

4,000 1,400 

1,200 Female 3,000 Male 1,000 

800 

2,000 600 Female 

400 1,000 

200 

0 0
 

81 84 87 90 93 96 99 02 05 08 11
 81 84 87 90 93 96 99 02 05 08 11 

Year Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10−17 Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10−17 

5,000 3,000 

4,000 2,500 Amer. Indian 

Black 2,000 White 3,000 

1,500 

2,000 1,000 White Asian 

1,000 500 

0 0

81 84 87 90 93 96 99 02 05 08 11 81 84 87 90 93 96 99 02 05 08 11 

Year Year 

December 2013 7 

 The Property Crime Index is dominated by larceny-theft, which accounted for 76% of all 

juvenile Property Crime Index arrests in 2011. Therefore, the trends in Property Crime Index 

arrests largely reflect the trends in arrests for larceny-theft. 

Data source: Analysis of arrest data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics and population data from the U.S. 

Census Bureau. (See arrest rate data source note on page 11 for details.) 

Male property crime 

arrest rates declined 

more than female rates 

The male property crime arrest rate has 

generally declined each year since the late 

1980s. In the 10 years since 2002, the 

male rate fell 33%, reaching its lowest 

level in at least three decades. In comparison, the decline in the female rate began 

nearly 10 years after that for males, and 

the relative decline was far less for females (down 19% since 2002). Unlike the 

pattern for males, the female rate varied 

considerably since 2002. However, after 3 

consecutive years of decline, in 2011 the 

female rate reached its lowest point since 

at least 1980. 

Property crime arrest 

rates declined for all 

racial groups 

Similar to the pattern for violent crime, 

property crime arrest rates have declined 

for all racial groups for nearly two decades. As a result, in 2011 the rates for level since at least 1980. The decline over youth (51%), followed by American Indian 

each racial group were at their lowest the past 10 years was greatest for Asian (43%), white (35%), and black (13%) youth. 
In 2011, juvenile arrest rates for all components of 


the Violent Crime Index were at their lowest levels
 

Murder 

 After reaching a peak in 1993, the juvenile arrest rate for murder declined 

substantially through 2000 (down 72%), falling below 4.0 (per 100,000 

juveniles) for the first time in at least two decades. By 2011, the juvenile 

murder arrest rate fell below 3.0 for the first time since at least 1980. 

 Compared with the previous 20 years, the juvenile murder arrest rate between 2000 and 2011 was historically low and relatively stable. In fact, 

the number of juvenile arrests for murder in the 4 years from 1992 

through 1995 exceeded the total number of such arrests in the past 10 

years. 

Forcible rape 

 With few exceptions, the juvenile arrest rate for forcible rape dropped 

annually from its 1991 peak, falling 63% through 2011. The 2,800 estimated juvenile arrests for forcible rape in 2011 were the fewest such 

arrests in at least three decades. 

 Juveniles accounted for 14% of all forcible rape arrests reported in 2011. 

Nearly two-thirds (65%) of these juvenile arrests involved youth ages 

15–17. Similarly, white youth accounted for 64% of juvenile arrests for 

forcible rape in 2011. Males accounted for the overwhelming majority 

(98%) of juvenile arrests for forcible rape. 

Robbery 

 Similar to other violent crimes, the juvenile robbery arrest rate declined 

steadily from the mid-1990s into the early 2000s. However, unlike the 

other violent crimes, the robbery rate increased between 2004 and 2008. 

The rate has declined each of the past 3 years (down 32%), resting in 

2011 at its lowest point of the 32-year period. 

 Juvenile robbery arrest rates declined for all gender and racial subgroups 

since 2008: 33% for females, 31% for males, 33% for whites, 32% for 

Asians, 30% for blacks, and 16% for American Indians. Rates in 2011 

were at historic lows for males and all races, except for black youth. 

Aggravated assault 

 After doubling between 1980 and 1994, the juvenile arrest rate for aggravated assault fell substantially and consistently through 2011, down 57% 

from its 1994 peak. As a result of this decline, the rate in 2011 reached 

its lowest point since at least 1980 and was 6% below the previous low 

point in 1983. 

 Aggravated assault rates declined for males and females and all racial 

groups since the mid-1990s. In fact, in 2011 the rates were at their lowest level of the 1980–2011 period for all racial groups and males. 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10−17 

14 

12 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 

Murder 

81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 07 09 11 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10−17 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

Forcible rape 

81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 07 09 11 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10−17 

200 

160 

120 

80 

40 

0 

Robbery 

81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 07 09 11 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10−17 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

Aggravated assault 

81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 07 09 11 

Year 

Data source: Analysis of arrest data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics and population data from the U.S. Census Bureau. (See arrest rate data source note on page 11 for 

details.) 

8 National Report Series Bulletin 
In 2011, juvenile arrest rates for burglary, larcenytheft, and motor vehicle theft reached historical lows 

Burglary 

 Unlike the pattern for other property crimes, a steady decline marked 

the trend in the juvenile arrest rate for burglary during the 1980– 

2011 period. The rate in 2011 reached its lowest level of the 32-year 

period, which was 75% below the level in 1980. 

 This large decline in juvenile burglary arrests was not reflected in the 

adult statistics. For example, between 2000 and 2011, the number of 

juvenile burglary arrests fell 35%, while adult burglary arrests 

increased 21%. As a result of this decline, only one-fifth (21%) of all 

burglary arrests in 2011 were juvenile arrests, compared with onethird in 2000. 

Larceny-theft 

 With few exceptions, the juvenile larceny-theft arrest rate declined 

annually over the past two decades, falling 55% since the mid-1990s. 

Following 3 years of decline (down 20% since 2008), in 2011 the 

juvenile arrest rate for larceny-theft was at its lowest level in more 

than three decades and 6% below the previous low point in 2006. 

 In 2011, three-fourths (76%) of all juvenile arrests for Property 

Crime Index offenses were for larceny-theft. As such, juvenile 

Property Crime Index arrest trends largely reflect the pattern of 

larceny-theft arrests (which is dominated by shoplifting—the most 

common larceny-theft offense). 

Motor vehicle theft 

 After reaching a peak in 1989, the juvenile arrest rate for motor 

vehicle theft declined annually for more than 20 years. By 2011, 

the rate was 88% below the 1989 peak. 

 This large decline in motor vehicle arrests was greater for juveniles 

than adults. For both groups, motor vehicle arrests reached a peak 

in 1989; since that time, the number of juvenile arrests for motor 

vehicle theft declined 85%, while adult arrests decreased 61%. 

 In 2011, most (80%) juvenile arrests for motor vehicle theft involved 

youth ages 15–17. 

Arson 

 The pattern of stability, growth, and decline in the juvenile arrest rate 

for arson was similar in magnitude and character to the trend in juvenile violent crime arrest rates. After years of stability, the juvenile 

arrest rate for arson increased more than 50% between 1987 and 

1994 before falling 59% between 1994 and 2011. 

 Arson is the criminal act with the largest proportion of juvenile 

arrestees—42% in 2011—and most juvenile arrests (57%) involved 

youth younger than 15. In comparison, the juvenile proportion for 

larceny-theft was 20%, and 28% of those involved youth younger 

than 15. 

Data source: Analysis of arrest data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics and population data from the U.S. Census Bureau. (See arrest rate data source note on page 11 for 

details.) 

800 

700 

500 

600 

400 

100 

200 

300 

0 

81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 07 09 11 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10−17 

Burglary 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10−17 

1,800 

1,600 

1,400 

1,200 

1,000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 07 09 11 

Year 

Larceny-theft 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10−17 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

Motor vehicle theft 

81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 07 09 11 

Year 

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10−17 

35 

30 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

Arson 

81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 07 09 11 

Year 

December 2013 9 
In nine states, juvenile arrest rates for both violent 

and property crime were above the U.S. average 

Among states with at least minimally adequate reporting (above 74%), those with high juvenile violent crime 

arrest rates in 2011 were Delaware, Florida, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee 

Arrests of juveniles under age 18 Arrests of juveniles under age 18 

per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17, 2011 per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17, 2011 2011 2011 

Reporting Violent Property Reporting Violent Property 

population Crime Crime Drug population Crime Crime Drug 

State coverage Index Index abuse Weapon State coverage Index Index abuse Weapon 

U.S. total 83% 210 1,030 444 82 Missouri 94% 194 1,366 538 61 

Alabama 2 0 1,074 305 11 Montana 90 101 1,586 448 16 

Alaska 99 239 1,268 434 36 Nebraska 90 109 1,914 737 65 

Arizona 95 155 1,301 733 39 Nevada 89 250 1,264 690 88 

Arkansas 74 136 1,017 283 46 New Hampshire 78 80 760 544 7 

California 99 262 809 296 143 New Jersey 99 214 619 504 101 

Colorado 91 117 1,257 665 83 New Mexico 95 203 1,515 658 77 

Connecticut 98 158 708 292 47 New York 47 181 1,013 453 39 

Delaware 100 389 1,287 530 96 North Carolina 96 183 1,081 350 152 

District of Columbia 0 NA NA NA NA North Dakota 94 72 1,579 559 33 

Florida 100 311 1,406 546 56 Ohio 74 112 668 242 48 

Georgia 94 173 1,016 298 78 Oklahoma 92 141 1,099 351 55 

Hawaii 0 NA NA NA NA Oregon 95 119 1,361 820 56 

Idaho 94 80 1,353 566 52 Pennsylvania 93 347 853 390 101 

Illinois 22 757 1,599 1,461 291 Rhode Island 83 134 861 451 109 

Indiana 76 214 1,233 419 58 South Carolina 90 170 985 480 98 

Iowa 88 192 1,540 395 43 South Dakota 83 80 1,551 900 37 

Kansas 70 113 903 412 36 Tennessee 95 305 1,025 431 93 

Kentucky 94 93 642 208 26 Texas 93 127 894 477 34 

Louisiana 53 523 1,325 448 97 Utah 44 98 1,424 606 65 

Maine 100 57 1,114 400 31 Vermont 73 79 456 207 18 

Maryland 83 400 1,519 855 158 Virginia 99 107 745 328 47 

Massachusetts 91 225 376 85 33 Washington 57 170 1,305 548 85 

Michigan 89 158 798 293 56 West Virginia 81 56 330 129 20 

Minnesota 100 151 1,407 552 89 Wisconsin 93 252 1,831 648 166 

Mississippi 56 112 1,127 308 55 Wyoming 96 88 1,381 1,025 67 

NA = Arrest counts were not available for the District of Columbia or Hawaii in the FBI’s Crime in the United States 2011. 

Notes: Arrest rates for jurisdictions with less than complete reporting may not be representative of the entire state. Although juvenile arrest rates may largely 

reflect juvenile behavior, many other factors can affect the magnitude of these rates. Arrest rates are calculated by dividing the number of youth arrests made in the year 

by the number of youth living in the jurisdiction. Therefore, jurisdictions that arrest a relatively large number of nonresident juveniles would have a higher arrest rate than 

jurisdictions where resident youth behave similarly. Jurisdictions (especially small ones) that are vacation destinations or that are centers for economic activity in a 

region may have arrest rates that reflect the behavior of nonresident youth more than that of resident youth. Other factors that influence arrest rates in a given area 

include the attitudes of citizens toward crime, the policies of local law enforcement agencies, and the policies of other components of the justice system. In many areas, 

not all law enforcement agencies report their arrest data to the FBI. Rates for such areas are necessarily based on partial information and may not be accurate. 

Comparisons of juvenile arrest rates across jurisdictions can be informative. Because of factors noted, however, comparisons should be made with caution. 

Data source: Analysis of arrest data from Crime in the United States 2011 (Washington, DC: Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2012) tables 5 and 69, and population data 

from the National Center for Health Statistics’ Postcensal Estimates of the Resident Population of the United States for July 1, 2010–July 1, 2012, by Year, County, 

Single-Year of Age (0, 1, 2, . . . , 85 Years and Over), Bridged Race, Hispanic Origin, and Sex (Vintage 2012) [machine-readable data files available online at www.cdc. 

gov/nchs/nvss/bridged_race.htm, as of 6/13/13]. 

10 National Report Series Bulletin 
Notes
 

Arrest rate data source 

Analysis of arrest data from Snyder, H., 

and Mulako-Wantota, J., Bureau of Justice 

Statistics, Arrest Data Analysis Tool 

[available online at www.bjs.gov/index. 

cfm?ty=datool&surl=/arrests/index.cfm, 

retrieved 6/3/13]; population data for 

1980–1989 from the U.S. Census Bureau, 

U.S. Pop u la tion Es ti mates by Age, Sex, 

Race, and His pan ic Origin: 1980 to 1999 

[machine-readable data files available online, re leased 4/11/00]; 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, Single-Year of Age, 

Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin [machinereadable data files available online at 

www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/bridged_race. 

htm, released 7/26/04]; population data 

for 2000–2009 from the National Center 

for Health Statistics (prepared under a 

collaborative arrangement with the U.S. 

Census Bureau), Intercensal Estimates 

of the Resident Population of the United 

States for July 1, 2000–July 1, 2009, 

by Year, County, Single-Year of Age (0, 

1, 2, . . . , 85 Years and Over), Bridged 

Race, Hispanic Origin, and Sex [machinereadable data files available online at 

www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/bridged_race. 

htm, as of 10/26/12, following release by 

the U.S. Census Bureau of the revised 

unbridged intercensal estimates by 5-year 

age group on 10/9/12]; and population 

data for 2010–2011 from the National 

Center for Health Statistics (prepared 

under a collaborative arrangement with 

the U.S. Census Bureau), Postcensal Estimates of the Resident Population of the 

United States for July 1, 2010–July 1, 

2012, by Year, County, Single-Year of Age 

(0, 1, 2, . . . , 85 Years and Over), Bridged 

Race, Hispanic Origin, and Sex (Vintage 

2012) [machine-readable data files available online at www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/ 

bridged_race.htm, as of 6/13/13, following release by the U.S. Census Bureau of 

the unbridged vintage 2011 postcensal 

estimates by 5-year age group on 6/13/13]. 

Data coverage 

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 2011 for offense definitions.) The proportion of the U.S. population covered by these reporting agencies 

ranged from 72% to 86% between 1980 

and 2011, with 2011 coverage of 80%. 

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 

Visit OJJDP’s Statistical 

Briefing Book for more 

information on juvenile arrests 

OJJDP’s online Statistical Briefing 

Book (SBB) offers access to a wealth 

of information about juvenile crime 

and victimization and about youth involved in the juvenile justice system. 

Visit the “Law Enforcement and Juvenile Crime” section of the SBB at 

ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/crime/faqs.asp for 

more information about juvenile arrest rate trends detailed by offense, 

gender, and race, including a spreadsheet of all juvenile arrest rates used 

in this bulletin. 

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. 

The reporting coverage for the total United 

States (83%) in the table on page 10 includes all states reporting arrests of persons younger than age 18. This is greater 

than the coverage in the rest of the bulletin (80%) for various reasons. For example, a state may provide arrest counts of 

persons younger than age 18 but not provide the age detail required to support 

other subpopulation estimates. 

December 2013 11 
National Report Series Bulletin NCJ 244476 

Acknowledgments 

This bulletin was written by Charles 

Puzzanchera, Senior Research 

Associate, with assistance from Melissa 

Sickmund, Ph.D., Director, at the 

National Center for Juvenile Justice, 

with funds provided by OJJDP to support the National Juvenile Justice Data 

Analysis Project. 

This bulletin was prepared under cooperative 

agreement number 2010–MU–FX–K058 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 Pro grams, which also includes the 

Bu reau of Jus tice As sis tance; the Bu reau of 

Jus tice Sta tis tics; the National In sti tute of 

Justice; the Office for Victims of Crime; and 

the Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, 

Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and 

Tracking. 

U.S. Department of Justice 

Office of Justice Programs 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention 

Washington, DC 20531 

Official Business 

Penalty for Private Use $300 

*NCJ~244476* PRESORTED STANDARD
 

POSTAGE & FEES PAID
 

DOJ/OJJDP
 

PERMIT NO. G–91