Task Force Releases Report on Juvenile Diversion

A Supreme Court of Ohio task force that reviewed local courts’ diversion of juveniles recommends that courts formalize their practices when redirecting juveniles to intervention services before an initial court appearance, and ensure compliance with victim rights laws. The task force, formed last year, has released its report with 10 recommendations.

Ohio law instructs juvenile courts to rehabilitate youths who become involved in the justice system, while also protecting the public and the rights of victims. Diversion is an informal alternative that redirects youths away from involvement in the juvenile justice system to address root causes of delinquent behavior. Those causes could be food and housing insecurity, joblessness, inadequate educational resources, and unmet mental health needs. Through diversion, juveniles are referred to services to deal with those difficulties. By examining root causes, juveniles are still held accountable for their behavior, but the court imposes no formal legal sanction or confinement.

“[T]he data shows that young people who are formally involved with the juvenile justice system and those who spend time in detention are far more likely to engage in further delinquent or criminal behavior and enter young adulthood at a distinct disadvantage,” the report notes. “[D]iversion increases the likelihood of future academic success, keeps the young person connected to the community, and decreases future justice system involvement.”

Create Local Rule, Written Guidelines for Diversion Processes
Among its recommendations, the Supreme Court Task Force on Juvenile Diversion concludes that courts implementing diversion before a juvenile attends an initial appearance (“pre-initial appearance diversion”) should adopt a local court rule outlining their practices and procedures. Juvenile courts using this type of diversion should develop written guidelines, in consultation with local criminal justice partners, for eligibility and process. A survey of juvenile court judges conducted for the task force indicates that 49% have written criteria for these practices and 35% have written procedures for notifying victims when a juvenile is diverted at this stage.

Developing written guidance promotes fairness and transparency in how these diversion interventions are used, the task force report states. The written guidelines should include:

• Criteria for when pre-initial appearance diversion is appropriate.
• Procedures for accessing and sealing records of pre-initial appearance diversions.
• Procedures for adhering to Marsy’s Law.

To Protect Victim Rights, Document Processes and Train Staff
Marsy’s Law was a constitutional amendment approved by voters in 2017 to guarantee rights to victims of criminal offenses and victims of juvenile delinquent acts. The rights, as codified in state law in 2023, include procedures for juvenile justice entities to follow to protect victim rights.

The task force reviewed local court practices for pre-initial appearance diversion in relation to Marsy’s Law, including looking at examples of victim notification letters and related materials. The task force observed that counties vary in how cases are referred for this type of diversion and whether the prosecutor’s office is involved.

The task force recommends that the written Marsy’s Law guidelines include procedures for notifying the victim, ensuring the victim will have the opportunity to be heard, and determining restitution. In addition, the local procedure should explain which entity is responsible for notifying the victim at each stage of the process.

Along with documenting Marsy’s Law procedures, the task force encourages training for staff on their court’s process for complying with the rights of victims.

Pursue Additional Steps, Such as Gathering Data
In other recommendations, the task force suggests that:

• Juvenile courts should use data to develop their guidelines and should make their diversion statistics publicly available.
• The Supreme Court, in conjunction with the Ohio Department of Youth Services and other appropriate juvenile justice stakeholders, should identify best practices regarding relevant interventions, screening and assessment tools, use of assessment centers and other diversionary tools, and data collection.

The report notes that resource and assessment centers have shown significant, measurable successes. The centers usually offer intake services to identify useful services and interventions for young people and assist in keeping them out of the formal justice system. Services include crisis intervention, life skills programming, mediation, and mentoring. There are 17 resource and assessment centers in Ohio, and five more are in development. The task force encourages the Department of Youth Services and the General Assembly to build on successful practices by continuing to fund programs for both pre-initial appearance diversion and assessment centers.

Task Force Sought Cross-Section of Perspectives
The 21-member task force, chaired by Delaware County Common Pleas Court Judge David Hejmanowski, was comprised of juvenile justice system stakeholders, judges, law enforcement officers, prosecutors, public defenders, legislators, law school professors, and juvenile justice experts.

Judge Hejmanowski, who presides over the court’s juvenile division, notes in the report that balancing the duties of rehabilitating juveniles while also protecting the public and making victims whole is a daily challenge for juvenile courts. But diversion is essential to the effort.

“[T]he question is not whether we should utilize diversion, but how, when, and with what safeguards,” he wrote.

He said the task force members hope the recommendations give courts the tools to utilize diversion in a way to effectively protect the public, make victims whole, and “produce productive adults.”