Alternative community program lowers juvenile detention numbers

The number of young offenders who face prosecution and need criminal defense in Hennepin County is on the decline because of the county’s alternative community program. The Juvenile Detention Alternative Initiative is responsible for decreasing the number of juvenile offenders in the Hennepin County Juvenile Detention Center (Juvenile Detention Center) by half in comparison to 2006. Officials that work at the Juvenile Detention Center are proud of the new statistic but say there are still goals to work towards regarding the disproportionate number of juvenile detainees who are minorities.

Despite the success in reducing the number of juvenile detainees, 90 percent of the juveniles at the Juvenile Detention Center are minorities. Minorities compose only 30 percent of the population of minors in Hennepin County. The co-chair of the Juvenile Detention Alternative Initiative attributes the success of the program to the logical choice of separating low level juvenile offenders from juveniles who have committed serious offenses. Low-level juvenile offenses include curfew violations, missed court dates and truancy. Another factor in the successful reduction in the number of juvenile offenders has been an overall reduction in juvenile crime.

The juvenile caseload for Minneapolis police decreased by 22 percent over the last two years and the number of felonies committed by juvenile offenders has decreased by 45 percent over the last five years. Ramsey County reports similar trends in its juvenile crime rate and juvenile detainee population. Also, Hennepin County has seen budgetary savings of $1.5 million from the new program.

Those working in the juvenile system in Hennepin County plan to reduce racial disparities in the system. Officials will review the procedural process from arrest to detainment, and officials will also start to ask parents to attend mandatory court dates with their children.

Source: Star Tribune, “Far fewer juveniles in lockup, but still a minority gap,” Abby Simons, 1/26/11

Max Keller has won countless jury trial cases involving misdemeanors and felonies, sex crimes, and DWI’s. He is a member of the Minnesota Society for Criminal Justice, which only allows the top 50 criminal defense attorneys in the state as members. Max is a frequent speaker at CLE’s and is often asked for advice by other defense attorneys across Minnesota.

Years of Experience: Approx. 20 years
Minnesota Registration Status: Active
Bar & Court Admissions: State of Minnesota Minnesota State Court Minnesota Federal Court 8th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals State of Maryland

What to Do If You Have Been Charged with a Criminal Offense

The Surprising Cost of a Guilty Criminal Plea in Minnesota

Defendants in Minnesota may plead guilty or accept deals without understanding the hidden cost of a guilty criminal plea. A guilty criminal plea, regardless of how appealing it appears, can leave you dealing with substantial lifelong consequences. You may skip lengthy trial proceedings and likely get a lenient sentence, but end up with a criminal record. The record can lead to various financial and collateral consequences, including difficulty in securing employment, loss of housing rights, license revocation, and immigration issues.

What You Can Expect at a Pre-Trial Motions Hearing in Minnesota

The pre-trial motions hearing is a court session you attend after your first arraignment. At the hearing, the prosecution and defense appear before a judge to clear several details about the case before trial. These details include pre-trial motions, evidentiary queries, and constitutional matters.

Refusing Arrest vs. Resisting Arrest in Minnesota: What’s the Difference?

Highly publicized incidents of police using excessive force over the past few years have led to people wondering, “What’s the difference between refusing arrest vs. resisting arrest?” Resisting arrest in Minnesota occurs when you use force to prevent a police officer from making a lawful arrest. Refusing an arrest, on the other hand, involves statements or actions that show reluctance to cooperate with an officer’s instructions without using force.