Maryland law provides that young people alleged to have committed delinquent acts should be treated differently than adults. In most cases, DJS receives and processes initial intake complaints involving young people. Citizens, schools, and law enforcement can bring complaints to DJS intake, although law enforcement is by far the largest referral source. In Baltimore during FY 2018, law enforcement agencies (including BPD and the Baltimore City School Police) initiated 75% of all complaints to DJS intake. Sometimes police take youth into custody and bring them directly to the DJS intake office, which is co-located with other juvenile justice agencies at the Baltimore City Juvenile Justice Center. In other cases, youth must attend a meeting with a DJS intake officer at a later time.
Upon receiving a complaint from law enforcement, Maryland law requires that DJS’s intake officers conduct a review of each case to determine whether the court has jurisdiction over the matter and “whether judicial action is in the best interests of the public or the child.” This can include a review of the merits of the complaint, a review of relevant records, and interviews with the young person and the young person’s parent, guardian, or caregiver. The DJS intake officer also completes an intake screening tool, which is part of the Maryland Comprehensive Assessment and Service Planning (MCASP), to inform intake decisions. The tool analyzes several factors, including a young person’s delinquency history, social history, and the most serious alleged offense, to help identify cases recommended for formal action.
Upon completion of this process, the DJS intake officer must make a determination among three options for handling the referral: 1) refuse authorization to file the petition for a lack of legal sufficiency or some other factor; 2) propose an informal adjustment of the complaint, which may include “informal case processing” by DJS and referral to programs such as Restorative Response, Teen Court, or Mountain Manor; or 3) authorize the petition and forward the case to the State’s Attorney’s Office for further processing. For the purposes of this assessment, CCLP regards both refusal to authorize the filing of a petition and informal adjustment as diversionary processes that end or limit involvement with the youth justice system.
During the intake process, DJS must also determine whether a young person c
