| Despite evidence that punitive measures have little general or specific deterrent effect for juveniles, the United Stated continues to legislate and adopt increasingly punitive juvenile sentencing policies. Stepping back from a cost-effective or recidivism approach to analyzing juvenile sentencing, this dissertation uses Garland's sociology of punishment approach to explore how theoretical approaches to punishment relate to a state's adoption of blended sentencing laws. Further, the analysis explores how young adults serving time on a blended sentence in Minnesota understand the intent, purpose, and effect of this type of sentence on their transition from the institution to the community. The quantitative analysis utilizes a longitudinal national data set (covering 24 years) to evaluate the social, cultural, political, and economic variables that are significantly related to states passage of blended sentencing. The results from the quantitative analysis show a similar economic, political, and demographic landscape for state's that adopt blended sentencing compared to states that use punitive penal measures to deal with adult crime. The qualitative analysis explores interviews with twenty-six young adults serving time on a blended sentence at two time periods: just prior to their release from the facility and three to six months post-release to understand how they manage criminal justice interventions, specifically a blended sentence. The young adults describe blended sentencing as a punitive crime control technique emphasizing surveillance and management, but also emphasize the "second chance" it provides in lieu of certification. In short, the analyses advance criminological theory by situating a recent juvenile justice reform within the broader punishment literature and provide one of the first qualitative analysis of juvenile offenders serving time on a blended sentence. |
