U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

..

.
,I' •

. .. .
, .
}

"

.""

".

" .

•

"""

Jeff Slowikowski, Acting Administrator

Office of Justice Programs

December 2009

Innovation • Partnerships • Safer Neighborhoods 	

Juvenile Arrests 2008
Charles Puzzanchera
In 2008, law enforcement agencies in the
United States made an estimated 2.11 mil­
lion arrests of persons younger than age
18.* Overall, there were 3% fewer juvenile
arrests in 2008 than in 2007, and juvenile
violent crime arrests fell 2%, continuing a
recent decline. Juvenile arrest rates, par­
ticularly Violent Crime Index rates, had in­
creased in 2005 and again in 2006 amid
fears that the Nation was on the brink of
another juvenile crime wave. These latest
data show increases in some offense cate­
gories but declines in most—with most
changes being less than 10% in either
direction.
These findings are drawn from data that
local law enforcement agencies across the
country report to the FBI’s Uniform Crime
Reporting (UCR) Program. Based on these
data, the FBI prepares its annual Crime in
the United States statistical compilation,
which summarizes crimes known to the
police and arrests made during the report­
ing calendar year. This information is used
to describe the extent and nature of juve­
nile crime that comes to the attention of
the justice system. Other recent findings
from the UCR Program include the
following:

* Throughout this Bulletin, youth younger than
age 18 are referred to as juveniles. See Notes on
page 12.

X	 Juveniles accounted for 16% of all vio­
lent crime arrests and 26% of all prop­
erty crime arrests in 2008.
X	 Juveniles were involved in 12% of all
violent crimes cleared in 2008 and 18%
of property crimes cleared.
X	 In 2008, 11% (1,740) of all murder vic­
tims were younger than age 18. More
than one-third (38%) of all juvenile
murder victims were younger than age
5, but this proportion varied widely
across demographic groups.
X	 The juvenile murder arrest rate in 2008
was 3.8 arrests per 100,000 juveniles
ages 10 through 17. This was 17% more
than the 2004 low of 3.3, but 74% less
than the 1993 peak of 14.4.
X	 Between 1999 and 2008, juvenile arrests
for aggravated assault decreased more
for males than for females (22% vs.
17%). During this period, juvenile male
arrests for simple assault declined 6%
and female arrests increased 12%.
X	 In 2008, although black youth account­
ed for just 16% of the youth population
ages 10–17, they were involved in 52%
of juvenile Violent Crime Index arrests
and 33% of juvenile Property Crime
Index arrests.
X	 The 2008 arrest rates for Violent Crime
Index offenses were substantially lower
than the rates in the 1994 peak year for
every age group younger than 40.

Access OJJDP publications online at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ojjdp

www.ojp.usdoj.gov

A Message From OJJDP
By summarizing juvenile crime data
from the FBI report Crime in the
United States 2008, this Bulletin can
serve as a benchmark for juvenile
justice professionals and other concerned citizens seeking to assess
America’s progress in reducing juvenile delinquency.
As detailed in these pages, the latest data reflect such progress, with
a 3% decline in overall juvenile
arrests from 2007 to 2008 and a 2%
decrease in juvenile arrests for violent offenses over the same period.
Similar positive trends are evidenced
across most offense categories for
both male and female and white and
minority youth, in effect reversing
the modest increases in juvenile
arrests reported for 2005 and 2006.
Nevertheless, although such trends
are encouraging, they should not
provide a pretext for a misplaced
sense of complacency.
One area that merits continued
attention is the persistently disproportionate rate of minority contact
with the juvenile justice system. The
arrest rate for robbery in 2008, for
example, was 10 times higher for
black youth than for white.
It is OJJDP’s hope that the information provided in this Bulletin will
guide our efforts to address such
disparities and to prevent and combat juvenile delinquency for the sake
of our children and our Nation.

What do arrest statistics
count?
To interpret the material in this Bulletin
properly, the reader needs a clear understanding of what these 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 counts 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 flow into the justice system.

made an estimated 40,000 arrests of
young people for weapons law violations
in 2008, it means that a weapons law
violation was the most serious charge in
these 40,000 arrests. An unknown number of additional arrests in 2008 included
a weapons charge as a lesser offense.

Arrest statistics also have limitations in
measuring the volume of arrests for a
particular offense. Under the UCR Program, the FBI requires law enforcement
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

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. For those interested in juvenile justice issues, the FBI
also reports the proportion of clearances
that involved only offenders younger than
age 18. This statistic is a better indicator
of the proportion of crime that this age
group commits than is the proportion of
arrests, although there are some concerns that even the clearance statistic
overestimates the proportion of crimes
committed by juveniles.

The juvenile proportion of arrests exceeded the juvenile proportion of
crimes cleared (or “closed”) by arrest in each offense category, reflecting
that juveniles are more likely than adults to commit crimes in groups and
to be arrested
12%

Violent Crime Index

16%
18%

Property Crime Index

What do clearance
statistics count?

26%
5%

Murder

10%
12%
15%
16%

Forcible rape
Robbery

27%
11%
13%
16%

Aggravated assault
Burglary

27%
19%

Larceny-theft

26%
16%

Motor vehicle theft

25%
38%

Arson

47%

0%

10%

20%
30%
40%
Percent involving juveniles
Clearance

50%

60%

Arrest

Data source: Crime in the United States 2008 (Washington, DC: Federal Bureau of Investigation,
2009), tables 28 and 38.

2

Research has shown that juvenile
offenders are more easily apprehended
than adult offenders; thus, the juvenile
proportion of clearances probably overestimates juveniles’ responsibility for
crime. To add to the difficulty in interpreting clearance statistics, 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.

In 2008, about 1 in 10
(1,740) murder victims
was a juvenile
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 16,270 murders were reported to law enforcement agencies in 2008,
or 5.4 murders for every 100,000 U.S. residents. The murder rate was essentially
constant between 1999 (the year with the
fewest murders in the last three decades)
and 2008. Prior to 1999, the last year in
which the U.S. murder rate was less than
6.0 was 1966.
Of all murder victims in 2008, 89% (or
14,530 victims) were 18 years old or older.
The other 1,740 murder victims were
younger than age 18 (i.e., juveniles). The
number of juveniles murdered in 2008 was
4% more than the average number of juveniles murdered in the prior 5-year period
and 39% less than the peak year of 1993,
when an estimated 2,880 juveniles were
murdered. During the same prior 5-year
period, the estimated number of adult
murder victims fell 33%.
Of all juveniles murdered in 2008, 38%
were younger than age 5, 70% were male,
and 50% were white. Of all juveniles mur­
dered in 2008, 30% of male victims, 57% of
female victims, 44% of white victims, and
30% of black victims were younger than
age 5.
In 2008, 67% of all murder victims were
killed with a firearm. Adults were more
likely to be killed with a firearm (69%)
than were juveniles (50%). However, the
involvement of a firearm depended greatly
on the age of the juvenile victim. In 2008,
17% of murdered juveniles younger than
age 13 were killed with a firearm, compared with 80% of murdered juveniles age
13 or older. The most common method of
murdering children younger than age 5
was by physical assault: in 47% of these
murders, the offenders’ only weapons
were their hands and/or feet, compared
with only 2% of juvenile victims age 13 or
older and 4% of adult victims. In 2008,
knives or other cutting instruments were
used in 8% of juvenile murders and 14% of
adult murders.

The 2.11 million arrests of juveniles in 2008 was 16% fewer than the
number of arrests in 1999

Most Serious Offense
Total
Violent Crime Index
Murder and nonnegligent
manslaughter
Forcible rape
Robbery
Aggravated assault
Property Crime Index
Burglary
Larceny-theft
Motor vehicle theft
Arson
Nonindex
Other assaults
Forgery and counterfeiting
Fraud
Embezzlement

Stolen property (buying,

receiving, possessing)
Vandalism
Weapons (carrying,
possessing, etc.)
Prostitution and
commercialized vice
Sex offense (except forcible
rape and prostitution)
Drug abuse violations
Gambling
Offenses against the
family and children
Driving under the influence
Liquor laws
Drunkenness
Disorderly conduct
Vagrancy
All other offenses
(except traffic)
Suspicion (not included
in totals)
Curfew and loitering
Runaways

Percent of Total
2008
Juvenile Arrests
Estimated
Number of
Younger
Juvenile Arrests Female Than 15

Percent Change
1999– 2004– 2007–
2008
2008
2008

30%
17

27%
27

–16%
–9

1,280
3,340
35,350
56,000
439,600
84,100
324,100
24,900
6,600

7
2
9
24
36
12
44
16
12

8
34
20
31
29
29
29
20
56

–9
–27
25
–21
–20
–14
–17
–50
–24

19
–21
46
–9
–2
4
0
–33
–16

–5
–2
2
–4
5
3
8
–17
–8

231,700
2,600
7,600
1,300

34
33
35
43

37
12
16
3

0
–64
–18
–31

–5
–48
0
19

–3
–15
3
–19

20,900
107,300

19
13

23
40

–23
–8

–10
3

–6
–4

40,000

10

31

–2

–4

–7

1,500

76

11

20

–14

–1

14,500
180,100
1,700

10
15
2

47
15
14

–18
–7
–51

–22
–5
–12

–5
–7
–19

5,900
16,000
131,800
15,400
187,600
4,000

36
24
38
24
33
29

28
2
9
11
36
29

–38
–27
–22
–24
2
–29

–14
–19
1
–3
–7
–3

–2
–14
–7
–8
–5
6

363,000

26

23

–19

–3

–3

300
133,100
109,200

22
31
56

24
26
32

–86
–27
–33

–74
5
–12

–29
–7
–5

2,111,200
96,000

–4%
5

–3%
–2

X In 2008, there were an estimated 324,100 juvenile arrests for larceny-theft.
Between 1999 and 2008, the number of such arrests fell by 17%.
X Of the four offenses that make up the Violent Crime Index, only juvenile arrests
for robbery increased in 2007–2008 (up 2%).
X In 2008, females accounted for 17% of juvenile Violent Crime Index arrests, 36%
of juvenile Property Crime Index arrests, and 44% of juvenile larceny-theft arrests.
X Youth younger than age 15 accounted for more than one-fourth of all juvenile arrests for Violent Crime Index offenses and Property Crime Index offenses in 2008
(27% and 29%, respectively).
Note: Detail may not add to totals because of rounding.
Data source: Crime in the United States 2008 (Washington, DC: Federal Bureau of
Investigation, 2009), tables 29, 32, 34, 36, 38, and 40. Arrest estimates were developed by
the National Center for Juvenile Justice.

3

One in eight violent
crimes was attributed
to juveniles

violent crime arrests in 2008 was less
than any year in the 1990s, and just 3%
greater than the average annual number
of such arrests between 2001 and 2007.

The relative responsibility of juveniles
and adults for crime is difficult to deter­
mine. Law enforcement agencies are more
likely to clear (or “close”) crimes that ju­
veniles commit than those that adults
commit. Thus, law enforcement records
may overestimate juvenile responsibility
for crime.

The number of juvenile arrests in 2008 for
forcible rape was less than in any year
since at least 1980, and the number of ju­
venile aggravated assault arrests in 2008
was less than in any year since 1988. In
contrast, after also falling to a relatively
low level in 2004, juvenile arrests for mur­
der increased each year from 2005 to
2007, then declined 5% in 2008. However,
juvenile arrests for robbery increased
more than 46% since 2004.

Data on crimes cleared or closed by ar­
rest or exceptional means show that the
proportion of violent crimes cleared and
attributed to juveniles has been rather
constant in recent years, holding at 12%
over the past 10 years. Specifically, the
proportions of both forcible rapes and ag­
gravated assaults attributed to juveniles
fluctuated between 11% and 12% over this
period, while the proportion of murders
ranged between 5% and 6% and the pro­
portion of robberies ranged between 14%
and 16%.
In 2008, 18% of Property Crime Index of­
fenses cleared by arrest or exceptional
means were cleared by the arrest of a ju­
venile. This was the same as the level in
2007 and 1 percentage point less than the
level in 2006; the level in 2007 and 2008
was the lowest since at least the mid­
1960s. For comparison, the proportion of
Property Crime Index offenses that law
enforcement attributed to juveniles was
28% in 1980 and 22% in both 1990 and
2000.

Juvenile arrests for
violence declined
between 2006 and 2008
The FBI assesses trends in violent crimes
by monitoring four offenses that law en­
forcement agencies nationwide consis­
tently 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, then declined in each of the next
2 years. Given that the number of arrests
in 2004 was less than in any year since
1987, the number of juvenile Violent
Crime Index arrests in 2008 was still rela­
tively low. In fact, the number of juvenile

Between 1999 and 2008, the number of ar­
rests in most offense categories declined
more for juveniles than for adults:

Percent Change
in Arrests
1999–2008
Juvenile Adult

Most Serious
Offense
Violent Crime Index
Murder
Forcible rape
Robbery
Aggravated assault
Property Crime Index
Burglary
Larceny-theft
Motor vehicle theft
Simple assault
Weapons law violations
Drug abuse violations

–9%
–9
–27
25
–21
–20
–14
–17
–50
0
–2
–7

Data source: Crime in the United States 2008,
table 32.

In 2008, juveniles were involved in 1 in 10 arrests for murder and
about 1 in 4 arrests for robbery, burglary, larceny-theft, and motor
vehicle theft
Total
Violent Crime Index
Property Crime Index

15%
16%
26%

Arson
Vandalism
Disorderly conduct
Robbery
Burglary
Larceny-theft
Motor vehicle theft
Weapons
Liquor laws
Stolen property
Sex offense
Other assaults
Forcible rape
Aggravated assault
Drug abuse violations
Murder
Offenses against the family
Fraud
Drunkenness
Prostitution
Driving under the influence

47%
38%
27%
27%
27%
26%
25%
22%
21%
19%
18%
18%
15%
13%
11%
10%
5%
3%
3%
2%
1%
0%

10%
20%
30%
40%
Percent of arrests involving juveniles

Data source: Crime in the United States 2008 (Washington, DC: Federal Bureau of
Investigation, 2009), table 38.

4

–4%
–5
–18
19
–8
12
19
13
–13
4
8
15

50%

Juvenile property
crime arrests increased
in 2008—for the second
consecutive year
As with violent crime, the FBI assesses
trends in the volume of property crimes
by monitoring four offenses that law en­
forcement agencies nationwide consistent­
ly 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 ju­
venile violent crime arrests increased sub­
stantially, juvenile property crime arrests
remained relatively constant. After this
long period of relative stability, juvenile
property crime arrests began to fall. Be­
tween 1994 and 2006, the number of juve­
nile Property Crime Index arrests fell by
half to their lowest level since at least the
1970s. However, the number of juvenile
arrests for property crimes increased in
each of the past 2 years—for the first time
since 1993–1994. This increase was a re­
sult of growth in the number of juvenile
arrests for larceny-theft, which rose 8%
each year from 2006 to 2008. Juvenile ar­
rests for motor vehicle theft and arson
reached historic lows in 2008, while ar­
rests for burglary rose 3% since 2007.

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 arrest­
ed persons younger than age 18 and un­
der the original jurisdiction of their State’s
juvenile justice system, the FBI’s UCR Pro­
gram 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 2008, 22% of arrests involving youth
who were eligible in their State for pro­
cessing in the juvenile justice system were
handled within law enforcement agencies
and the youth were released, 66% were
referred to juvenile court, and 10% were
referred directly to criminal court. The
others were referred to a welfare agency
or to another police agency. In 2008, the
proportion of juvenile arrests sent to juve­
nile court in cities with a population of
more than 250,000 (66%) was similar to
that in smaller cities (68%).

The juvenile Violent Crime Index arrest rate fell for the second
consecutive year and is down 5% since 2006
Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
600
500

Violent Crime Index
400
300
200
100
0
80

82

84

86

88

90

92

94 96
Year

98

00

02

04

06

08

X The juvenile Violent Crime Index arrest rate reached a historic low in 2004, down
49% from its 1994 peak. This decade-long decline was followed by a 12% increase over the next 2 years, and then a 5% decline between 2006 and 2008.
Data source: Analysis of arrest data from the FBI and population data from the U.S. Census
Bureau and the National Center for Health Statistics. [See data source note on p. 12 for detail.]

After years of decline, the juvenile arrest rate for Property Crime Index
offenses increased 9% between 2006 and 2008
Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
3,000
2,500
2,000

Property Crime Index
1,500
1,000
500
0
80

82

84

86

88

90

92

94 96
Year

98

00

02

04

06

08

X Despite the recent increase, the 2008 juvenile Property Crime Index arrest rate
was 49% less than the 1991 peak. The large declines over the past decade in the
two arrest indexes that have traditionally been used to monitor juvenile crime indicate a substantial reduction in the law-violating behavior of America’s youth over
this period.
Data source: Analysis of arrest data from the FBI and population data from the U.S. Census
Bureau and the National Center for Health Statistics. [See data source note on p. 12 for detail.]

5

In 2008, the juvenile arrest rates for murder, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault each remained well
below their peak levels of the 1990s
Murder

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
16

X From the mid-1980s to the peak in 1993, the juvenile arrest
rate for murder more than doubled.

14
12

X Then, the juvenile arrest rate for murder declined through the
mid-2000s, reaching a level in 2004 that was 77% less than
the 1993 peak.

Murder

10
8
6

X The growth in the juvenile murder arrest rate that began in
2004 was interrupted in 2008 as the rate fell 6% over the past
year, resting at a level that was 74% below its 1993 peak.

4
2
0
80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

Forcible Rape

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
25

X Following the general pattern of other assaultive offenses, the
juvenile arrest rate for forcible rape increased from the early
1980s through the early 1990s and then fell substantially.

20

Forcible rape
15

X Over the 1980–2008 period, the juvenile arrest rate for forcible
rape peaked in 1991, 44% more than its 1980 level.

10

X With few exceptions, the juvenile arrest rate for forcible rape
dropped annually from 1991 through 2008. By 1999, it had returned to its 1980 level. By 2008, the rate had reached its lowest level since at least 1980 and 57% less than its 1991 peak.

5
0

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

Robbery

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
200

X In contrast with the juvenile arrest rates for other violent
crimes, the rate for robbery declined through much of the
1980s, reaching a low point in 1988. Then, like the violent
crime arrest rate in general, by the mid-1990s the juvenile robbery arrest rate grew to a point greater than the 1980 level.

175
150

Robbery

125
100

X The juvenile robbery arrest rate declined substantially (62%)
between 1995 and 2002. Since 2002, however, the arrest rate
rose again, so that by 2008 the rate was 44% greater than its
low point in 2002 but still 46% less than its 1995 peak.

75
50
25
0

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
300

Aggravated Assault
X The juvenile arrest rate for aggravated assault doubled between 1980 and 1994 and then fell substantially and consistently through 2004, down 39% from its 1994 peak.

250
200

Aggravated assault

X This pattern of decline was briefly interrupted, as the juvenile
aggravated assault arrest rate increased 2% between 2004
and 2006. By 2008, however, the rate declined 8%, reaching
its lowest point since the late 1980s.

150
100
50
0

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

Data source: Analysis of arrest data from the FBI and population data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the National Center for Health Statistics. [See
data source note on p. 12 for detail.]

6

The four offenses that make up the Property Crime Index show very different juvenile arrest rate patterns over
the 1980–2008 period
Burglary

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
800

X Unique in the set of Property Crime Index offenses, the juvenile arrest rate for burglary declined almost consistently and
fell substantially between 1980 and 2008, down 68%.

700
600

Burglary

500

X This large fall in juvenile burglary arrests from 1980 through
2008 was not replicated in the adult statistics. For example,
between 1999 and 2008, the number of juvenile burglary arrests fell 14%, while adult burglary arrests increased 19%. In
1980, 45% of all burglary arrests were arrests of a juvenile; in
2008, reflecting the greater decline in juvenile arrests, just
27% of burglary arrests were juvenile arrests.

400
300
200
100
0

Larceny-Theft

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
1,750

X The juvenile arrest rate for larceny-theft remained essentially
constant between 1980 and 1997, then fell 47% between
1997 and 2006, reaching its lowest point since 1980. This decline reversed in 2007, as the juvenile arrest rate for larcenytheft increased 17% in the past 2 years.

1,500

Larceny-theft

1,250
1,000
750

X In 2008, 74% of all juvenile arrests for Property Crime Index
offenses were for larceny-theft. Thus, juvenile Property Crime
Index arrest trends largely reflect the pattern of larceny-theft
arrests (which itself is dominated by shoplifting—the most
common larceny-theft offense).

500
250
0

Motor Vehicle Theft

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
350

X The juvenile arrest rate for motor vehicle theft more than doubled between 1983 and 1990, up 137%.

300
250

X After the peak years of 1990 and 1991, the juvenile arrest rate
for motor vehicle theft declined steadily through 2008, falling
78%. In 2008, the juvenile arrest rate for motor vehicle theft
was less than in any year in the 1980–2008 period.

200

Motor vehicle theft

150

X This large decline in juvenile arrests was not replicated in the
adult statistics. Between 1999 and 2008, the number of juvenile motor vehicle theft arrests fell 50%, while adult motor vehicle theft arrests decreased just 13%.

100
50
0

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

Arson

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
35

X After being relatively stable for most of the 1980s, the juvenile
arrest rate for arson grew 33% between 1990 and 1994.

30
25

X The juvenile arrest rate for arson declined substantially between 1994 and 2008, falling 46%.

Arson

20
15

X Following a 19% decline between 2006 and 2008, the juvenile
arrest rate for arson in 2008 reached its lowest point since
1980.

10
5
0

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

Data source: Analysis of arrest data from the FBI and population data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the National Center for Health Statistics. [See
data source note on p. 12 for detail.]

7

Although arrest trends by gender were similar for robbery, recent
trends showed greater declines for males in other offenses
Robbery
Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
400

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
40

300

30

Male

200
100
0

Female

20
10

Female
80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

0

Aggravated assault
Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
120

400

100
80

300

Female

60
200

0

40

Female

100

20
80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

0

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

Other (simple) assault
Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
1,200

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
600

1,000

500

800

Male

400

600
400
200
0

200
100

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

0

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

Drug abuse violations
Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
1,400
1,200
1,000
Male
800
600
400
Female
200
0
80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
250
200

Female
150
100
50
0

Most Serious
Offense
Violent Crime Index
Robbery
Aggravated assault
Simple assault
Property Crime Index
Burglary
Larceny-theft
Motor vehicle theft
Vandalism
Weapons
Drug abuse violations
Liquor law violations
DUI
Disorderly conduct

Percent Change in
Juvenile Arrests
1999–2008
Female
Male
–10%
38
–17
12
1
–3
4
–52
3
–1
–2
–6
7
18

–8%
24
–22
–6
–28
–16
–29
–50
–9
–3
–8
–29
–34
–5

Data source: Crime in the United States 2008,
table 33.

Female

300

Female

Law enforcement agencies made 629,800
arrests of females younger than age 18 in
2008. From 1999 through 2008, arrests of
juvenile females decreased less than male
arrests in most offense categories (e.g.,
aggravated assault and burglary); in some
categories (e.g., simple assault, larcenytheft, and DUI), female arrests increased
while male arrests decreased.

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
500

Male

In 2008, females
accounted for 30%
of juvenile arrests

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

X Juvenile male and female robbery arrest rates both decreased through the late
1980s and climbed to a peak in the mid-1990s; by 2002, both had fallen to their
lowest level since at least 1980. Following these declines, the rates for both
groups increased through 2008 (43% for males and 51% for females).
X The juvenile female arrest rate for aggravated assault did not decline after its
1990s peak as much as did the male rate. As a result, in 2008, the juvenile male
arrest rate was just 4% more than its 1980 level, while the female rate was 80%
more than its 1980 rate. Similarly, while the male arrest rate for simple assault
nearly doubled between 1980 and 2008, the female rate more than tripled.
Data source: Analysis of arrest data from the FBI and population data from the U.S. Census
Bureau and the National Center for Health Statistics. [See data source note on p. 12 for detail.]

8

Gender differences also occurred in the
assault arrest trends for adults. Between
1999 and 2008, adult male arrests for ag­
gravated assault fell 10%, while female ar­
rests fell less than 1%. Similarly, adult
male arrests for simple assault stayed the
same between 1999 and 2008, while adult
female arrests rose 17%. Therefore, the fe­
male proportion of arrests grew for both
types of assault. It is likely that the dis­
proportionate 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 in­
volving females in other offense categories
for both juveniles and adults. Between
1999 and 2008, the number of larcenytheft arrests of juvenile females grew 4%
while juvenile male arrests declined 29%,
and adult female arrests grew more than
adult male arrests (29% and 4%, respec­
tively). For Property Crime Index offenses,
juvenile arrests declined more for males
than females between 1999 and 2008, and
adult arrests increased less for males
(5%) than for females (29%).

Juvenile arrests
disproportionately
involved minorities
The racial composition of the U.S. juvenile
population ages 10–17 in 2008 was 78%
white, 16% black, 5% Asian/Pacific Island­
er, and 1% American Indian. Most juve­
niles of Hispanic ethnicity were included
in the white racial category. Of all juvenile
arrests for violent crimes in 2008, 47% in­
volved white youth, 52% involved black
youth, 1% involved Asian youth, and 1%
involved American Indian youth. For prop­
erty crime arrests, the proportions were
65% white youth, 33% 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 2008
Murder
58%
Forcible rape
37
Robbery
67
Aggravated assault
42
Simple assault
39
Burglary
35
Larceny-theft
31
Motor vehicle theft
45
Weapons
38
Drug abuse violations
27
Vandalism
19
Liquor laws
6
Data source: Crime in the United States 2008,
table 43.

Arrest rate trends from 1980 through 2008 were similar across racial
groups; the differences were in the volume of arrests
Murder
Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
60
50
40

Black

30
20

White

10
0

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

Robbery
Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
800

In the 1980s, the Violent Crime Index arrest rate for black juveniles was between 6
and 7 times the white rate. This ratio declined during the 1990s, holding at 4 to 1
from 1999 to 2004. Since 2004, the racial
disparity in the rates increased, reaching
5 to 1. This increase resulted from an
increase in the black rate (24%) and a
decline in the white rate (3%). More specifically, the aggravated assault arrest rate
increased 4% for black juveniles while the
white rate declined 9%, and the robbery
rate increased more for black (56%) than
for white juveniles (30%).

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
100

White

80

600

Black

Asian

60

400
40
200
0

Amer. Indian

20

White
80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

0

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

Aggravated assault
Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
1,000
800
600

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
250

Amer. Indian

200

Black

White

150

400

100

White

200
0

The Violent Crime Index arrest rate (i.e.,
arrests per 100,000 juveniles in the racial
group) in 2008 for black juveniles (926)
was about 5 times the rate for white juveniles (178), 6 times the rate for American
Indian juveniles (153), and 13 times the
rate for Asian juveniles (71). For Property
Crime Index arrests, the rate for black juveniles (2,689) was more than double the
rates for white juveniles (1,131) and American Indian juveniles (1,104) and nearly 6
times the rate for Asian juveniles (471).

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
7
6
5
White
4
3
2
1
0
80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

Asian

50

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

0

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

Property Crime Index
Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
5,000

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
3,000

4,000

2,500

Black
3,000

2,000

Amer. Indian
White

1,500
2,000

White

1,000

1,000

500

0

0
80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

Asian

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

X The white juvenile murder rate in 2008 was near its lowest level since at least
1980, having fallen 69% since its 1993 peak. The black rate in 2008 was well below (76%) its 1993 peak, despite a 40% increase since 2004.
X After peaking in the mid-1990s, robbery and aggravated assault arrest rates fell
substantially for all four racial groups.
X From 1994 through 2008, the Property Crime Index arrest rates dropped dramatically for juveniles in all racial groups—declining 42% or more.
Note: Murder rates for American Indian youth and Asian youth are not presented because the
small number of arrests and small population sizes produce unstable rate trends.
Data source: Analysis of arrest data from the FBI and population data from the U.S. Census
Bureau and the National Center for Health Statistics. [See data source note on p. 12 for detail.]

9

The decline in the juvenile arrest rate for weapons
law violations between 2006 and 2008 broke the
trend of increasing rates that began in 2003

After a period of substantial growth during the
1990s, the juvenile arrest rate for drug abuse
violations declined after 1997
Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
800

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
250

700
200

600

Weapons

Drug abuse

500

150

400
100

300
200

50

100
0

0

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

X Between 1980 and 1993, the juvenile arrest rate for weapons law violations increased more than 140%. Then the
rate fell substantially, so that by 2002 the rate was just
14% more than the 1980 level.

X Between 1990 and 1997, the juvenile arrest rate for drug
abuse violations increased 145%. The rate declined 28%
between 1997 and 2008, but the 2008 rate was 78%
more than the 1990 rate.

X However, between 2002 and 2006, the juvenile weapons
arrest rate grew 35%, then fell 16% through 2008. As a result, the rate in 2008 was 30% more than the 1980 level
and 47% less than its 1993 peak. Between 2006 and 2008,
the rate declined more for females (19%) than for males
(15%), and more for whites (15%) than for blacks (11%).

X Over the 1980–2008 period, the juvenile drug arrest rate
for whites peaked in 1997 and then held relatively constant through 2008 (down 13%). In contrast, the rate for
blacks peaked in 1995, then fell 49% by 2002. Despite a
recent increase—23% between 2002 and 2007—the rate
fell 13% in 2008 and was 45% less than the 1995 peak.

The juvenile arrest rate for simple assault declined
slightly for the second consecutive year—down 7%
since 2006

Between the 1994 peak and 2008, arrest rates for
Violent Crime Index offenses fell substantially for
every age group younger than 40

Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10–17
800

Violent Crime Index arrests per 100,000 population
1,200

700

1,000

600
500

Other (simple) assault

1994

800

400

600

300

400

2008

200
200

100
0

0
80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08
Year

X The juvenile arrest rate for simple assault increased 156%
between 1980 and 1997, declined slightly through 2002, then
rose slightly through 2006. Following the decline over the
past 2 years, the 2008 rate was 10% below the 1997 peak.

10

15

20

25

30

35 40
Age

45

50

55

60

65

X Juveniles showed the largest decline in Violent Crime Index arrest rates between 1994 and 2008—falling 40% or
more in each age group from 10 through 17.
X Between 1994 and 2008, the Violent Crime Index arrest
rates for 18-year-olds fell 37% and the rates for persons
age 19–39 fell more than 30% for each age group.

X Unlike the trend for simple assault, the juvenile aggravated
assault arrest rate declined steadily since the mid-1990s,
falling 43% between 1994 and 2008.

X Over the 1994–2008 period, the Violent Crime Index arrest rates for persons age 45–64 changed little.

X The 2008 juvenile arrest rate for simple assault was substantially greater than the 1980 rate for most racial groups.

Data source: Analysis of arrest data from the FBI and population data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the National Center for Health Statistics.
[See data source note on p. 12 for detail.]

10

State variations in juvenile arrest rates may reflect differences in juvenile law-violating behavior, police
behavior, and/or community standards; therefore, comparisons should be made with caution

State

2008 Juvenile Arrest Rate*
Violent Property
Reporting Crime Crime
Drug
Coverge Index
Index
Abuse Weapons

State

2008 Juvenile Arrest Rate*
Violent Property
Reporting Crime Crime
Drug
Coverage Index
Index
Abuse Weapons

United States
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona

82%†
81
97
99

306
176
272
228

1,398
924
1,655
1,558

560
242
340
762

121
47
42
76

Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada

94%
96
92
98

274
112
139
337

1,928
1,831
2,013
1,724

566
305
657
618

121
21
112
159

Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut

84
99
88
92

180
414
199
337

1,460
1,153
1,853
1,163

365
523
763
456

62
196
123
90

New
New
New
New

78
96
73
47

84
332
278
260

771
925
1,537
1,141

580
642
580
536

12
158
133
60

100
0
100
62

630
NA
471
278

1,778
NA
2,062
1,343

774
NA
731
465

169
NA
104
198

North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma

72
91
60
100

305
117
160
202

1,615
2,107
1,088
1,335

458
477
360
479

197
70
79
83

Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana

89
94
23
73

264
136
1,066
290

1,405
1,764
1,850
1,734

375
468
1,843
460

22
101
334
57

Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina

96
97
100
98

192
426
186
192

1,914
1,106
1,097
784

614
486
397
388

87
119
129
94

Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana

92
68
15
56

252
163
402
603

1,792
1,109
2,182
1,564

396
472
729
580

52
59
84
116

South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah

78
80
96
87

79
318
181
122

1,640
1,348
1,182
2,125

590
574
566
563

83
115
61
120

100
99
90
87

66
608
333
225

1,622
2,073
578
1,067

428
1,272
358
337

35
226
45
85

Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia

82
97
73
61

91
142
248
72

569
865
1,760
577

274
351
507
204

29
72
126
25

97
45

208
145

1,884
1,483

511
454

145
124

Wisconsin
Wyoming

98
99

279
132

2,588
1,977

780
910

238
83

Delaware
Dist. of Columbia
Florida
Georgia

Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi

Hampshire
Jersey
Mexico
York

* Throughout this Bulletin, juvenile arrest rates are calculated by dividing the number of arrests of persons ages 10–17 by the number of persons
ages 10–17 in the population. In this table only, arrest rate is defined as the number of arrests of persons younger than age 18 for every 100,000
persons ages 10–17. Juvenile arrests (arrests of youth younger than age 18) reported at the State level in Crime in the United States cannot be
disaggregated into more detailed age categories so that the arrest of persons younger than age 10 can be excluded in the rate calculation.
Therefore, there is a slight inconsistency in this table between the age range for the arrests (birth through age 17) and the age range for the population (ages 10–17) that are the basis of a State’s juvenile arrest rates. This inconsistency is slight because just 1% of all juvenile arrests involved
youth younger than age 10. This inconsistency is preferable to the distortion of arrest rates that would be introduced were the population base for
the arrest rate to incorporate the large volume of children younger than age 10 in a State’s population.
† The reporting coverage for the total United States in this table (82%) includes all States reporting arrests of persons younger than age 18. This is
greater than the coverage in the rest of the Bulletin (76%) 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 presentations in Crime in the United States 2008.
NA = Crime in the United States 2008 reported no arrest counts for the District of Columbia.
Interpretation cautions: Arrest rates are calculated by dividing the number of youth arrests made in the year by the number of youth living in
reporting jurisdictions. While juvenile arrest rates in part reflect juvenile behavior, many other factors can affect the size of these rates. For example,
jurisdictions that arrest a relatively large number of nonresident juveniles would have higher arrest rates than jurisdictions where resident youth
behave in an identical manner. Therefore, jurisdictions that are vacation destinations or regional centers for economic activity may have arrest rates
that reflect more than the behavior of their resident youth. Other factors that influence the magnitude of arrest rates in a given area include the attitudes of its citizens toward crime, the policies of the jurisdiction’s law enforcement agencies, and the policies of other components of the justice
system. Consequently, comparisons of juvenile arrest rates across States, while informative, should be made with caution. In most States,
not all law enforcement agencies report their arrest data to the FBI. Rates for these States are necessarily based on partial information. If the
reporting law enforcement agencies in these States are not representative of the entire State, then the rates will be biased. Therefore, reported
arrest rates for States with less than complete reporting coverage may not be accurate.
Data source: Analysis of arrest data from the FBI’s Crime in the United States 2008 (Washington, DC: Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2009),
tables 5 and 69, and population data from the National Center for Health Statistics’ Estimates of the July 1, 2000–July 1, 2008, United States
Resident Population From the Vintage 2008 Postcensal Series by Year, County, Age, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin [machine-readable data files
available online at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/bridged_race.htm, released 9/2/2009].

11

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

PRESORTED STANDARD

POSTAGE & FEES PAID

DOJ/OJJDP

PERMIT NO. G–91


Washington, DC 20531
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300

Bulletin

Data source note
Analysis of arrest data from unpublished FBI
reports for 1980 through 1997, from Crime in
the United States reports for 1998 through
2003 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government
Printing Office, 1999 through 2004, respective­
ly) and from Crime in the United States reports
for 2004 through 2008, which are available
online at www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm#cius,
released September 2009; population data
for 1980–1989 from the U.S. Census Bureau,
U.S. Population Estimates by Age, Sex, Race,
and Hispanic Origin: 1980 to 1999 [machine­
readable data files available online, released
April 11, 2000]; 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 Popu­
lation by County, Single-year of Age, Sex, Race,
and Hispanic Origin [machine-readable data
files available online at www.cdc.gov/nchs/
nvss/bridged_race.htm, released July 26, 2004];
and population data for 2000–2008 from the
National Center for Health Statistics (pre­
pared under a collaborative arrangement
with the U.S. Census Bureau), Estimates of the
July 1, 2000–July 1, 2008, United States Resi­
dent Population From the Vintage 2008 Post­
censal Series by Year, County, Age, Sex, Race,
and Hispanic Origin [machine-readable data

NCJ 228479
files available online at www.cdc.gov/nchs/
nvss/bridged_race.htm, released September
2, 2009].

Notes
In this Bulletin, “juvenile” refers to persons
younger than age 18. This definition is at
odds with the legal definition of juveniles in
2008 in 13 States—10 States where all 17­
year-olds are defined as adults and 3 States
where all 16- and 17-year-olds are defined as
adults.
FBI arrest data in this Bulletin are counts of
arrests detailed by age of arrestee and of­
fense categories from all law enforcement
agencies that reported complete data for
the calendar year. (See Crime in the United
States for offense definitions.) The propor­
tion of the U.S. population covered by these
reporting agencies ranged from 63% to 94%
between 1980 and 2008, with 2008 coverage of
76%.
Estimates of the number of persons in each
age group in the reporting agencies’ resi­
dent populations assume that the resident
population age profiles are like the Nation’s.
Reporting agencies’ total 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.

Additional juvenile arrest statistics are available online:
www.ojjdp.ncjrs.gov/ojstatbb/crime/JAR.asp

Acknowledgments
This Bulletin was written by Charles
Puzzanchera, Senior Research Associate, with assistance from Melissa
Sickmund, Ph.D., Chief of Systems
Research, and Ben Adams, Research
Assistant, 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 2008–JF–FX–K071 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 Programs, which also includes the
Bureau of Justice Assistance; the Bureau of
Justice Statistics; the Community Capacity
Development Office; the National Institute of
Justice; the Office for Victims of Crime; and the
Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring,
Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking
(SMART).