1 Deterrence in Criminal Justice Evaluating Certainty vs. Severity of Punishment Valerie Wright, Ph.D. November 2010
2 For further information: The Sentencing Project 1705 DeSales St., NW 8 th Floor Washington, D.C (202) This report was written by Valerie Wright, Ph.D., Research Analyst at The Sentencing Project. The Sentencing Project is a national non-profit organization engaged in research and advocacy on criminal justice policy issues. Copyright 2010 by The Sentencing Project. Reproduction of this document in full or part in print or electronic format only by permission of The Sentencing Project.
3 DETERRENCE IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE EVALUATING CERTAINTY VERSUS SEVERITY OF PUNISHMENT 1 O ver the past several decades state and federal incarceration rates have increased dramatically. As a consequence of more punitive laws and harsher sentencing policies 2.3 million people are incarcerated in the nation s prisons and jails, and the U.S. leads the world in its rate of incarceration. Sentencing systems and incarceration traditionally have a variety of goals, which include incapacitation, punishment, deterrence and rehabilitation. In recent decades, sentencing policy initiatives have often been enacted with the goal of enhancing the deterrent effect of the criminal justice system. Under the rubric of getting tough on crime, policies such as mandatory minimums, truth in sentencing, and three strikes and you re out have been designed to deter with the threat of imposing substantial terms of imprisonment for felony convictions. While the criminal justice system as a whole provides some deterrent effect, a key question for policy development regards whether enhanced sanctions or an enhanced possibility of being apprehended provide any additional deterrent benefits. Research to date generally indicates that increases in the certainty of punishment, as opposed to the severity of punishment, are more likely to produce deterrent benefits. This briefing paper provides an overview of criminological research on these relative impacts as a guide to inform future policy consideration.
4 DETERRENCE IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE EVALUATING CERTAINTY VERSUS SEVERITY OF PUNISHMENT 2 CONCEPTUALIZING DETERRENCE In broad terms punishment may be expected to affect deterrence in one of two ways. First, by increasing the certainty of punishment, potential offenders may be deterred by the risk of apprehension. For example, if there is an increase in the number of state troopers patrolling highways on a holiday weekend, some drivers may reduce their speed in order to avoid receiving a ticket. Second, the severity of punishment may influence behavior if potential offenders weigh the consequences of their actions and conclude that the risks of punishment are too severe. This is part of the logic behind three strikes, and truth in sentencing policies, to utilize the threat of very severe sentences in order to deter some persons from engaging in criminal behavior. One problem with deterrence theory is that it assumes that human beings are rational actors who consider the consequences of their behavior before deciding to commit a crime; however, this is often not the case. For example, half of all state prisoners were under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time of their offense. 1 Therefore, it is unlikely that such persons are deterred by either the certainty or severity of punishment because of their temporarily impaired capacity to consider the pros and cons of their actions. Another means of understanding why deterrence is more limited than often assumed can be seen by considering the dynamics of the criminal justice system. If there was 100% certainty of being apprehended for committing a crime, few people would do so. But since most crimes, including serious ones, do not result in an arrest and conviction, the overall deterrent effect of the certainty of punishment is substantially reduced. Clearly, enhancing the severity of punishment will have little impact on people who do not believe they will be apprehended for their actions. 1 Christopher Mumola. Substance Abuse and Treatment, State and Federal Prisoners, Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report, 1999.
5 DETERRENCE IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE EVALUATING CERTAINTY VERSUS SEVERITY OF PUNISHMENT 3 Economists often come to different conclusions than criminologists on the value of harsher sentences in reducing crime. While criminologists tend to regard various legal threats as the result of a complex and unpredictable process, economists approach the issue along the lines of a rational choice perspective that considers the risk and benefits of engaging in crime; sanctions merely represent the expected price of engaging in criminal behavior. In critiquing this perspective, Michael Tonry, a leading scholar on crime and punishment, contends that Such research is incapable of taking into account whether and to what extent purported policy changes are implemented, whether and to what extent their adoption or implementation is perceived by would-be offenders, and whether and to what extent offenders are susceptible to influence by perceived changes in legal threats. At the very least, macro-level research on deterrent effects should test the null hypothesis of no effect rather than the price theory assumption that offenders behavior will change in response to changes in legal threats. 2 Another problem in assessing deterrence is that in order for sanctions to deter, potential offenders must be aware of sanction risks and consequences before they commit an offense. In this regard, research illustrates that the general public tends to underestimate the severity of sanctions generally imposed. 3, 4 This is not surprising given that members of the public are often unaware of the specifics of sentencing policies. Potential offenders are also unlikely to be aware of modifications to sentencing policies, thus diminishing any deterrent effect. The absence of such data on awareness of punishment risks makes it difficult to draw conclusions regarding the deterrent effects of sanction levels and prospects. Below we explore these outcomes in greater detail. 2 Michael Tonry. Learning from the Limitations of Deterrence Research in Crime and Justice: A Review of Research edited by Michael Tonry. The University of Chicago Press, Kirk R. Williams, Jack P. Gibbs, and Maynard L. Erickson, Public Knowledge of Statutory Penalties: The Extent and Basis of Accurate Perception, Pacific Sociological Review, 23(1), Andrew von Hirsch, Anthony Bottoms, Elizabeth Burney, and P-O. Wikstrom, Criminal Deterrence and Sentence Severity: An Analysis of Recent Research, Oxford: Hart Publishing, 1999.
6 DETERRENCE IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE EVALUATING CERTAINTY VERSUS SEVERITY OF PUNISHMENT 4 CERTAINTY VS. SEVERITY OF PUNISHMENT Criminological research over several decades and in various nations generally concludes that enhancing the certainty of punishment produces a stronger deterrent effect than increasing the severity of punishment. Key findings in this regard include the following: The Institute of Criminology at Cambridge University was commissioned by the British Home Office to conduct a review of research on major studies of deterrence. Their 1999 report concluded that the studies reviewed do not provide a basis for inferring that increasing the severity of sentences generally is capable of enhancing deterrent effects. 5 In addition, in reviewing macrolevel studies that examine offense rates of a specific population, the researchers found than an increased likelihood (certainty) of apprehension and punishment was associated with declining crime rates. 6 Daniel Nagin and Greg Pogarsky, leading scholars on deterrence, conclude that punishment certainty is far more consistently found to deter crime than punishment severity, and the extra-legal consequences of crime seem at least as great a deterrent as the legal consequences. 7 Similar findings are observed in micro-level studies on deterrence that assess the likelihood of individuals engaging in crime. People who perceive that sanctions are more certain tend to be less likely to engage in criminal activity. Scenario-based research using self-reports that examine the effect of certainty of punishment on individual behavior has shown that as the perceptions of the risk of arrest for petty 5 Ibid. 6 Ibid. 7 Daniel Nagin and Greg Pogarsky. Integrating Celerity, Impulsivity, and Extralegal Sanction Threats into a Model of General Deterrence: Theory and Evidence, Criminology, 39(4), 2001.
7 DETERRENCE IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE EVALUATING CERTAINTY VERSUS SEVERITY OF PUNISHMENT 5 theft, drunk driving, and tax evasion increases, individuals report they would be less likely to offend. Researchers have also compared the relative importance of both certainty and severity as dimensions of punishment. In a 2001 study published in the journal Criminology, researchers utilized a sample of college students to assess the likelihood of drinking and driving. The authors found that the certainty of punishment was a more robust predictor of deterrence than severity. Increasing the probability of apprehension by 10% was predicted to reduce the likelihood of drunk driving by 3.5%, while the effect of severity eroded when the effects of certainty and severity were combined. 8 In another study, researchers compared crime and punishment trends in the U.S., England, and Sweden, and failed to find an effect for severity. 9 The statistical associations were weak and even when there was a negative relationship between severity of punishment and crime rates, the findings were not strong enough to achieve statistical significance. This finding is noteworthy because it reflected varying degrees of punitiveness in the sentencing policies of the three nations. While most studies suggest that certainty of punishment is related to reductions in crime rates, some researchers speculate that increasing the likelihood of arrest and/or incarceration for both serious and minor offenses could cause sanctions, particularly imprisonment, to be viewed as less stigmatizing. 10 Nagin also emphasizes that sanctions have the potential to erode the deterrent effects of a policy because as he states, [f]or an event to be stigmatizing it must be relatively uncommon Ibid. 9 David Farrington, Paul Langan, Per-Olof H. Wikstrom. Changes in Crime and Punishment in America, England and Sweden between the 1980s and the 1990s, Studies in Crime Prevention, 3: , Paul J. Hirschfield, The Declining Significance of Delinquent Labels in Disadvantaged Urban Communities, Sociological Forum, 23(3), Daniel S. Nagin, Criminal Deterrence Research at the Outset of the Twenty-First Century, In Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, edited by Michael Tonry. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998.
8 DETERRENCE IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE EVALUATING CERTAINTY VERSUS SEVERITY OF PUNISHMENT 6 MORE SEVERE SENTENCES FAIL TO ENHANCE PUBLIC SAFETY The logic behind supporting harsher sentences is simple: locking up people for longer periods of time should enhance public safety. From this view, putting people in prison for years or even decades should prevent offenders from re-offending by incapacitating them and/or deterring would-be-offenders from committing crimes. However, contrary to deterrence ideology and get tough rhetoric, the bulk of research on the deterrent effects of harsher sentences fails to support these assertions. 12 A series of studies have examined the public safety effects of imposing longer periods of imprisonment. 13, 14, 15 Ideally, from a deterrence perspective, the more severe the imposed sentence, the less likely offenders should be to re-offend. A 1999 study tested this assumption in a meta-analysis reviewing 50 studies dating back to 1958 involving a total of 336,052 offenders with various offenses and criminal histories. Controlling for risk factors such as criminal history and substance abuse, the authors assessed the relationship between length of time in prison and recidivism, and found that longer prison sentences were associated with a three percent increase in recidivism. Offenders who spent an average of 30 months in prison had a recidivism rate of 29%, compared to a 26% rate among prisoners serving an average sentence of 12.9 months. The authors also assessed the impact of serving a prison sentence versus receiving a community-based sanction. Similarly, being incarcerated versus 12 Anthony Doob and Cheryl Webster, Sentence Severity and Crime: Accepting the Null Hypotheses, Crime and Justice, 30: , Paul Gendreau, T. Little, and Claire Goggin, A Meta-Analysis of Adult Offender Recidivism: What Works! Criminology, 34(3): , Martin A. Levin, Policy Evaluation and Recidivism, Law and Society Review, 6(1):17-46, Lin Song and Roxanne Lieb, Recidivism: The Effect of Incarceration and Length of Time Served, Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute of Public Policy, 1993
9 DETERRENCE IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE EVALUATING CERTAINTY VERSUS SEVERITY OF PUNISHMENT 7 remaining in the community was associated with a seven percent increase in recidivism. 16 Researchers also find an increased likelihood that lower-risk offenders will be more negatively affected by incarceration. 17 Among low-risk offenders, those who spent less time in prison were 4% less likely to recidivate than low-risk offenders who served longer sentences. 18 Thus, when prison sentences are relatively short, offenders are more likely to maintain their ties to family, employers, and their community, all of which promote successful reentry into society. Conversely, when prisoners serve longer sentences they are more likely to become institutionalized, lose pro-social contacts in the community, and become removed from legitimate opportunities, all of which promote recidivism. 19 The Bureau of Justice Statistics has reported on a nationally representative sample of prisoners assessing the impact of time served in prison on recidivism rates. Researchers found that recidivism rates did not vary substantially whether prisoners were released anywhere in the range of six months to five years. While recidivism rates were high in general, they fluctuated in the range of 62-68%, and did not decline significantly for those spending more time in prison. 20 Furthermore, findings from a natural experiment investigating how prisoners respond to the manipulation of prison sentences show that reduced sentences may reduce recidivism rates. The Collective Clemency Bill passed by the Italian Parliament in July 2006 allowed for a three-year sentence reduction for persons who committed their offense prior to May 16 Paul Gendreau, Claire Goggin, and Francis T. Cullen, The Effects of Prison Sentences on Recidivism, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Public Works and Government Services Canada, Ibid. 18 Supra, note Thomas Orsagh and Jong-Rong Chen, The Effect of Time Served on Recidivism: An Interdisciplinary Theory, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 4(2): , Patrick Langan and David Levin. Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 1994, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2002.
10 DETERRENCE IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE EVALUATING CERTAINTY VERSUS SEVERITY OF PUNISHMENT 8 2, The authors of the study concluded that the sentence commutations significantly reduced the likelihood of recidivating. 22 ECONOMIC COSTS OF MORE SEVERE SENTENCES Fiscal crises and a growing emphasis on using evidence-based practices has caused many policymakers to call into question the practicality of current sentencing policies and the overreliance on incarceration. Incarceration is an expensive sanction and sentencing people to longer prison terms has resulted in valuable resources being devoured. It is estimated that federal, state, and local governments are spending $68 billion annually. 23 A recent economic analysis estimates that reducing the number of incarcerated non-violent offenders by half could save taxpayers $16.9 billion annually without putting public safety at risk. 24 Non-violent drug offenders comprise a substantial percentage of the prison population and many studies have suggested that this number could be reduced if more treatment alternatives were available. While there are costs associated with treatment, research indicates that they tend to be far lower than the costs associated with lengthy terms of incarceration that show little evidence of deterring future offenses. For example, a recent study showed that spending on drug treatment in community-based programs versus incarceration yields a higher return on the investment while at the same time improving the life outcomes of drug users. The study concluded that a dollar spent on treatment in prison yields about six dollars of 21 The Collective Clemency Bill (2006) states that if a former inmate commits a crime within five years following his release from prison, he or she will be required to serve the remaining sentence suspended by the pardon in addition to the sentence given for the new crime. 22 Fancesco Drago, Roberto Galbiati, and Pietro Vertova, The Deterrent Effects of Prison: Evidence from a Natural Experiment, Journal of Political Economy, 117(2): John Schmitt, Kris Warner, and Sarika Gupta. The High Budgetary Cost of Incarceration, Center for Economic and Policy Research, Ibid.
11 DETERRENCE IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE EVALUATING CERTAINTY VERSUS SEVERITY OF PUNISHMENT 9 savings, but a dollar investment in community-based treatment yields nearly $20 in costs savings. 25 CONCLUSION Existing evidence does not support any significant public safety benefit of the practice of increasing the severity of sentences by imposing longer prison terms. In fact, research findings imply that increasingly lengthy prison terms are counterproductive. Overall, the evidence indicates that the deterrent effect of lengthy prison sentences would not be substantially diminished if punishments were reduced from their current levels. Thus, policies such as California s Three Strikes law or mandatory minimums that increase imprisonment not only burden state budgets, but also fail to enhance public safety. As a result, such policies are not justifiable based on their ability to deter. Based upon the existing evidence, both crime and imprisonment can be simultaneously reduced if policy-makers reconsider their overreliance on severitybased policies such as long prison sentences. Instead, an evidence-based approach would entail increasing the certainty of punishment by improving the likelihood that criminal behavior would be detected. Such an approach would also free up resources devoted to incarceration and allow for increased initiatives of prevention and treatment. 25 Steve Aos, Marna Miller, and Elizabeth Drake, Evidence-Based Public Policy Options to Reduce Future Prison Construction, Criminal Justice Costs, and Crime Rates, Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2006.
Issue Brief Project PUBLIC SAFETY NamePERFORMANCE PROJECT Risk/Needs Assessment 101: Science Reveals New Tools to Manage Offenders Every day, criminal justice officials make decisions that have enormous
Does Imprisonment Reduce Recidivism Rate? - A Focus on Drug Offenders by Joseph Chan Introduction In a press release by Singapore s Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) on February 2012, it was reported that
2009 Florida Prison Recidivism Study Releases From 2001 to 2008 May 2010 Florida Department of Corrections Walter A. McNeil, Secretary Bureau of Research and Data Analysis email@example.com
The Facts on Drugs and Crime in America Our nation s prison population has exploded beyond capacity. 1 1 in 100 U.S. citizens is now confined in jail or prison. The U.S. incarcerates more people per capita
Washington State Institute for Public Policy 110 Fifth Avenue SE, Suite 214 PO Box 40999 Olympia, WA 98504-0999 (360) 586-2677 FAX (360) 586-2793 www.wsipp.wa.gov THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IN WASHINGTON
BRIEF I Setting the Stage: Juvenile Justice History, Statistics, and Practices in the United States and North Carolina Ann Brewster Most states juvenile justice systems have two main goals: increased public
Issue Brief Project Public Safety NamePerformance Project The Impact of Arizona s Probation Reforms An analysis of trends in Arizona s prison system in 2008 estimated that the inmate population would increase
EOPS Grantee Tools Implementing a Reentry Program According to Best Practices Report prepared by: Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety Research and Policy Analysis Division March 2007 This document
CENTER ON JUVENILE AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE JUNE 2007 www.cjcj.org Crime Rates and Youth Incarceration in Texas and California Compared: Public Safety or Public Waste? By Mike Males PhD, Christina Stahlkopf
SENTENCING REFORM FOR NONVIOLENT OFFENSES: BENEFITS AND ESTIMATED SAVINGS FOR ILLINOIS LISE MCKEAN, PH.D. SUSAN K. SHAPIRO CENTER FOR IMPACT RESEARCH OCTOBER 2004 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS PROJECT FUNDER Chicago
Statement of The Sentencing Project To the Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on The Constitution, Civil Rights and Human Rights Hearing on The State of Civil and Human Rights in the United States
Incarcerated Parents and Their Children Trends 1991-2007 February 2009 For further information: The Sentencing Project 514 Tenth St. NW Suite 1000 Washington, D.C. 20004 (202) 628-0871 www.sentencingproject.org
g b agerstein bocian agne strategies To: Interested Parties From: GBA Strategies Date: October 11, 2011 Youth Justice System Survey An estimated 250,000 youth are tried, sentenced, or incarcerated as adults
Reducing Recidivism: Stopping the Trend of Criminal Relapse in America Joseph Rosansky Sabiduria, vol. 2.1 Reducing Recidivism 1 The corrections system in the United States has come under serious scrutiny
The Effect of Prison Populations on Crime Rates Revisiting Steven Levitt s Conclusions Nathan Shekita Department of Economics Pomona College Abstract: To examine the impact of changes in prisoner populations
Action Items for Oklahoma Criminal Justice Increase Safety and Savings with Smart on Crime Reforms This is the second of a seven part series by Oklahoma Policy Institute to propose public policy action
State Spending for Corrections: Long-Term Trends and Recent Criminal Justice Policy Reforms September 11, 2013 Overview State spending for corrections has risen steadily over the last three decades, outpacing
Tough and Smart: Opportunities for Kansas Policymakers to Reduce Crime and Spending Dr. Tony Fabelo, Senior Research Consultant Marshall Clement, Policy Analyst Overview Tough and Smart Criminal Justice
T H E M I N N E S O T A C O U N T Y A T T O R N E Y S A S S O C I A T I O N Minnesota County Attorneys Association Policy Positions on Drug Control and Enforcement Adopted: September 17, 2004 Introduction
Women in the Criminal Justice System Briefing Sheets May 2007 WOMEN IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM: AN OVERVIEW During the last 20 years, there has been a profound change in the manner in which women are
2012 Party Platforms On Criminal Justice Policy September 2012 1 2012 PARTY PLATFORMS ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE POLICY THE SENTENCING PROJECT The Washington Post recently reported that the gulf between Republicans
Trends in U.S. Corrections 1,600,000 U.S. State and Federal Prison Population, 1925-2014 2014: 1,508,636 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 1925 1930 1934 1938 1942 1946 1950
AB 109 is DANGEROUS Governor Brown signed AB 109 the Criminal Justice Realignment Bill into law on April 5, 2011. Governor Brown stated in his signing message on AB 109 - "For too long, the state s prison
Testimony of The Legal Aid Society at a public hearing on The Rockefeller Drug Laws 35 Years Later Presented to: Assembly Standing Committee on Codes Assembly Standing Committee on the Judiciary Assembly
Justice Reinvestment State Brief: Texas This brief is part of a series for state policymakers interested in learning how particular states across the country have employed a data-driven strategy called
Brief to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice, Human Rights, Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness 39 th Parliament Regarding Bill C-10 Act to amend the Criminal Code (Minimum penalties
Potential for Change: Public Attitudes and Policy Preferences for Juvenile Justice Systems Reform Executive Summary: Washington A Center for Children s Law and Policy Report Introduction New polling data
Mandatory Supervision: The Benefits of Evidence Based Supervision under Public Safety Realignment State prison and probation are two ends of the response continuum traditionally available to judges who
Working Paper UNLOCKING THE POTENTIAL OF REENTRY AND REINTEGRATION Alan Rosenthal, J.D. Elaine Wolf, Ph.D. Center for Community Alternatives Justice Strategies 115 E. Jefferson Street, Suite 300 Syracuse,
Submission to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario Standing Committee on Public Accounts regarding Special Report on Accountability and Value for Money (2000) Provincial Auditor of Ontario 3.04 The Ministry
11 MS. SCHLANGER: We're going to hear 12 next from Michael Jacobson, who is the Director of the 13 Vera Institute of Justice, which is obviously the 14 sponsoring organization for this Commission. Before
Prepared by: Bexar County Court at Law No. 1 Adult Drug Court Program Drug Courts presentation Presiding Judge: Honorable Al Alonso Session Objectives: As a result of this session, you will be able to:
House Proposal of Amendment S. 292 An act relating to term probation, the right to bail, medical care of inmates, and a reduction in the number of nonviolent prisoners, probationers, and detainees. The
1 PRISONER REENTRY THE STATE OF PUBLIC OPINION Introduction While national public opinion has been measured on many aspects of the criminal justice system, attitudes on prisoner reentry issues have been
State Policy Implementation Project CIVIL CITATIONS FOR MINOR OFFENSES Explosive growth in the number of misdemeanor cases has placed a significant burden on local and state court systems. Throughout the
Criminal Justice 101 The Criminal Justice System in Colorado and the Impact on Individuals with Mental Illness April 2009 Acronyms DOC = Department of Corrections DYC = Division of Youth Corrections DCJ
Correctional and Sentencing Reform for Drug Offenders Research Findings on Selected Key Issues September 2009 Roger K. Przybylski RKC Group Lakewood, Colorado Correctional and Sentencing Reform for Drug
Snapshot of National Organizations Policy Statements on Youth in the Adult Criminal Justice System A n estimated 250,000 youth are prosecuted in the adult criminal justice system every year, and nearly
Criminal Justice Policy Workgroup: Background Information 1 Criminal Justice Vision Statement This vision statement was created using the data from our needs assessment, as well as the information presented
Mission The Mission of OJP is to increase public safety and improve the fair administration of justice across America through innovative leadership and programs. OJP strives to make the nation s criminal
Removal of Youth in the Adult Criminal Justice System: A State Trends Update Rebecca Gasca on behalf of Campaign for Youth Justice Juvenile Court founded in 1899 to create a separate justice system for
Methodology for ACLU-WA Marijuana Law Enforcement Costs Data Visualization 1 I. Criminal Justice Data Sources and Formatting for Visualization The criminal justice data used in this visualization are all
Sentencing for Impaired Driving 1. Sentencing on Impaired Driving Causing Death or Bodily Harm Introduction The principles governing Canadian sentencing law are convoluted. It is often difficult to understand
Options for Policymakers Considering a Justice Reinvestment Initiative in Louisiana Submitted to: National Center for Urban Communities at Tulane and Xavier Universities Council of State Governments Criminal
Analyses of Crime, Community Corrections, and Sentencing Policies Governor Jennifer M. Granholm, Senate Majority Leader Michael D. Bishop, and Speaker of the House Andy Dillon requested intensive technical
TREATMENT COURTS IN NEBRASKA ALTERNATIVES TO INCARCERATION If you are currently facing charges in Nebraska, or have a loved one who is, it is in your best interest to consult with an experienced Nebraska
Meeting the Prime Ministers Crime Reduction Goals- In the Prime Minister s speech to the Auckland Chamber of Commerce, on Better Public Services (15 March ) he identified ten key results within the public
Three Year Recidivism Tracking of Offenders Participating in Substance Abuse Treatment Programs Prepared for the 76 th Texas Legislature, 1999 Criminal Justice Policy Council Tony Fabelo, Ph.D. Executive
February 21, 2013 Promoting Successful Rehabilitation and Reentry of Ex-Drug Offenders Rachel Cooper firstname.lastname@example.org Jeanie Donovan email@example.com To promote the successful rehabilitation and reentry
PARTICIPANTS PAPERS THE MALDIVES CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM AN ALTERNATIVE METHOD FOR PUNISHMENT Haleem Mohamed* I. INTRODUCTION The Maldives legal system is based on the principles of shariah and other legislation,
Drug Policies in the State of Michigan Economic Effects Executive Summary News Walker: Keep reforming drug laws Home» Publications» Drug Policies in the State of Michigan Economic Effects» Drug Policies
September 2012 States Report Reductions in Recidivism In many jurisdictions, state and local government officials have intensified their efforts to reduce recidivism. As policymakers are under tremendous
Effective Reentry Programs This essay appeared as an Editorial Introduction to an article in Criminology and Public Policy (Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2006) that presented the findings of a rigorous evaluation
It s all apples and oranges. January 31, 2012 Nathan Brady OLRGC What is recidivism and what is the impact on the state? How does Utah compare nationally? What is Utah doing to address inmate recidivism
Statistics on Women in the Justice System January, 2014 All material is available though the web site of the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS): http://www.bjs.gov/ unless otherwise cited. Note that correctional
Performance Metrics for Community Corrections February 2015 State of California Board of State and Community Corrections 600 Bercut Drive Sacramento CA 95811 www.bscc.ca.gov Performance Metrics in Community
Report on Adult Drug Court: eligibility, procedure, and funding Prepared for the State of Rhode Island General Assembly revised April 26, 2007 The Council on Crime Prevention: Nathaniel Lepp, Matthew Palevsky,
FEWER PRISONERS, LESS CRIME: A TALE OF THREE STATES Although the pace of criminal justice reform has accelerated at both the federal and state levels in the past decade, current initiatives have had only
Corrections Spending in Colorado: Examining the Effects of Alternatives to Incarceration for Non-Violent Drug Offenders Policy Memorandum University of Denver Institute for Public Policy Studies Timothy
Reentry & Aftercare Reentry & Aftercare Juvenile Justice Guide Book for Legislators Reentry & Aftercare Introduction Every year, approximately 100,000 juveniles are released from juvenile detention facilities
SHAMING AS A TECHNIQUE FOR INFORMATION SECURITY POLICY AND TRAINING ADHERENCE Mark A. Harris University of South Carolina firstname.lastname@example.org ABSTRACT Information security policy and information security
RE-INCARCERATION OF PRISONERS IN ARIZONA: A FOCUS ON DRUG OFFENDERS The re-incarceration of prisoners in Arizona: a Focus on Drug Offenders Submitted to Arizona Criminal Justice Commission By: Dr. Nancy
A Decade of Truth-In- Sentencing in Virginia A decade ago, Virginia abolished parole and adopted truth-in-sentencing for convicted felons. Over 200,000 criminals have been punished under noparole laws.
The Affordable Care Act: Implications for Public Safety and Corrections Populations Susan D. Phillips, Ph.D. September 2012 For further information: The Sentencing Project 1705 DeSales St., NW 8 th Floor
TESTIMONY OF THE LAWYERS COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS UNDER LAW SUBMITTED TO: U.S. SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE OCTOBER 19, 2015 Testimony of the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law Submitted by Kimberly
J U S T I C E P O L I C Y C E N T E R B R I E F The Justice Reinvestment Initiative Experiences from the Local Sites Lindsey Cramer, Samantha Harvell, Dave McClure, Ariel Sankar-Bergmann, and Erika Parks
Re-validation of the Nonviolent Offender Risk Assessment Instrument: Study Update Current Instrument 3 Refined Risk Assessment Instrument: Significant Factors in Assessing Risk Relative Degree of Importance
Standing Committee on Justice, Human Rights, Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Ottawa, November 24, 2005 Speaking Notes Bill C-215: An Act to amend the Criminal Code (consecutive sentence for use
2015 IL App (1st) 133402-U FOURTH DIVISION October 29, 2015 No. 1-13-3402 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances
WHAT IS THE ILLINOIS CENTER OF EXCELLENCE AND HOW DID IT START? MISSION STATEMENT The mission of the Illinois Center of Excellence for Behavioral Health and Justice is to equip communities to appropriately
AS MUCH AS TIMES CHANGE FEDERAL DRUG CHARGES STAY THE SAME A White Paper Presented by Ron Cordova, Attorney-at-Law AN OVERVIEW OF FEDERAL DRUG CRIMES AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF CONVICTION California s stance
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES STAFF ANALYSIS BILL #: HB 307 Driving or Boating Under the Influence SPONSOR(S): Planas TIED BILLS: IDEN./SIM. BILLS: SB 2030 REFERENCE ACTION ANALYST STAFF DIRECTOR 1) Transportation
WHAT WORKS IN CORRECTIONAL INTERVENTION Edward J. Latessa, Ph.D. * I. INTRODUCTION Recent changes in correctional policy have involved decreasing amenities for prisoners, three strike laws, chain gangs,
Offender Screening Oklahoma Department of Mental health and Substance Abuse Services Presenters DR. DAVID WRIGHT, EVALUATION PROJECTS MANAGER NISHA WILSON, STATE DIRECTOR OF SPECIALTY COURTS The Problem
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.