Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing. Sentencing in Pennsylvania

Transcription

1 Sentencing in Pennsylvania Annual Report 2009

2

3 Sentencing in Pennsylvania Commonwealth Media Services 2009 Annual Report Representative Frank Dermody, Chair Senator Mary Jo White, Vice-Chair

4 009 Brumbaugh Hall The Pennsylvania State University University Park, PA Location 408 Forum Building Capitol Complex Harrisburg, PA PO Box 1200 State College, PA Mailing Address PO Box 1045 Harrisburg, PA Telephone Fax SGS Web Help Desk: (statewide) Sentencing Assistance / Questions (Western Region) or (Eastern Region) Please visit the Commission s web site for more detailed information. URL: Cover Photo Courtesy of Commonwealth Media Services

5 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA 009 Brumbaugh Hall University Park Campus PO Box 1200 State College, PA Phone (814) Fax (814) Forum Building Capitol Complex PO Box 1045 Harrisburg, PA Phone (717) Fax (717) The Honorable Members of the General Assembly of Pennsylvania The Honorable Ronald D. Castille, Chief Justice of Pennsylvania The Honorable Edward G. Rendell, Governor of Pennsylvania The Citizens of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania PENNSYLVANIA COMMISSION ON SENTENCING July 1, 2010 It is with great pleasure that we present the 2009 Annual Report. This report details the work of the Commission and its staff during 2009 and provides a review of sentencing practices and aggregate statewide sentencing data during the same calendar year. A total of 142,221 offenses with corresponding sentences were reported to the Commission by the Courts of Common Pleas through April 30, 2010, representing 98,737 criminal incidents. Sentences for calendar year 2009 reported on or after May 1, 2010 will be included in revised tables to be posted on the Commission s web site in December The Commission is indebted to court officials and practitioners throughout the Commonwealth who contributed their efforts and to the many agencies at both the state and local levels who partner with the Commission. The Commission also appreciates the work of members and staff. It recognizes the contributions of Commission members whose terms ended in 2009: Judge Jeffrey A. Manning, a court appointee from Allegheny County, and Judge Jeannine Turgeon, a court appointee from Dauphin County. During 2009, the Commission undertook numerous projects. It completed its report of the Study on the Use and Impact of Mandatory Minimum Sentences as directed by House Resolution 12 of In accordance with the enactment of Acts 81 and 83 of 2008, the Commission embarked on its new mandate to develop parole guidelines for both state and county paroling authorities, resentencing guidelines, and state recommitment ranges. Six major research projects are underway to examine sentencing policy and practices and the new areas of parole and resentencing. Extensive outreach activities included seminars on sentencing, SGS Web, the corrections and legislative reform packages, and many special presentations. SGS Web was updated to keep pace with changing technology. Data provision and impact analyses provided input on legislative proposals. The Commission worked toward making data sets available on-line for researchers and others so they can access and query aggregate sentencing information. As an agency of the General Assembly, the is charged with the responsibility of serving as a clearinghouse and information center for the collection, preparation, and dissemination of information on Commonwealth sentencing practices, and with assisting courts and agencies in the development, maintenance, and coordination of sound sentencing policies. Pursuant to its new mandate, the Commission s work will expand to include resentencing and parole in the future. We hope that the information contained in this report, as well as that available through our web site ( and from our staff, will be used to promote fairer and more uniform sentencing practices in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Respectfully submitted, Representative Frank Dermody Chair Senator Mary Jo White Vice Chair The is an agency of the General Assembly affiliated with The Pennsylvania State University.

6 Table of Contents PART I: THE COMMISSION AND ITS WORK...1 THE ORGANIZATION... 2 Legislative Mandate...2 Duties of the Commission...2 Legislative Agency Benefiting from University Resources...3 Composition...3 THE PEOPLE... 4 Commissioners...4 Commission Members: 1979 to Staff...6 THE INFRASTRUCTURE... 7 Committees...7 Budget...8 Grants...9 SGS Web...10 Major Highlights THE WORK...12 Commission...12 Commission Meetings...12 Commission Committee Highlights...12 Supporting Criminal Justice Practitioners...13 Seminars...13 Sentencing / SGS Web Assistance...14 Criminal Justice Advisory Boards...15 NASC...15 Courses Taught...15 Journal Publications...15 Annual Villanova Sentencing Workshop...15 Presentations...16 Staff Committee Work...17 Supporting Decision Makers...18 Testimony...18 Legislative Reports...18 Research Bulletin...18 Data and Information...18 Impact of Proposed Legislation...18 Relevant Case Law...19 Legislation Enacted...19 Reform Work...19 Reform Work Groups...20 Research...21 Responding to Initiatives: The Use and Impact of Mandatory Minimum Sentences...23 House Resolution 12 of Advisory Committee...23 Who Receives the Mandatory Sentence?...23 What Factors are Related to Recidivism?...24 Overall Findings...25 Frequency of Mandatory Sentencing and Trends in Sentences Imposed...25 Processing of Mandatory Sentencing Cases...25 Effectiveness of Mandatory Sentencing...26 Policy Implications...27 Recommendations...28 Table of Contents

7 Table of Contents continued PART II: SENTENCING ANALYSIS...29 Introduction to Sentencing Guidelines...30 Sentencing Guidelines...30 Guideline Editions...30 Sentencing Alternatives...31 Recidivism Risk Reduction Incentive...31 Place of Confinement / Paroling Authority...32 Enhancements...32 Mandatory Sentences...32 Inchoate Offenses...32 Conformity...33 Reporting Requirements...33 Defining a Sentence for Reporting...33 Qualifiers and Disclaimers...33 An Overview of Sentencing in Sentences...35 Offenders...39 Conformity to Guidelines...40 County and State Intermediate Punishment Alternatives...41 Economic Sanctions...41 Juvenile Offenders...41 PART III: DATA TABLES...43 Table 1. Number of Cases Reported by County...44 Table 2. Reasons Given for Departures Above the Guidelines...46 Table 3. Reasons Given for Departures Below the Guidelines...47 Table 4. Offender Characteristics by County...48 Table 5. Offender Characteristics by Offense Type...50 Table 6. Summary of Sentences Imposed by County...52 Table 6A. Summary of Sentences Imposed by County (Felonies Only)...54 Table 7. Summary of Sentences Imposed by Offense Type...56 Table 8. Summary of Sentences Imposed for Drug Offenses by County...58 Table 9. Sentences Imposed for Drug Offenses...60 Table 10. Sentences Imposed for DUI Offenses Only by County...62 Table 11. Summary of Sentences Imposed by Offense Type (DUI Offenses Only)...64 Table 12. Place of Confinement by County (2 to less than 5 Year Maximum Sentence)...66 Table 13. Place of Confinement by Offense Type (2 to less than 5 Year Maximum Sentence)...68 Table 14. Percent Incarcerated by OGS and PRS...70 Table 15. Incarceration Sentences with Deadly Weapon Enhancements...71 Table 16. Mandatory Sentences by Offense Type (Excluding Driving Under the Influence)...72 Table 17. Conformity to the Guidelines by County...74 Table 18. Conformity to the Guidelines by Offense Type...76 Table 19. Conformity to the Sentencing Guidelines for Drug Offenses...78 Table 20. Conformity to the Guidelines by OGS and PRS...80 Table 21. State Intermediate Punishment Eligible Offenders Sentenced to State Prison...82 Table 22. County Intermediate Punishment Eligible Offenders Sentenced to County Jail...83 Table 23. State and County Intermediate Eligibility and Sentences...84 Table 24. Type of Sentences Imposed by Sentencing Guideline Level...85 Table 25. Number of Sentences by Level of Offense and Offense Gravity Score...86 Table 26. Economic Sanctions and Assessments...88 Table 27. Summary of Sentences Imposed by Offense Type (Juvenile Offenders Only)...89 Table 28. Summary of Sentences Imposed by Age [Juvenile Offenders Only (<18 Years Old)]...89 Table 29. Summary of Sentences Imposed by County [Juvenile Offenders Only (<18 Years Old)]...90 Table 30. Completed or Inchoate Offenses by Offense Type...92 Annual Report 2009

8 Table of Contents continued APPENDICES...95 A. New Offenses...96 B. Case Law Highlights C. Sentencing Alternatives D. Pennsylvania s Mandatory Minimum Sentencing Provisions E. 6th Edition, Revised Guideline Matrix F. Abbreviations G. PA County Classification, Table of Contents

9 PART I: THE COMMISSION AND ITS WORK Commonwealth Media Services

10 PART I: THE COMMISSION AND ITS WORK THE ORGANIZATION Legislative Mandate The primary purpose of the Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing is to create and maintain a consistent and rational statewide sentencing policy. Created in 1978 by the Pennsylvania General Assembly (42 Pa.C.S. 2154), the Commission is charged with adopting guidelines that promote fairer and more uniform sentencing throughout the Commonwealth. It does this by providing every judge with a common reference point for sentencing similar offenders convicted of similar crimes. Acts 81 and 83 of 2008, effective November 24, 2008, direct the Commission to develop parole guidelines to be considered by the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole and any other paroling authority (42 Pa.C.S ). Additionally, guidelines are to be developed for resentencing and for recommitment ranges. This process enhances accountability and transparency, and more closely aligns state and county parole procedures. Duties of the Commission First and foremost, the Commission was created to develop sentencing guidelines that: Specify a range of sentences applicable for crimes of a given degree of gravity; Specify a range of sentences of increased severity for defendants previously convicted of one or more felony or misdemeanor offenses, or convicted of a crime involving the use of a deadly weapon; and Prescribe variations from the range on account of aggravating or mitigating circumstances. In addition, the Commission was empowered to: Establish a research and development program; Function as an information clearinghouse on Commonwealth sentencing practices; Serve in a consulting capacity to state courts; Collect and disseminate information regarding the sentences actually imposed and the effectiveness of sentences; Make recommendations to the General Assembly concerning modification or enactment of sentencing and correctional statutes to carry out an effective, humane, and rational sentencing policy; and Systematically monitor compliance with the guidelines and with mandatory sentencing laws. Commonwealth Media Services With Acts 81 and 83 of 2008, the Commission has been charged to: Develop state and county parole guidelines as well as resentencing guidelines; Develop state recommitment ranges; and Collect data and information to systematically monitor and report on conformity to parole and resentencing guidelines. 2 Part I: The Commission and Its Work

11 Legislative Agency Benefiting From University Resources The Commission was created by and remains closely tied to the state legislature. In 1986, it was designated an agency of the General Assembly. The House and Senate Judiciary Committees review its regulations. The Commission s members, appointed from the ranks of judges, legislators, and criminal justice professionals, provide oversight and direction. The Penn State Connection Headquarters are housed on the University Park Campus of The Pennsylvania State University under an agreement first established in Penn State provides office space and administrative support at no cost, and the Commission contracts with faculty and staff to conduct sentencing-related research. In return, the Commission provides opportunities for students to develop research and practical skills; a fulltime research associate to assist Penn State faculty and students using Commission data; and 45 percent of the salary for a tenured faculty member to undertake Commission research, as well as two half-time graduate research assistants and two part-time undergraduate research assistantships. Penn State students also benefit from experience brought to the classroom by the Commission s executive director who regularly teaches courses on campus. Duquesne and Villanova Working relationships with the Law Schools at Duquesne University and Villanova University similarly enhance the education of law students. By agreement with each university, the Commission provides financial assistance for student research and the executive director s time in the classroom as adjunct faculty. The Commission gains additional support for its research efforts and access to meeting space and video conferencing for workshops, training, and continuing education in the Pittsburgh and Philadelphia areas. Chris Koleno, 2005 Composition The Commission, by statute, consists of 11 members. Commission members are appointed for two-year terms and serve without compensation. They serve until a replacement is named. The Chief Justice of Pennsylvania selects four judges. The President Pro Tempore of the Senate appoints two senators (one from each caucus). The Speaker of the House of Representatives appoints two members (one from each caucus). The Governor chooses three members and must include a district attorney, a defense attorney, and a professor of law or criminologist. Additionally, three ex officio members were added to the Commission (42 Pa.C.S. 2154(a.1)): the Secretary of Corrections, the Victim Advocate, and the Chairman of the Board of Probation and Parole. Annual Report

12 THE PEOPLE Commissioners Chair Rep. Frank Dermody, Allegheny County (D) Commissioner, January 1991 present, Chair since Vice-Chair Sen. Mary Jo White, Venango County (R) Commissioner, March 2003 present, Vice-Chair since Members Professor Steven L. Chanenson Villanova University School of Law January 2002 present Rep. Douglas G. Reichley Berks/Lehigh Counties (R) January 2007 present Sen. Jay Costa, Jr. Allegheny County (D) February 1997 present President Judge Harold E. Woelfel, Jr. Snyder and Union Counties April present District Attorney Marjorie J. Fox Greene County June 2007 present Judge Linda K. M. Ludgate Berks County April 2008 present Judge Sheila A. Woods-Skipper Philadelphia County April 2006 present Ex Officio Members PA Board of Probation and Parole Catherine C. McVey, Chairman Judge Jill E. Rangos Allegheny County April 2009 present Defense Attorney Marc S. Raspanti Philadelphia County June 2007 present 4 Part I: The Commission and Its Work PA Department of Corrections Jeffrey A. Beard, Ph.D., Secretary PA Office of Victim Advocate Carol L. Lavery, Victim Advocate Former Commission Members Judge Jeffrey A. Manning Allegheny County June 2002 to April 2009 Judge Jeannine Turgeon Dauphin County April 2003 to April 2009

13 Commission Members: 1979 to 2009 Representatives: Democrat Norman S. Berson 1979 Joseph M. Hoeffel 1983 Paul F. McHale 1983 Michael E. Bortner 1987 Frank Dermody (VC, C) 1991 Representatives: Republican Anthony J. Scirica 1979 Terrence F. McVerry 1979 Daniel F. Clark 1989 Brett O. Feese 1995 William I. Gabig 2001 Mark S. McNaughton 2003 Douglas G. Reichley 2007 Senators: Democrat James R. Kelley 1979 Hardy Williams 1983 John W. Regoli 1987 H. Craig Lewis 1989 Michael E. Bortner 1991 Jack Wagner 1995 Jay Costa, Jr Judicial Appointment 4 John W. O Brien (C) 1979 Robert E. Dauer (C) 1990 Cynthia Baldwin 1996 Gary P. Caruso 1998 Michael T. Conahan 2002 Gary P. Caruso 2004 Linda K. M. Ludgate 2008 District Attorney Robert E. Colville 1979 Frank Hazel 1981 Richard A. Lewis 1983 Theresa Ferris-Dukovich 1990 Merritt E. Ted McKnight (VC) 1996 Marjorie J. Fox 2007 Defense Attorney Michael J. Minney 1979 Charles F. Scarlata 1981 Warren H. Spencer 1985 John P. Moses 1990 William T. C. Tully 1996 Marc S. Raspanti 2007 Senators: Republican George W. Gekas 1979 Stewart J. Greenleaf 1983 David W. Heckler (VC, C) 1995 Jeffrey E. Piccola (VC) 1997 Mary Jo White (VC) 2003 Judicial Appointment 1 Curtis C. Carson 1979 Charles L. Durham 1985 John L. Braxton (C) 1991 Charles C. Brown, Jr. (VC) 1995 Jeannine Turgeon 2003 Harold F. Woelfel, Jr Judicial Appointment 2 Richard P. Conaboy (C) 1979 Lynne M. Abraham (VC) 1981 Theodore A. McKee (VC, C) 1986 James A. Lineberger 1995 Renee Cardwell Hughes 1998 Sheila A. Woods-Skipper 2006 Professor Alfred S. Pelaez (VC) 1979 David A. Jones 1981 Alfred Blumstein 1986 Laurie Magid 1996 Steven L. Chanenson 2002 Ex Officio: PA Board of Probation & Parole Chairman Catherine C. McVey 2008 Ex Officio: PA Department of Corrections Secretary Jeffrey A. Beard, Ph.D Ex Officio: PA Victim Advocate Carol L. Lavery 2008 Executive Director John H. Kramer 1979 Mark H. Bergstrom 1998 Judicial Appointment 3 Merna B. Marshall 1979 Anthony J. Scirica (C) 1980 Melvin G. Levy (VC, C) 1985 Ricardo C. Jackson 1992 Robert E. Dauer 1997 Jeffrey A. Manning 2002 Jill E. Rangos 2009 (C) and (VC) indicate that these members served, sometime during their tenure, as chair or vice-chair, respectively. Annual Report

14 Staff Executive Mark H. Bergstrom, executive director Cynthia A. Kempinen, Ph.D., deputy director Joseph Sabino Mistick, Esq., part-time Commission counsel Administrative Jodi R. Ripka, fiscal/office manager Catherine W. Dittman, staff assistant Trevor D. Squillario, system administrator Information Access Joan F. Lisle, manager Haiou Hu, project associate Data Management Carol A. Zeiss, manager Linda M. Bell, SGS Web support Brenda C. Cooper, project associate Robert E. Probst, lead data input specialist Barbara R. Boob, data input specialist Research Cynthia A. Kempinen, Ph.D., research director Leigh A. Tinik, research support associate R. Barry Ruback, Ph.D., faculty researcher In addition to the full-time University Park and Harrisburg-based staff listed, the Commission employed graduate and undergraduate research assistants from the Crime, Law and Justice Program of Penn State s Department of Sociology; legal research assistants from Duquesne and Villanova Universities; and part-time administrative staff. The Commission also provided contracted services for collaborative projects with statewide application through grant-related positions. Outreach and Policy Support *Diane E. Shoop, Ph.D., manager Carrie L. Peters, sentencing policy specialist *Helene J. Placey, sentencing policy specialist *Harrisburg-based positions PENNSYLVANIA COMMISSION ON SENTENCING ORGANIZATIONAL CHART PA Commission on Sentencing Rep. Frank Dermody, Chair Sen. Mary Jo White, Vice Chair Joseph Sabino Mistick, Esq. Counsel Mark H. Bergstrom Executive Director Cynthia A. Kempinen, Ph.D. Deputy Director DATA MANAGEMENT Carol Zeiss, Manager INFORMATION ACCESS Joan Lisle, Manager RESEARCH Cynthia Kempinen, Ph.D. Director OUTREACH & POLICY SUPPORT Diane Shoop, Ph.D. Manager ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT Jodi Ripka, Office Manager Trevor Squillario, System Administrator Linda Bell SGS Web Support Haiou Hu Data Analyst Leigh Tinik Research Associate Helene Placey Sentencing Policy Specialist Carrie Peters Sentencing Policy Specialist Catherine Dittman Staff Assistant Robert Probst Lead Data Input Brenda Cooper Data Technologist Barbara Boob Data Input PSU Research Partnership Part-Time Staff 6 Part I: The Commission and Its Work

15 THE INFRASTRUCTURE Committees Budget and Management Committee Role: Oversees budget and personnel issues; establishes general policies and promulgates rules and regulations for the Commission as necessary. Reviews contracts, leases, and cooperative agreements with government agencies and private contractors for services, personnel, and equipment required by the Commission. Members Rep. Dermody, chair Sen. White, vice-chair Sen. Costa Rep. Reichley Data Management and Information Access Committee Role: Oversees data collection and management via SGS Web, Release of Information Policy, sentencing simulations, projections and analysis, and access to sentencing information. Monitors information on Commonwealth sentencing practices and publishes data on sentencing processes and sentences actually imposed. Through October, committee responsibilities included: oversee education, outreach, and consultation to state judiciary on sound sentencing practices and monitor compliance with the guidelines and mandatory sentencing laws. These responsibilities moved to Policy Committee. Members (January April) Judge Woods-Skipper, chair District Attorney Fox Judge Ludgate (May December) Attorney Raspanti, chair District Attorney Fox Judge Ludgate Policy Committee Role: Reviews sentencing, correctional, and parole statutes and makes recommendations to the General Assembly to maintain an effective, humane, and rational sentencing and parole policy. Oversees a clearinghouse and information center for Commonwealth sentencing and parole practices. Reviews appellate court decisions and legislation. Coordinates the development and implementation of guidelines for fines and economic sanctions, sentencing, resentencing, and parole; the development of recommitment ranges; and the identification of eligible offenders for County Intermediate Punishment, State Intermediate Punishment, and Motivational Boot Camp. Oversees sentencing and corrections reform work groups and conducts informational meetings and public hearings. Able to invite witnesses and request evidence when reviewing appellate court decisions and pending sentencing- and parole-related legislation. All Commission members serve on the Policy Committee, which operates as a committee of the whole. Members (January April) Judge Manning, chair Sen. Costa, vice-chair Rep. Reichley, vice-chair all other Commission members ex officio members (May December) Judge Woods-Skipper, chair Sen. Costa, vice-chair Rep. Reichley, vice-chair all other Commission members ex officio members Research Committee Role: Oversees the Commission s research agenda and legislative mandates, including ongoing evaluation of State Intermediate Punishment, Motivational Boot Camp, and Recidivism Risk Reduction Incentive Program. Required by statute to monitor, evaluate, and produce alternating biennial reports on these programs. Conducts reseach as required through House or Senate Resolutions such as HR 12 of Disseminates research data and sentencing information on incapacitation, recidivism, deterrence and overall effectiveness of sentences imposed. Members (January April) Professor Chanenson, chair Attorney Raspanti Judge Turgeon (May December) Professor Chanenson, chair Judge Rangos President Judge Woelfel Annual Report

16 Budget The Commission received a state appropriation of $1.45 million for fiscal year 2008/2009, which was more than 60% of the total operating budget. Federal grants for specific projects comprised the remainder, as the following graphic and chart illustrate. PA Commission on Sentencing State Appropriations and Federal Grants: Fiscal Years 2001/2002 to 2008/2009 State Federal Total Fiscal Year Appropriation Grant Funds Operating Budget 2001/2002 $935,000 $983,961 $1,918, /2003 $992,000 $1,014,000 $2,006, /2004 $992,000 $1,150,146 $2,141, /2005 $992,000 $1,435,904 $2,427, /2006 $1,120,000 $1,138,912 $2,258, /2007 $1,120,000 $1,338,349 $2,458, /2008 $1,470,000 $1,117,447 $2,587, /2009 $1,451,000 $829,613 $2,280,613 PA Commission on Sentencing State Appropriations by Category: Fiscal Year 2008/2009 Other/Match, 4% Operating, 12% Travel, 8% During fiscal year 2008/2009, the Commission expended $1.5 million in state appropriations and related matching funds in order to undertake its work. Personnel costs consumed the largest proportion of funds. Consultants, 4% Salaries, 72% A balance of the fiscal year 2007/2008 appropriation ($345,000) was transferred to the fiscal year 2008/2009 operating budget to support several multi-year data projects. This is not included in the chart to the left. 8 Part I: The Commission and Its Work

17 Grants During calendar year 2009, the Commission received $829,613 in Byrne Justice Grants (JAG) and National Criminal History Improvement Program (NCHIP) grants. Of these grants, $429,119 were directly for PCS use, and $400,494 (48%) supported Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency activities (noted by * ). Grant funds went to the following projects: Grant Name Amount PCS usage: Enhanced Criminal Justice Advisory Board Support $ 109,833 Intermediate Punishment Technical Assistance and Training $ 148,156 SGS Web Migration $ 126,220 SGS Web Reform Legislation $ 44,910 Subtotal $ 429,119 PCCD usage*: Corrections Policy Research Support $ 139,993 County Integration Architect Project $ 123,177 Intermediate Punishment Technical Assistance and Training $ 137,324 Subtotal $ 400,494 Grand Total $ 829,613 Grants awarded to the Commission often fund joint efforts with other agencies, as the following list of grants received in 2009 demonstrates: Corrections Policy Research Support* provides for a research position at PCCD and contracted research services. Both agencies benefit from the resulting policy analysis, statistical analysis, and ad hoc research projects. County Integration Architect Project* PCCDbased position which provides review and oversight capability for state and federal grant funds earmarked for integration of various county and local public safety and homeland security systems across the Commonwealth. Enhanced Criminal Justice Advisory Board Support provides additional support for sentencingrelated activities directed to counties. It includes development of data and information to support policy initiatives, enhancement of SGS Web application functions, and increased training and consulting efforts directly with counties. Intermediate Punishment Technical Assistance and Training* provides support for both the Commission on Sentencing and the Commission on Crime and Delinquency. It funds four positions at PCCD to work with county Criminal Justice Advisory Boards and one position to work as a behavioral health consultant in the area of RIP/D&A. It partially supports a position at the Commission on Sentencing for educational seminars, assistance, and support related to sentencing and sentencing guidelines. SGS Web Migration provides support for the Sentencing Guideline Software Web-Based application, used by counties to determine sentence recommendations and report sentences imposed to the Commission in an accurate and timely manner via Pennsylvania s Justice Network (JNET). Funds were used to migrate the application to.net platform and to migrate the database from Oracle to SQL Server. SGS Web Reform Legislation - provided support to modify SGS Web Guideline Software to capture information required by the reform legislation. Specifically, data related to RRRI and county reentry were added. Annual Report

18 SGS Web The Commission s legislative mandate to collect and disseminate information on Commonwealth sentencing practices shaped the progression of gathering sentencing information. The original paper forms were phased out, first by the PC-based Sentencing Guideline Software introduced in 1998, and more effectively by the webbased software, SGS Web, introduced four years later in Benefiting from the secure environment available at Pennsylvania s Justice Network (JNET), SGS Web allows on-line calculation of the sentencing guidelines for judges consideration at the time of sentence. Retrieving offense information from the Administrative Office of the Pennsylvania Courts (AOPC) improves efficiency and accuracy. Effective July 1, 2005, SGS Web officially replaced paper forms to fulfill the county requirement to report sentences to the Commission. Users of SGS Web can quickly determine the correct guideline recommendations and print a guideline sentence form for use by the court. The law requires these forms to be submitted to correctional facilities when offenders are committed. Electronic reporting is more efficient, accuracy is improved, and data are available for use in much less time than under previous paper-based systems. Today, SGS Web serves as the Commission s calculation and collection tool and its repository for sentencing data. The importance of this data collection effort cannot be underestimated. The Commission uses sentencing data to determine compliance; to project impacts of changes in the law, policy, or practice; to assess the impact of guidelines and mandatory sentences; to monitor sentencing trends; and to project the impact of policy changes on prison and jail populations. Screen Shot of SGS Web s Digital Dashboard 10 Part I: The Commission and Its Work

19 MAJOR HIGHLIGHTS Guideline Editions Legislation Impacts Commission Year Event 1978 Act 319 created the 1979 John H. Kramer, Ph.D., appointed 1st executive director of Commission st Edition Guidelines adopted, effective July Commission begins collecting sentencing information from the courts st Edition Guidelines amended, effective June st Edition Guidelines amended, effective January nd Edition Guidelines adopted, effective June Act 41 designated Commission an agency of the General Assembly 1987 Pa. Supreme Court invalidated all guidelines due to procedural error in 1981 when legislature rejected the Commission's initial set of guidelines 1988 Guidelines re-promulgated and 3rd Edition Guidelines adopted, effective April Commission designated a Legislative Service Agency 1990 Act 215 established Motivational Boot Camp. Commission mandated to provide annual evaluation and report to the legislature 1990 Acts 193 and 201 established County Intermediate Punishment as sentencing alternative rd Edition Guidelines amended to incorporate Motivational Boot Camp, effective August th Edition Guidelines adopted, effective August th Edition Guidelines adopted, effective June Mark H. Bergstrom appointed executive director of the Commission 1998 SGS introduced 1999 Formal Release of Information Policy developed 2002 SGS Web available as part of Pennsylvania's Justice Network 2003 Commission designated a Pennsylvania Criminal Justice Agency 2004 Act 112 established State Intermediate Punishment as a new sentencing alternative 2005 Electronic reporting of sentences to Commission required (July 1) 2005 Commission mandated to provide evaluation and report to the legislature on State Intermediate Punishment and Motivational Boot Camp on alternating years th Edition Guidelines adopted, effective June Web-based sentencing simulation model development initiated 2007 Commission opened 2nd office located in 408 Forum Building, Capitol Complex, Harrisburg 2007 Act 37 required Commission to adopt guidelines for fines 2008 Records retention policy adopted 2008 Right to Know Policy adopted 2008 Acts 81 and 83 mandated development of parole and resentencing guidelines and recommitment ranges, systematic monitoring of compliance, and reporting on same th Edition, Revised Guidelines adopted, effective December Study of the Impact and Use of Mandatory Minimum Sentencing submitted to PA House of Representatives as required by HR 12 of 2007 Other Annual Report

20 THE WORK Commission Commission Meetings The Commission is required by statute to meet at least four times per year and not less than semiannually. These are public meetings preceded by a work session. Commission Committee Highlights Budget and Management Committee Worked to continue service and staffing throughout the budget impasse. Applied for and was granted ARRA funding to continue its work on reform activities in Data Management and Information Access Committee Oversaw training, collection, and dissemination of sentencing data, and the compilation of sentencing information. SGS Web was updated to reflect changes to statute and software requirements. Judges completed verification of sentencing data for Web-accessible sentencing reports were made available to Commission staff with further additions and expansions planned following an upgrade to the software (scheduled for early 2010). Sentencing Simulation Model training was completed and model testing resulted in some modifications. Model testing is anticipated for completion in the first quarter of During 2009, four Commission meetings were held in the Commission s Harrisburg Office, located in the Capitol Complex: February 5, May 21, August 20, and December 10. Policy Committee Gathered information on policies and practices, relevant research, and data in order to develop recommendations for state and county parole guidelines, resentencing guidelines, and recommitment ranges. Identified education and training needs. Seminars and training sessions on sentencing policy and practices, sentencing guidelines, and SGS Web were scheduled and held. Research Committee Completed and issued the Legislative Report, A Study on the Use and Impact of Mandatory Minimum Sentences, in response to House Resolution 12 of Completed and issued the 2009 Legislative Report on the State Motivational Boot Camp Program. Undertook a study on the impact of program completion on recidivism for the 2010 Legislative Report on the State Intermediate Punishment Program. Continued a long-term research effort on economic sanctions and community service sanctions. Released a Research Bulletin, The Impact of Boot Camp Program Completion on Recidivism. 12 Part I: The Commission and Its Work

21 Supporting Criminal Justice Practitioners Seminars The Commission devoted significant resources during 2009 to educational programs in sentencing, the application of sentencing guidelines, and specific topics for court professionals Most seminars were CLE accredited; all were free-of-charge to Pennsylvania criminal justice professionals, including court staff, district attorneys, judges, probation and parole officers, public defenders, private attorneys, and others. The following is a summary of programs offered: Sentencing-Related Seminars: Officer Basic Training for the PA Board of Probation and Parole (for new probation and parole officers) Covers basic terminology and an overview of sentencing statutes and policies, e.g., sentencing alternatives, mandatory minimums, county versus state sentences, aggregation, merger, etc. Three sessions at the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections Training Academy in Elizabethtown and one session in the Harrisburg area. Introduction to Sentencing in Pennsylvania Covers basic terminology and an overview of sentencing statutes and policies e.g., sentencing alternatives, mandatory minimums, county versus state sentences, aggregation, merger, etc. One session each at MPOETC in Harrisburg, Penn State DuBois, and Clearfield County Emergency Management in Clearfield. One session requested by Montgomery County Drug and Alcohol. 6th Edition Sentencing Guidelines and Sentencing in Pennsylvania Covers the 6th Edition Sentencing Guidelines and provides a comprehensive explanation of Offense Gravity Score, Prior Record Score, and sentencing recommendations specific to the 6th Edition Sentencing Guidelines. Includes a review of sentencing statutes and policies, plus overviews of State Intermediate Punishment and SGS Web. Three sessions at Penn State campuses in DuBois, Harrisburg and Lehigh Valley as well as one session at a facility of the Clearfield County Emergency Management unit and one in a facility in Cranberry Township. Three sessions requested by Lebanon, Lycoming, and Mercer County Courts. Basic Sentencing Overview Provide a basic overview of sentencing processes and sentencing guidelines in Pennsylvania, targeted to specific audience needs. Two sessions for the PA District Attorneys Institute s Basic Prosecutors Course. Special topic or customized seminars are held for legislative staff and members in the Capitol Complex area. Seminars are often requested by county agencies, courts, and other agencies and held locally. Legislative sessions included: Sentencing and Corrections Reform Package -The Use and Impact of Mandatory Sentences Other special request seminars included: -An Overview of Sentencing and Correction Reform and Revised Guidelines Twenty-five sessions held in the following counties: Beaver, Berks, Blair, Bucks, Cambria, Chester, Clinton, Cumberland, Dauphin, Delaware, Fayette, Huntingdon, Lancaster, Lehigh, Montgomery, Northampton, Philadelphia, Schuykill, Union/Snyder, Venango, and York. One session requested by Treatment Trends. -Overview of Sentencing Guidelines One session for the Juvenile Court Judges Commission. SGS Web-Related Training SGS Web Basic A hands-on computer session on the basics of calculating the sentencing guidelines and submitting the guideline sentence form. Includes advanced OTN search, creating PRS worksheets, entering offense and sentencing information, submitting, and printing the judicial proceeding. Two sessions in Harrisburg. SGS Web Advanced A hands-on computer session beyond the basics. Covers entering judicial proceedings with multiple OTNs and docket numbers, perfecting searches, using offense search shortcuts, updating/changing case information and running reports. Two sessions in Harrisburg. SGS Web County Requested Hands-on computer session covers both the SGS Web Basic and Advanced training topics and focuses attention on county-specific work flow processes. One session each for Allegheny, Beaver, and Philadelphia counties. Annual Report

22 Sentencing / SGS Web Assistance Commission staff provides assistance and support services for sentencing-related questions and technical assistance for SGS Web. During 2009, there were more than 1,000 requests for information or assistance on sentencing and sentencing guidelines and nearly 900 requests for help with SGS Web. Sentencing and guideline questions are posed not only by judges and court staff but also by probation and parole officers, district attorneys, public defenders, defense attorneys, out-of-state agencies, and the general public. Technical assistance for SGS Web users generally is requested by probation and parole officers, district attorneys, judges, court staff, and clerks of courts. All SGS Web questions may be directed to Beginning in 2007, the Commission assigned sentencing policy specialists to the eastern and western regions of the state. This change allows specialists to work more closely with counties on sentencing-related issues. Counties in the eastern region call and those in the western region call West East Allegheny Franklin Adams Monroe Armstrong Fulton Berks Montgomery Beaver Greene Bradford Montour Bedford Huntingdon Bucks Northampton Blair Indiana Carbon Northumberland Butler Jefferson Chester Perry Cambria Lawrence Columbia Philadelphia Cameron McKean Cumberland Pike Centre Mercer Dauphin Schuylkill Clarion Mifflin Delaware Snyder Clearfield Potter Juniata Sullivan Clinton Somerset Lackawanna Susquehanna Crawford Venango Lancaster Tioga Elk Warren Lebanon Union Erie Washington Lehigh Wayne Fayette Westmoreland Luzerne Wyoming Forest Lycoming York 14 Part I: The Commission and Its Work

23 Criminal Justice Advisory Boards The Sentencing Commission, in conjunction with the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency (PCCD), supported the efforts of County Criminal Justice Advisory Boards (CJABs) in several ways. In 2007, the Commission and PCCD began a collaborative effort to provide counties with technical and training assistance through the dedication of limited funding to support local initiatives. The intent was to provide a means for counties to apply for smaller amount of funds without the need of a lengthy grant application process. During fiscal year 2008/2009, $20,000 in technical assistance and training grant funds were awarded to 15 counties. To date in fiscal year 2009/2010, more than $30,000 of grant funds were awarded to 23 counties. NASC The Commission has been actively involved in the National Association of Sentencing Commissions (NASC) since its inception in The Commission s first executive director, John Kramer, was a key player in the formation of NASC, which was established for the exchange of information on sentencing policy. Commission staff have served as board members and conference planning committee members in the past. NASC s 16th Annual Conference was held in Baltimore, Maryland, in August The executive director was a panelist in a session on release decisions. Courses Taught During 2009, the executive director taught one undergraduate course on sentencing for Penn State s Department of Sociology as part of the Crime, Law and Justice Program. Journal Publications During 2009, the executive director co-authored a journal article and was sole author of another. Bergstrom, M. H., Dermody, F., Chanenson, S. L. & Hyatt, J. (2009). The next era of sentencing reform... Revisited. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 21 (3). Annual Villanova Sentencing Workshop Each year, the Commission cohosts the Villanova Sentencing Workshop, held at Villanova University School of Law. The heart of the workshop is studentjudge interaction and discussion of real cases submitted by the participating judges. The 2009 workshop was held over two multi-day sessions in March and April. It brought together 12 students, 7 sitting judges, 2 parole board members, a prosecutor, a defense attorney and other professionals to discuss sentencing policy through the lens of pre-screened, real cases. Before the sessions, participants reviewed voluminous case files, including police reports and court transcripts. They determined an appropriate sentence for each case and prepared brief sentencing memoranda explaining their decisions. This information was distributed to the other workshop participants to facilitate discussion of the cases. The sessions were devoted in large measure to discussion of the cases and learning about factors that go into the sentencing decision. The 2009 workshop included a parole component which assisted Commission efforts in developing parole guidelines. Participants were provided postsentencing documents, including a Parole Decisional Instrument and supporting documents related to risk, needs, institutional programming, institutional behavior, and other factors. These were used to consider a decision to grant parole and set any parole requirements or conditions. PA Supreme Court Justice Michael Eakin and former Speaker of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives Dennis M. O Brien were guest speakers during the 2009 workshops. Prosecution and defense were represented by the Philadelphia County District Attorney s Office and Montgomery County Public Defender s Office, respectively. The Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole Board Chair Catherine McVey and Board Member Benjamin Martinez participated and shared their expertise in the parole decision process. Bergstrom, M. H. (2009). The Pennsylvania experience: You need a tool box to build a roadmap. Chapman Journal of Criminal Justice, 1(1). Judiciary Member Participants in the 2009 Villanova Sentencing Workshop Marilyn J. Horan, Butler County Court of Common Pleas Linda K. M. Ludgate, Berks County Court of Common Pleas Harold F. Woelfel, Jr., Union and Snyder Counties Court Common Pleas Sheila A. Woods-Skipper, Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas Margherita Patti Worthington, Monroe County Court of Common Pleas John H. Yoder, McKean County Court of Common Pleas John A. Zottola, Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas Annual Report

24 Presentations The Executive Director presented specifically on the Sentencing and Corrections Reforms during 2009 for: Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, Criminal Conversations. January 2009, Philadelphia, PA. Pennsylvania Bar Association, Pennsylvania Bar Institute. January 2009, Philadelphia, PA, Webinar. Montgomery County Bar Association. 2009, Norristown, PA. January Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, Law Clerks. February 2009, Philadelphia, PA. Pennsylvania Conference of State Trial Judges. February 2009, Pittsburgh, PA. Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas. February 2009, Lancaster, PA. Bucks County Bar Association. March 2009, Lancaster, PA. *Philadelphia District Attorney s Office. 2009, Philadelphia, PA. *Defenders Association of Philadelphia. 2009, Norristown, PA. March April *Philadelphia Bar Association. April 2009, Philadelphia, PA. Allegheny County Bench-Bar Conference. 2009, Seven Springs, PA. *Included Sentencing Guideline Revisions June Other activies included: National Project on Risk and Needs at Sentencing. National Center for State Courts. February 2009, Montgomery, AL. Criminal Law Symposium. Pennsylvania Bar Institute. June 4, 2009, Harrisburg, PA. Release Decisions. National Association of Sentencing Commissions Conference. August 2009, Baltimore, MD. Sentencing and Parole Fundamentals (Part 1). Duquesne University School of Law. September 2009, Pittsburgh, PA. Sentencing and Parole Fundamentals (Part 2). Duquesne University School of Law. September 2009, Pittsburgh, PA. Recommended Parole Guidelines for Allegheny County. Advisory Board Member, Systems Synthesis Project: Carnegie Mellon University. Fall 2009, Pittsburgh, PA. *HR12: A Study on the Use and Impact of Mandatory Minimum Sentences. Commission for Justice Initiatives in Pennsylvania. October 2009, Harrisburg, PA. National Project on Risk and Needs at Sentencing. National Center for State Courts. October 2009, Washington, DC. Consultation: Colorado Sentencing Reforms. Vera Institute of Justice. October 2009, New York, NY. Consultation: Drug Sentencing Policies, District Attorney-Elect Seth Williams. Philadelphia District Attorney s Office. October 2009, Philadelphia, PA. Sentencing Case Review. Duquesne University School of Law. November 16, 2009, Pittsburgh, PA. Parole Case Review. Duquesne University School of Law. November 30, 2009, Pittsburgh, PA. Consultation: Strategic Planning in Sentencing and Corrections. Vera Institute of Justice. December 2009, New York, NY. *Deputy Director/Research Director presented 16 Part I: The Commission and Its Work

25 Staff Committee Work Commission staff members serve on numerous national, state, and local committees and boards to promote the understanding and use of sentencing guidelines and to help create and enhance consistent, rational, equitable, and fair sentencing policy and practices. Participation in 2009 included: Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts, Drug Court Accreditation Committee. Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts, Inter-Disciplinary Advisory Committee. County Commissioners Association of PA., Courts and Corrections Committee. County Commissioners Association of PA., County Criminal Justice Data Quality Project. Correctional and Parole Population Projections Committee. Cross Agency Workgroup for Adam Walsh Act Implementation. Joint State Government Commission, Advisory Committee on Children of Incarcerated Parents (HR 203, SR 52) and Subcommittee on Arrests and Judicial Proceedings. Legislative Service Agency Directors. Master Charge Code Committee. National Association of Sentencing Commissions, National Conference Program Committee. Pennsylvania Bar Association, Committee on Justice Initiatives in PA. Pennsylvania Bar Association, Mental Health Initiatives Group. PA Commission on Crime and Delinquency, Commission Member. PA Commission on Crime and Delinquency, County Systems Subcommittee. PA Commission on Crime and Delinquency, Mental Health Advisory Committee. PA Commission on Crime and Delinquency Public Safety Advisory Committee (executive director is vicechair). PA Justice Network, County Integration Committee. PA Justice Network, Executive Council. PA Justice Network, Justice Agency Advisory Subcommittee (executive director is chair). PA Justice Network, Steering Committee. PSU Crime, Law, and Justice Affiliate Program Group (staff member is board member, chair). PSU Justice Association. Commonwealth Media Services Annual Report

26 Supporting Decision Makers The following are examples of how the Commission supported policy and decision makers during the year. Testimony The executive director provided testimony before these House and Senate panels in 2009: House Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on Criminal Justice: Federal Stimulus Funding. April 2, 2009, Harrisburg, PA. House Transportation Committee: Accidents Involving Death or Personal Injury (HB 197, HB 352, HB 748). April 20, 2009, Harrisburg, PA. House Judiciary Committee: Mandatory Minimum Sentencing Study, Findings and Recommendations. October 21, 2009, Harrisburg, PA. House Majority Policy Committee: The Prison System and Reducing Its Costs. October 30, 2009, Philadelphia, PA. Senate Judiciary Committee: Prison Overcrowding. November 16, 2009, Harrisburg, PA. Legislative Reports The Commission submitted the following reports: Pennsylvania s Motivational Boot Camp Program. The Impact of Program Completion on Offender Recidivism: 2009 Report to the Legislature, in January A Study on the Use and Impact of Mandatory Minimum Sentences, in October Research Bulletin The Commission published one Research Bulletin during 2009: The Impact of Boot Camp Program Completion on Recidivism: A Summary of the 2009 Legislative Report (Vol. 8 No. 1, February 2009). Data and Information More than 135 requests for data were received from state and county governments, the news media and researchers. The Commission also generated in-depth and complex data analyses for state and county decision makers, including many projects for the legislative and executive branches of state and federal government. Some examples include: Comparative analysis of repeat violent offender legislative proposals. Sentencing impact assessments of selected components of House Resolution 12 of Two-and four-year sentencing trend reports. State sentences in county jails. First time offenders. Assaultive versus non-assaultive crimes. Sentencing data used for analysis for House Bills 39, 89, 282, 373, 485, 727, 914 and Impact of Proposed Legislation Given the impact policies and practices have on other segments of the criminal justice system, budgets, and capacity, the Commission actively works with other agencies on population projections and impact analyses. It serves as a member of the Correctional and Parole Population Projections Committee along with the Department of Corrections, Board of Probation and Parole, Commission on Crime and Delinquency, and the Governor s Budget and Policy Offices. This Committee is charged with developing annual population projections based on changes in programs, policies, practices, and other nuances in the criminal justice system in order to plan for the future. The Commission consults with legislative offices, executive branch agencies, the judiciary, and other groups to develop public policy. More formally, the Commission analyzes the impact of legislative proposals in a proactive effort to assist in the creation of solid policy. Through reviews of current and past sentencing data, forecasts are created as to the impact on the criminal justice system of not only new laws, but also changes or proposed changes in policy and practice. Impact analyses were completed for House Bills 39, 89, 282, 373, 485, 727, 1567, and Additionally, a sentencing simulation module is used to more accurately project the impact from changes in sentencing guidelines or statutes to the types of sentences imposed. 18 Part I: The Commission and Its Work