Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 3:53 am
Time: 3:53 am
Results for day parole
2 results foundAuthor: Stys, Yvonne Title: Conditional Release of Federal Offenders Convicted of Criminal Organization Offences Summary: Past research on criminal organization offenders has typically centred on the nature of the offences committed and profiling those offenders. This study extended the extant knowledge of criminal organization offenders by updating past profiles, focusing on community outcomes while on conditional or statutory release, and identifying risk factors related to re-offending for these offenders. Overall, 451 offenders were identified in the Correctional Service of Canada’s (CSC) Offender Management System (OMS) as being convicted of a criminal organization offence, as outlined in Sections 467.11 to 467.13 of the Criminal Code of Canada (CCC), between April 25, 1997 and March 31, 2009. This included 418 non-Aboriginal males, 19 Aboriginal males, and 14 women offenders, with an average sentence length of 5.2 years. Most offenders convicted of a criminal organization offence had some prior involvement with the criminal justice system, with 21.5% having served a previous adult term in a federal penitentiary. Along with their current criminal organization conviction, offenders were most commonly also convicted of drug offences (59.6%) or attempted murder (8.2%). Examination of criminogenic risk, need and reintegration potential found that the typical criminal organization offender was assessed as being “medium” risk (58.1%) and “high” need (45.9%), with “high” reintegration potential (68.8%). Domain-level analyses of need illustrated that criminal organization offenders were significantly more likely to have some or considerable need in the areas of criminal attitudes and criminal associates than a matched sample of CSC offenders. Of the 451 offenders who were convicted of a criminal organization offence, 332 (73.6%) had been released to the community. The majority were released on day parole (51.8%) or statutory release (44.9%). Most (76.4%) had been employed at some point during release, and 14.8% of those released were participating in some sort of community intervention program, with the most common programs including education, Counter-Point, and living skills programs. Of those who were released, 12.7 % (42) were re-admitted to a federal institution. Most had their release revoked without a new offence (76.2%), while 14.3% (n=6) were convicted of a new offence. Survival analyses conducted to determine the risk of failure upon release found that those convicted of criminal organization offences were significantly less likely than the matched group to be returned to custody. Risk factors found to be especially predictive of readmission or re-conviction included age at release and type of release, with younger offenders and those on statutory release more likely to fail than those released at an older age or released on day or full parole. Details: Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada, 2010. 47p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Report 2010 No R-227: Accessed April 16, 2012 at: http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/rsrch/reports/r227/r227-eng.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Canada URL: http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/rsrch/reports/r227/r227-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 124986 Keywords: Conditional Release (Canada)Criminal OrganizationsDay ParoleGangsOrganized CrimeParolePunishmentRecidivism |
Author: Keown, Leslie-Anne Title: Low-Risk Offenders and Waivers, Postponements, and Withdrawals of Parole Reviews Summary: Offenders' gradual and supervised return to the community is known to contribute to lower rates of re-offending. Conditional release provides a mechanism for this gradual release, and although virtually all offenders are eligible for consideration for release after serving a portion of their sentence, some choose not to appear before the Parole Board of Canada for review. Understanding the reasons why offenders waive, postpone, or withdraw their applications for review may provide information that can be used in promoting offenders' transition to the community. This issue is especially pertinent for low-risk offenders. Given these offenders are more likely to be granted parole and to be successful in the community, decreasing the delays and cancellations for this group is likely to increase the number of positive parole decisions. In order to examine the reasons for parole review delays and cancellations, the 5,549 day parole reviews and 10,358 full parole reviews scheduled for 2013-14 were examined. Additional analyses focused on the 2,276 day parole and 4,267 full parole reviews scheduled for offenders who were assessed, at their most recent review, as minimum security - these offenders comprised the low-risk offender group. Overall, about a third of day parole and over half of full parole reviews were delayed or canceled. Among low-risk offenders, this rate was lower but still considerable (26% and 36% for day and full parole respectively). Most frequently, these parole delays and cancellations were attributable to a desire to avoid a negative decision, program non-completion, and unspecified reasons; analyses of offender subgroups showed that these patterns also applied for women and Aboriginal offenders. More detailed examinations focused on low-risk offenders reinforced these themes, and also identified three additional reasons for waivers and withdrawals: lack of case management team endorsement for parole application, a desire to build credibility or demonstrate stability via other activities (such as temporary absences) prior to parole consideration, and a desire to be considered for only day parole despite being eligible for both day and full parole. Further, many offenders considered a number of these often inter-related reasons in making their decisions. Additional information emerged in more detailed analyses, with, for instance, about one-third of low-risk offenders who cited program non-completion as their reason for delaying or canceling their parole review, in fact, were not eligible for programs. It seems that these offenders believed they should complete these programs - or would be expected by the PBC to complete these programs - despite their non-eligibility, which suggests an avenue for further education. In addition to information-sharing and education, two other possible avenues for improvement were identified: improvements in data collection and initiatives focused on increased efficiencies. With respect to the latter, a number of current initiatives, including the implementation of the Integrated Correctional Program Model and efforts to streamline and enhance assessment and intervention, seem likely to contribute to offenders being prepared for parole earlier in their sentence. These, and similar initiatives, should continue to be explored. Details: Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada, 2015. 38p. Source: Internet Resource: 2015 No. R-365 Accessed February 21, 2018 at: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/scc-csc/PS83-3-365-eng.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Canada URL: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/scc-csc/PS83-3-365-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 149194 Keywords: Conditional Release Day ParoleLow Risk Offenders Parole Parole Waiver Parolees |