Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 10:03 pm
Time: 10:03 pm
Results for pretrial release (u.s.)
3 results foundAuthor: VanNostrand, Marie Title: State of the Science of Pretrial Release and Recommendations and Supervision Summary: Earlier this year, the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) and the Pretrial Justice Institute published the document, State of the Science of Pretrial Risk Assessment. That document focused on what the field knows about our ability to predict the likelihood of failure to appear in court or rearrest on new charges among pretrial defendant populations. It described the great strides that the field has made in assessing risks of pretrial misconduct, as well as the challenges that researchers face in validating pretrial risk assessment instruments, and guidance on how they can face those challenges. This document, State of the Science of Pretrial Release Recommendations and Supervision, has a different focus. It picks up where the first document left off. It asks the question: now that we know so much more about predicting risks of pretrial misconduct, how can we use that information to better assure that defendants are appropriately matched to conditions of pretrial release that are designed to minimize their identified risks? In most counties across the country, pretrial release recommendations are subjective. Even when pretrial services agency staff have access to the results of a validated pretrial risk assessment, if it exists in the county, there is often no objective and consistent guidance for making pretrial release recommendations. In addition, many pretrial services agencies require the same frequency and types of contacts for all defendants during pretrial supervision while some have identified their own levels of supervision with varying frequencies and types of contacts. In both cases there is no objective and consistent policy for providing differential pretrial supervision based on the risk of pretrial failure. The appropriate matching of defendant risks with conditions of pretrial release should take place in the framework of Legal and Evidence Based Practices (LEBP). These are interventions and practices that are consistent with the legal and constitutional rights afforded to accused persons awaiting trial and methods research have proven to be effective in reducing unnecessary detention while assuring court appearance and the safety of the community during the pretrial stage. A component of this larger LEBP initiative involves the development and implementation of research-based guidelines for use by pretrial services agencies that are (1) risk-based, (2) consistent with legal and evidence-based practices, and (3) provide guidance for pretrial release recommendations and differential pretrial supervision. This document begins with a discussion of the legal issues that are relevant to persons who have been accused, but not yet adjudicated, of a crime. It describes the possible legal implications of pretrial release practices, including the setting of specific conditions of pretrial release. Following that is a discussion of research results regarding pretrial release conditions and interventions. The final section presents existing guidelines for pretrial release recommendations and differential pretrial supervision. Details: Washington, DC: Pretrial Justice Institute, 2011. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 12, 2011 at: http://www.pretrial.org/Featured%20Resources%20Documents/PJI%20State%20of%20the%20Science%20Pretrial%20Recommendations%20and%20Supervision%20%282011%29.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.pretrial.org/Featured%20Resources%20Documents/PJI%20State%20of%20the%20Science%20Pretrial%20Recommendations%20and%20Supervision%20%282011%29.pdf Shelf Number: 122039 Keywords: BailPretrial Release (U.S.)Pretrial SupervisionRisk Assessment |
Author: Bechtel, Kristin Title: Identifying the Predictors of Pretrial Failure: A Meta-Analysis Summary: The purpose of this study was to empirically examine what risk factors are statistically associated with various measures of pretrial failure. As such, a meta-analysis was conducted to identify these risk factors as well as to determine if some of the more commonly assumed factors associated with pretrial failure are actual risks. The report is divided into the following sections: a detailed description of the methodology for this meta-analysis, findings, limitations and lastly, policy implications. Details: Unpublished report, 2011. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 13, 2011 at: http://www.pretrial.org/Setting%20Bail%20Documents/Identifying%20the%20Predictors%20of%20Pretrial%20Failure%20-%20A%20Meta%20Analysis%20(June%202011).pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.pretrial.org/Setting%20Bail%20Documents/Identifying%20the%20Predictors%20of%20Pretrial%20Failure%20-%20A%20Meta%20Analysis%20(June%202011).pdf Shelf Number: 122044 Keywords: Pretrial Release (U.S.)Risk Assessment |
Author: American Council of Chief Defenders Title: Policy Statement on Fair and Effective Pretrial Justice Practices Summary: Pretrial release practices throughout the country frequently result in the unjust, unnecessary, expensive, and prolonged detention of many individuals prior to trial. Our legal traditions urge us to reserve pretrial detention for only the most carefully limited circumstances, and all available evidence reflects the importance of doing so. Pretrial detention has harsh consequences, including the loss of jobs, homes, and family ties. Research has revealed that all other factors being equal, individuals who are detained prior to trial experience more severe ultimate outcomes. Just as importantly, the heavy reliance by many jurisdictions upon monetary bond as a pretrial release condition disproportionately affects the poor and minorities. Given our evidence-based ability to accurately identify risk, communities can lower their jail costs while ensuring that only those who pose significant risks of flight or danger are detained. This American Council of Chief Defenders Policy Statement calls for a new commitment by all criminal justice stakeholders to ensure fair and appropriate pretrial release decision-making, and outlines key action steps for each pretrial actor. In particular, this statement calls upon defenders to advance the following initiatives: Examine Pretrial Release Practices Within Their Own Jurisdictions to Identify Key Areas of Improvement. While jurisdictions may share common issues, each has its own unique set of practices and traditions. Where unnecessary or unjust pretrial detention is occurring, defenders ought to identify the particular practices leading to those outcomes. Identify and Implement National Standards and Best Practices. Several national organizations have developed national standards on pretrial practices, and these provide excellent guidelines for defenders in developing strategies to improve pretrial outcomes. Defenders should become familiar with these standards and strive to implement them in daily practice. Develop Collaborative Efforts Among All Criminal Justice Stakeholders to Improve Pretrial Practices. Improvements are only feasible where open dialogue is occurring between all pertinent criminal justice leaders. Defenders can lead the effort to develop a collaborative approach to rectifying identified detrimental pretrial practices. This effort ought to include local and state policy-makers, who determine how resources are allocated. Develop Effective Pretrial Litigation Strategies. Defenders ought to be equipped with effective and efficient litigation strategies, grounded in local practice and law, to challenge pretrial-release decisions that result in unnecessary detention. Details: Washington, DC: American Council of Chief Defenders, 2011. 19p. Source: Internet Resource: accessed August 2, 2011 at: http://www.nlada.org/Defender/Defender_ACCD/ACCDpretrialrelease Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.nlada.org/Defender/Defender_ACCD/ACCDpretrialrelease Shelf Number: 122253 Keywords: BailPretrial Release (U.S.) |