Date: April 29, 2024 Mon

Time: 8:43 pm

Results for sentencing

227 results found

Author: United States Sentencing Commission Title: The History of the Child Pornography Guidelines Summary: This report provides a history of the child pornography guidelines as established by the United States Sentencing Guidelines Commission. The child pornography guidelines have existed since their initial promulgation in 1987, and they have been substantively amended nine times. These revisions were prompted by, among other things, statutory changes, the United States Sentencing Commission's independent analysis, and public comment. This report is the first step in an ongoing examination of the child pornography guidelines. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Sentencing Commission, 2009 Source: Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 117331 Keywords: Child Pornography Sentencing

Author: Stewart, Felicity Title: Provocation in Sentencing: Research Report. 2nd Edition Summary: This paper is intended as an examination of some of the sentencing policy issues and principles raised by the abolition of the partial defence of provocation in light of Victoria Law Reform Commission Homicide Report. Details: Melbourne: State of Victoria, Sentencing Advisory Council, 2009 Source: Year: 2009 Country: Australia URL: Shelf Number: 117350 Keywords: Homicide Sentencing

Author: Florida. Department of Corrections. Bureau of Research and Data Analysis Title: Florida's Criminal Punishment Code: A Comparative Assessment Summary: The intent of this report is to address the requirement set forth in Florida Statute 921.002(4)(a) to analyze sentencing events under the Florida Criminal Punishment Code. Each year, the Department of Corrections is required to report on trends in sentencing practices and sentencing score thresholds, and provide an analysis of the sentencing factors considered by the courts. In this report, a comparison is made between the Criminal Punishment Code sentences recieved in the Fiscal Year 2007-2008 and the Fiscal Year 2008-2009. Details: Tallahassee: 2009 Source: A Report to the Florida Legislature Detailing Florida's Criminal Punishment Code Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 116546 Keywords: Corrections Florida Sentencing

Author: Olson, David E. Title: Final Report: The Impact of Illinois' Truth-in-Sentencing Law on Sentence Lengths, Time to Serve and Disciplinary Incidents of Convicted Murderers and Sex Offenders Summary: Truth-in-sentencing (TIS) policies require those convicted and sentenced to prison to serve at least 85 percent of their court-imposed sentence and often results in inmates serving longer periods of incarceration. This study seeks to answer two of the key questions regarding the implementation of Illinois' TIS law as it pertains to convicted murders and sex offenders: 1) has TIS changed the sentence lengths and lengths of time to serve in prison for murderers and sex offenders, and if so, to what degree, and 2) has TIS had an influence on the extent and nature of disciplinary infractions to these inmates. Details: Chicago: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, 2009. 54p. Source: Loyola University Chicago, Department of Criminal Justice Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 115343 Keywords: Murderers Sentencing Sex Offenders

Author: New York State Commission on Sentencing Reform Title: The Future of Sentencing in New York State: Recommendations for Reform Summary: This report calls for reforms to New York State drug laws; determinate sentencing, graduated and sanctions for parole violators are among the other recommendations offered. Details: Albany: New York State Commission on Sentencing Reform, 2009. 256p. Source: Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 113484 Keywords: Drug Abuse Policy Drug Offenses Parole Sentencing

Author: United States Sentencing Commission Title: Demographic Differences in Federal Sentencing Practices: An Update of the Booker Report's Multivariate Regression Analysis Summary: In 2006, the United States Sentencing Commission undertook a review of the impact on federal sentencing of the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Booker. As part of the review, the Commission performed an analysis of data from the federal courts to examine whether differences in the length of sentenced imposed on offenders were correlated with demograhpic characteristics of those offenders. This report updates the earlier analysis. Details: Washington, DC: United States Sentencing Commission, 2010. 24p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 117827 Keywords: Judicial Discretion Sentencing

Author: New South Wales Sentencing Council Title: Sentencing for Alcohol-Related Violence Summary: This report by the NSW Sentencing Council examines the current principles and practices governing sentencing for offenses committed while an offender is intoxicated, as well as those for alcohol-related violence. Details: Sydney: NSW Sentencing Council, 2009. 158p. Source: Year: 2009 Country: Australia URL: Shelf Number: 117375 Keywords: Alcohol-Related Crime Sentencing

Author: Criminal Justice Joint Inspection Title: A joint inspection on work prior to sentence with offenders with mental disorders. Summary: This inspection focused on cases involving offenders who have been identified prior to sentence as having a mental disorder, and how these cases have been handled in practice. The inspectors found neither criminal justice nor health professionals were in favor of diverting an increased number of offenders from prosecution. Most felt that the majority should be combined with rather than instead of court action. However, in the minority of cases who were suitable for diversion, there did appear to be scope for greater efficiency by diverting these earlier in the process, before they got to the court stage. Most of the areas visited would also benefit from a better quality and more timely psychiatric report service once at the court stage. More generally, it was clear that treatment did help some current offenders to stop offending, so sustained access to treatment continues to be very important. Details: Manchester: HM Inspectorate of Probation, 2009, 56p. Source: Internet Source Year: 2009 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 117573 Keywords: Diversion Mental Health Mentally Ill Offenders Sentencing

Author: Howe, Martin, Chair Title: Order in the Courts: Restoring Trust Through Local Justice. A Policy Report from the Courts and Sentencing Working Group. Summary: This report draws on interviews with the public, experts, the judiciary, probation and others involved in the criminal justice system. It makes 40 recommendations which will shift the focus of magistrates' courts, the probation service and prisons onto the communities they serve and will make sentences more productive. Details: London: Centre for Social Justice, 2009. 192p. Source: Breakthrough Britain Year: 2009 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 118166 Keywords: Courts Criminal Justice Systems Sentencing

Author: National Youth Gang Center Title: Gang Prosecution Manual Summary: This publication was brings together information on the basics of gang crime prosecution at the local level. It is a workbook designed to help local prosecutors and investigators visualize and prepare for every step of a gang-related crime prosecution, from the initial crime scene investigation to preparing and presenting the case and, finally, sentencing issues specific to gang cases. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 2009. 116p. Source: Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 117561 Keywords: Case Processing Gangs Investigative Techniques Prosecution of Gangs Prosecutors Sentencing

Author: Lulham, Rohan Title: The Recidivism of Offenders Given Suspended Sentences: A Comparison with Full-Time Imprisonment Summary: Between 2000 and 2007, the number of suspended sentences imposed by the New South Wales Local Court rose 300 percent, from 1,704 to 5,172. In 2000, suspended sentences accounted for about one percent of all penalties imposed by the Local Court. By 2007, this figure had risen to 4.6 percent. One issue of contention is whether suspended sentences have the same deterrent effect on re-offending as prison sentences. This study compares rates of re-offending among offenders who received suspended sentences with rates of re-offending among a matched control group who received a full-time prison sentence. For offenders with no prior prison sentence, there was no statistically significant difference in re-offending between offenders who received a suspended sentence and those who received a prison sentence. Among offenders who had previously been to prison, however, those who received a prison sentence re-offended substantially quicker than those who received a suspended sentence. The study concludes that there is no evidence full-time imprisonment exerts a greater deterrent effect than a suspended sentence of imprisonment. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2009. 16p. Source: Crime and Justice Bulletin; Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice, No. 136 Year: 2009 Country: Australia URL: Shelf Number: 118548 Keywords: Imprisonment Recidivism Sentencing Suspended Sentences (Australia)

Author: Gill, Molly M. Title: Correcting Course: Lessons from the 1970 Repeal of Mandatory Minimums Summary: This report calls for the U.S. Congress to reform mandatory minimum sentencing. It presents two options: excise all mandatory minimums for drug offenses found in the criminal code or expand the existing "safety valve" to allow judges to depart from the statutory sentence when that punishment would be excessive. Either solution will result in better and more cost effective criminal justice and pave the way for smarter alternatives. Details: Washington, DC: Families Against Mandatory Minimums, 2008. 36p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 118706 Keywords: Drug Offenders Sentencing Sentencing Reform

Author: Jacobson, Jessica Title: Unjust Deserts: Imprisonment for Public Protection Summary: The indeterminate sentence of imprisonment for public protection (IPP) was created by the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (U.K.). The sentence enables the courts to imprison for an indefinite period those convicted of violent and sexual offenses who are deemed to be dangerous, but whose offending is not so serious that they quality for a life sentence. Around 6,000 people have received the sentence since it was implemented in april 2005; about 2,500 of those are currently being held in custody beyond expiry of their minimum term in custody, or tariff. This report reviews the implication of the implications of the IPP sentence for those serving it and for the courts, the Prison Service and the Parole Board. In so doing, it highlights what is perceived to be flaws inherent in the design of the sentence, and the injustices in its implementation. Details: London: Prison Reform Trust, 2010. 70p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 119267 Keywords: Imprisonment Indeterminate Sentences (U.K.) Sentencing Sex Offenders Violent Offenders

Author: Mujuzi, Jamil Ddamulira Title: The Changing Face of Life Imprisonment in South Africa Summary: This report examines "the meaning and use of life imprisonment in South Africa in four major legal historical eras: life imprisonment at the time when the death penalty was still lawful in South Africa (including life imprisonment as early as 1906); life imprisonment in the immediate aftermath of the abolition of the death penalty (1994-1998); life imprisonment following the introduction of the minimum sentences legislation (1998-2007); and life imprisonment after December 2007, when the sentencing jurisdiction of the regional courts was extended to include life imprisonment." Details: Bellville, South Africa: Civil Society Prison Reform Initiative, 2008. 41p. Source: Internet Resource; CSPRI Research Paper No. 15 Year: 2008 Country: South Africa URL: Shelf Number: 119382 Keywords: Imprisonment Life Imprisonment (South Africa) Sentencing

Author: Preston, Brian J. Title: Achieving Consistency and Transparency in Sentencing for Environmental Offences Summary: Sentencing statistics for criminal offences have been used by Local, District and Supreme Courts in New South Wales for more than 15 years. This monograph reports on an intiative of the Judicial Information Research System to provide sentencing statistics for environmental offences in graphical form. Details: Sydney: Judicial Commission of New South Wales, 2008. 48p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2008 Country: Australia URL: Shelf Number: 119451 Keywords: Offenses Against the Environment Sentencing Wildlife Crime

Author: Rice, Linda Title: Conditional Cautions: Lessons Learnt from the Unpaid Reparative Work Pilot Implementation Summary: A pilot testing the implementation of the unpaid reparative work conditional caution (RWC), a type of out-of-court disposal, took place between December 2006 and September 2007. The purpose of the RWC was to enable offenders to make good any damage they had caused by carrying out up to 20 hours of specified work. The report describes the research that was carried out to explore the reasons for the low take-up of the RWC and to identify the lessons learnt from the pilot implementation process. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2010. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Summary 5/10: Accessed September 2, 2010 at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/docs/conditional-cautions-unpaid-reparative-work-pilot.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/docs/conditional-cautions-unpaid-reparative-work-pilot.pdf Shelf Number: 119732 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration Community Based Corrections Community Service Sentencing

Author: McLeod, Rosie Title: Good Practice Guidance: Commission, Administering and Producing Psychiatric Reports for Sentencing. Prepared for Her Majesty's Cout Service Summary: This document provides good practice guidance for the commissioning, administration and production of psychiatric reports for sentencing in U.K. criminal courts. The guidance is designed to help psychiatrists, the judiciary and court staff. It is not intended to be prescriptive but to enable practitioners to reflect critically on their practice to ensure that it is of the highest quality. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2010. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 16, 2010 at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/docs/good-practice-guidance-psych-reports-sentancing.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/docs/good-practice-guidance-psych-reports-sentancing.pdf Shelf Number: 119815 Keywords: Mental Health Risk Assessment Sentencing

Author: McLeod, Rosie Title: Improving the Structure and Content of Psychiatric Reports for Sentencing: Research to Develop Good Practice Guidance Summary: This research study produced good practice guidance on the structure and content of psychiatric reports for sentencing in criminal courts. It consisted of a three-stage process of fact finding, development and testing involving key stakeholders from the judiciary and magistrates, court staff and psychiatrists using an ‘action research’ methodology. Many stakeholders questioned the efficiency of the current system for commissioning reports, and a desire for good practice guidance was expressed. TNS-BMRB co-created guidance in consultation with stakeholders and a Forensic Psychiatrist which addresses the commissioning, administration and production of reports. The document was tested among stakeholders and refined using their feedback. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2010. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 16, 2010 at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/docs/improving-psychiatric-reports-0910.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/docs/improving-psychiatric-reports-0910.pdf Shelf Number: 119816 Keywords: Mental Health Risk Assessment Sentencing

Author: Great Britain. Sentencing Advisory Panel Title: Sentencing for Drug Offences: Advice to the Sentencing Guidelines Council Summary: This advice to the Sentencing Guidelines Council makes proposals in relation to the sentencing of the most commonly sentenced drug offences. It considers those offences which derive from conduct intended to bring illicit drugs into circulation (including importation, production and supply) as well as those relating to possession and use. Details: London: Sentencing Advisory Panel, 2010. 56p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 21, 2010 at: http://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/press/publications/2010/03/downloads/11-drug-offences.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/press/publications/2010/03/downloads/11-drug-offences.pdf Shelf Number: 119853 Keywords: Drug Offenders Drug Offenses Drug Trafficking Sentencing

Author: Aos, Steve Title: WSIPP's Benefit-Cost Tool for States: Examining Policy Options in Sentencing and Corrections Summary: Can knowledge about “what works” to reduce crime be used to help states achieve a win-win outcome of lower crime and lower taxpayer spending? The Washington State Institute for Public Policy has constructed an analytical tool for the Washington legislature to help identify evidence-based sentencing and programming policy options to reduce crime and taxpayer criminal justice costs. This report describes the tool (as of August 2010) in detail and illustrates its use by applying it to two hypothetical sentencing policy options in Washington State. The tool assesses benefits, costs, and risks. Results from the two hypothetical examples point to possible win-win policy combinations. Details: Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2010. 56p. Source: Internet Resource: Document No. 10-08-1201: Accessed October 8, 2010 at: http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/rptfiles/10-08-1201.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/rptfiles/10-08-1201.pdf Shelf Number: 119882 Keywords: Corrections Cost-Benefit Analysis Costs of Criminal Justice Criminal Justice Policy Evidence-Based Policies Sentencing

Author: MacKinnell, Ian Title: Measuring Offence Seriousness Summary: The aim of this report is to present and assess two new measures of offence seriousness in NSW. The first measure of offence seriousness, Median Sentence Ranking (MSR), was constructed by identifying the median sentence actually imposed in each Australian Standard Offence Classification (ASOC) group. The data used for this purpose consisted of cases finalised in the NSW Children's, Local, District and Supreme Courts between 3 April 2000 and 31 March 2005 where the offender had no prior criminal record. The second measure, Median Statutory Maximum Ranking (MSMR), was constructed by reference to the median statutory maximum penalty applicable among offences in each ASOC group. Logistic regression was used to compare the MSR and the MSMR to the current National Offence Index (NOI) in terms of (a) their ability to predict who will be sentenced to imprisonment, and (b) their ability to identify the principal offence, that is, the offence that incurred the most severe penalty. The MSR proved superior to both the NOI and MSMR both in its ability to predict a sentence of imprisonment and to predict the principal offence. The MSMR proved superior to the NOI in its ability to predict a sentence of imprisonment, however, the NOI proved superior to the MSMR in predicting the principal offence. It was found that the MSR is the better choice when the aim is either to investigate or control for the influence of offence seriousness on the likelihood of imprisonment or to identify which of two offences will incur the more severe sentence. The NOI is a relatively robust measure of seriousness which may make it useful when alternative measures are not available or cannot be derived or when the aim is to predict outcomes outside the criminal justice system where public opinion is a salient factor. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2010. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Crime and Justice Bulletin, No. 142: Accessed October 7, 2010 at: http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/bocsar/ll_bocsar.nsf/vwFiles/CJB142.pdf/$file/CJB142.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Australia URL: http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/bocsar/ll_bocsar.nsf/vwFiles/CJB142.pdf/$file/CJB142.pdf Shelf Number: 119883 Keywords: Offense Seriousness Sentencing

Author: Kuhnrich, Bernd Title: Attitudes Towards Punishment in the European Union: Results from the 2005 European Crime Survey (ECSS) with Focus on Germany Summary: This report examines the attitudes of Europeans regarding punishment for certain crimes. The aim of the report is to present an analysis of the significant mean differences between Germany and all other European countries. Details: Freiburg, Germany: Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law, 2005. 71p. Source: Internet Resource: ECSS Project: Research Report MPI (30/12/2005): Accessed October 29, 2010 at: http://www.europeansafetyobservatory.eu/doc/Punitiveness.pdf Year: 2005 Country: Europe URL: http://www.europeansafetyobservatory.eu/doc/Punitiveness.pdf Shelf Number: 120125 Keywords: Prisons Public Opinion Punishment Sentencing

Author: Mitchell, Barry Title: Public Opinion and Sentencing for Murder: An Empirical Investigation of Public Knowledge and Attitudes in England and Wales Summary: With the possible exception of genocide, murder is widely regarded, by members of the public as well as by lawyers, as the most serious offence in the criminal calendar, and it continues to attract great public interest. Reflecting their most serious nature, murder cases continue to attract considerable coverage in the media. The death penalty for murder was wholly abolished by the Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act 1965 after it became apparent that the distinction between capital and noncapital cases was unsatisfactory. Since then, trial judges have been required to impose a life sentence on all persons convicted of murder. It was assumed that anything less than automatic indefinite imprisonment would undermine public confidence in the criminal justice system. This assumption has never been tested, however. One of the principal goals of the current research project was to explore the consequences on public opinion, of abolishing the mandatory life sentence for murder. The mandatory life sentence effectively consists of two distinct stages. The first is now known as the “minimum term” – formerly referred to as the “tariff” – which is a period of imprisonment that is intended to reflect the seriousness of the murder. In the vast majority of cases this term must be served in full, though it is possible for a prisoner to be released (on licence) before the expiry of the minimum term in very exceptional circumstances. When the minimum term has expired, the offender can be considered for release on licence but this will depend on the perceived risk that s/he poses to the public. In other words, release on licence is not automatic on expiry of the minimum term; a murderer will be detained in prison until s/he no longer poses an unacceptable danger to the public. One specific aspect of the murder law that has caused recent controversy and public debate relates to what is often called “joint enterprise” murder – i.e. when two people intend that a crime should be committed and one of them is present whilst the other commits murder but makes no attempt to prevent him from so doing. This has risen, for example, in gang killings where one or more members of a gang are present at the scene of a murder which is carried out by another member. Should those who make no attempt to prevent the killing themselves be guilty of murder? There seems to be some uncertainty about how a court would regard their liability: much is likely to depend on what the jury thinks the fellow gang members expected and that in itself will probably be uncertain. The main purpose of the present research program was to test empirically the assumption that the British public is firmly opposed to any alternative to the current sentencing arrangements for murder. Specifically, we explored public opinion towards the sentencing of cases of murder. This represents the first systematic attempt to map put the contours of public attitudes to this critical issue in criminal justice in this or any other jurisdiction. A secondary aim of the research was to gauge the public’s knowledge and understanding of the mandatory life sentence and the way in which it operates in practice. In pursuing these aims we also very briefly took the opportunity to gauge public opinion on “joint enterprise murder”. Details: London: Nuffield Foundation, 2010. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 29, 2010 at: http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/sites/default/files/files/Public%20Opinion%20and%20Sentencing%20for%20Murder_Mitchell&Robertsv_FINAL.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/sites/default/files/files/Public%20Opinion%20and%20Sentencing%20for%20Murder_Mitchell&Robertsv_FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 120131 Keywords: Life Sentence Murderers Public Opinion Sentencing

Author: Kaye, Robert Title: Fitting the Crime: Reforming Community Sentences: Mending the Weak Link in the Sentencing Chain Summary: Community sentences are the focus of renewed attention from UK politicians faced with unsustainable demand for prison places and the perceived cost and ineffectiveness of short-term prison sentences. Successions of Ministers in recent years have attempted to reform community disposals to make them more effective and to address legitimate public concern that they do not prevent reoffending and are not appropriate punishments. Before the mid 1990s, community sentences in England and Wales were focused on rehabilitation and designed for first time, less serious offenders. They are now a much more common form of disposal and are routinely used in response to serial recidivists. This mission creep has not been accompanied by systemic reform of community sentences to create a clearly defined and credible punishment. Instead, these sentences continue to suffer from a historic handicap that keeps them linked with rehabilitation instead of punishment, undermining them in the eyes of sentencers and the public. Current community sentences fail because they are fundamentally flawed, poorly administered and confused in their purpose. There is no contradiction between being “tough” and being “effective”. To be made better, community sentences first need to be refocused back to their core function of punishment and then radically reformed to improve compliance and reduce reoffending. Details: London: Policy Exchange, 2010. 111p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 27, 2010 at: http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/images/publications/pdfs/Fitting_the_Crime_-_Nov__10.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/images/publications/pdfs/Fitting_the_Crime_-_Nov__10.pdf Shelf Number: 120290 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration Community Based Corrections Punishment Sentencing

Author: Wright, Valerie Title: Deterrence in Criminal Justice: Evaluating Certainty vs. Severity of Punishment Summary: Over 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. Details: Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project, 2010. 9p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 29, 2010 at: http://www.sentencingproject.org/doc/Deterrence%20Briefing%20.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.sentencingproject.org/doc/Deterrence%20Briefing%20.pdf Shelf Number: 120303 Keywords: Deterrence Punishment Sentencing

Author: Great Britain. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary Title: Stop the Drift: A Focus on 21st-Century Criminal Justice Summary: The report “Stop the Drift” finds that more needs to be done to explain to the public why some offenders never end up in court. HMIC found that the system would work better if justice agencies stop it growing, improve wasteful processes, and make the most of innovation. But all agencies must pull together The system has grown, with 14 pieces of legislation added to the criminal justice process over the last 15 years. It takes around 1,000 steps to deal with a simple domestic burglary. This slows down the process and consumes resources, reducing the number of officers available to help the public. All criminal justice agencies should sign up to a smarter approach, which reduces bureaucracy and duplication. HMIC found that the number of offenders dealt with outside the courts through cautions, penalty notices, and formal warnings has risen by 135% over five years. Nearly half of the 1.3 million cases solved in 2008/9 were dealt with in this way, although the proportion varies significantly between forces. This has been accompanied by an increased reliance on restorative justice approaches. There are signs that some of these approaches increase victim satisfaction, however the public should be better informed of their effectiveness. This would help eliminate the perceived injustice of different ways of dealing with offenders in different parts of the country. HMIC found an example of a shoplifter charged by police and sentenced at court just two hours later. But the average is 12 days. Whilst 67% of defendants eventually plead guilty, 41% do so when they get to the trial. This results in huge amounts of unnecessary paperwork and also causes further distress to victims. HMIC found that getting defendants to court quickly, providing good quality information to the prosecutor and firm case management could reduce late guilty pleas, improve victim satisfaction and save cost, in the region of £40m a year. Some forces take innovative approaches, with police and prosecutors pooling resources in London to create one process that reduces duplication, potentially saving £16m over 10 years. But innovation is challenging. No data exists for all agencies to refer to that shows the cost benefit of working collaboratively, and the fragmented system means that no single leader can authorise and commit to change. Details: London: HMIC, 2010. 42p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 2, 2010 at: http://www.hmic.gov.uk/SiteCollectionDocuments/Thematics/THM_20101103.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.hmic.gov.uk/SiteCollectionDocuments/Thematics/THM_20101103.pdf Shelf Number: 120348 Keywords: Costs of Criminal Justice Criminal Case Processing Criminal Justice Systems (UK) Sentencing

Author: Great Britain. Ministry of Justice Title: Breaking the Cycle: Effective Punishment, Rehabilitation and Sentencing of Offenders Summary: The safety and security of the law-abiding citizen is a key priority of the Coalition Government. Everyone has a right to feel safe in their home and in their community. When that safety is threatened, those responsible should face a swift and effective response. We rely on the criminal justice system to deliver that response: punishing offenders, protecting the public and reducing reoffending. This Green Paper addresses all three of these priorities, setting out how an intelligent sentencing framework, coupled with more effective rehabilitation, will enable us to break the cycle of crime and prison which creates new victims every day. Despite a 50% increase in the budget for prisons and managing offenders in the last ten years almost half of all adult offenders released from custody reoffend within a year. It is also not acceptable that 75% of offenders sentenced to youth custody reoffend within a year. If we do not prevent and tackle offending by young people then the young offenders of today will become the prolific career criminals of tomorrow. Details: London: The Stationery Office, 2010. 92p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 13, 2010 at: http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm79/7972/7972.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm79/7972/7972.pdf Shelf Number: 120447 Keywords: Costs of Criminal Justice Criminal Justice Systems (U.K.) Punishment Recidivism Rehabilitation Sentencing

Author: Armstrong, Sarah Title: What Do the Punished Think of Punishment? The Comparative Experience of Short Prison Sentences and Community-Based Punishments Summary: Scotland is currently engaged in one of the biggest penal reform projects in a generation, seeking to fundamentally change its approach to punishment, which is characterised by high use of imprisonment compared to other parts of Europe, and the use of very short prison sentences. In Scotland around three quarters of prison sentences handed down by the courts are for six months or less. But because short sentences are seen as minimally intrusive compared to long-term or life sentences, there has been, until now, little research on their effects. This study sought to fill this gap in knowledge by speaking with those serving short prison sentences or a community-based sentence (the main proposed alternative on the reform agenda). The researchers spoke with 35 men and women ranging in age from 19 to 55 about their experiences of punishment. The aim was to accurately describe the experience for offenders of doing a short sentence, in prison or the community. In summary, the key findings of the report are the following: •Short prison sentences in Scotland are a form of ‘doing life by instalments’. Most of the people interviewed counted the times they had been in prison not in terms of numbers but as frequencies, that is, by how many times per year they are in prison. •It is the cumulative effect of doing many short sentences, more than the experience of any single sentence, which carries the largely negative impacts of short-term imprisonment. For many people short prison sentences have become a regular life activity, and the constant coming and going between community and prison interrupts the ability to deal with drug and alcohol issues, strengthen family relationships, and become employable. •The extensive use of short sentences is a function mainly of drug and alcohol dependency. For nearly everyone interviewed, the offending which led to their imprisonment was motivated by drug and alcohol use. Common offences were shoplifting (to pay for drugs) and minor assaults (while under the influence of drugs or alcohol). This finding suggests that prison and the criminalisation of addiction have become primary strategies of dealing with drug and alcohol problems, particularly for those in the most marginalised socio-economic groups. •Prison has produced positive life changes for some but in a way that is almost impossible to predict. Some people reported that it was during their short prison sentence they had achieved the resolution to abstain from drugs. In one case this resolution came after only serving two brief sentences in prison, while for another it took nearly twenty years of serving short sentences to make this step towards recovery. The finding suggests prison is an expensive and unpredictable technique of getting people to change. •Contrary to prior research, nearly everyone would prefer a community-based sentence to a prison sentence. Past research showed many people would choose a short period in prison over a longer period on probation. Armstrong and Weaver found the opposite: most people would prefer serving their time in the community, largely to preserve links to family and work. However, the preference was affected by the state of an addiction problem, suggesting reforms to community-based sentences need to develop effective means of addressing drug and alcohol dependency. Details: Edinburgh: Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research, 2010. 23p. Source: Internet Resource: SCCJR Research Report, No.4: Accessed December 16, 2010 at: http://www.sccjr.ac.uk/documents/Report%202010%2004%20-%20User%20Views%20of%20Punishment.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.sccjr.ac.uk/documents/Report%202010%2004%20-%20User%20Views%20of%20Punishment.pdf Shelf Number: 120525 Keywords: Alternative to Incarceration Community Based Corrections Imprisonment Punishment (U.K.) Sentencing

Author: Great Britain. Ministry of Justice Title: Breaking the Cycle: Effective Punishment, Rehabilitation and Sentencing of Offenders Summary: The Ministry of Justice Structural Reform Plan published in July 2010 set out a commitment to introduce a 'rehabilitation revolution' and conduct a review of sentencing policy. This consultation sets out the resulting proposals which aim to break the destructive cycle of crime and protect the public, through more effectively punishing and rehabilitating offenders and reforming the sentencing framework. Details: London: The Stationery Officer, 2010. 92p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 1, 2011 at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/consultations/docs/breaking-the-cycle.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.justice.gov.uk/consultations/docs/breaking-the-cycle.pdf Shelf Number: 120654 Keywords: Criminal Justice Policy (U.K.) Offenders Punishment Rehabilitation Sentencing

Author: Weatherburn, Don Title: Why Does NSW Have a Higher Imprisonment Rate Than Victoria? Summary: This study examines the influence of sentencing practice and other factors on the difference between NSW and Victoria in their imprisonment rates. The report includes a descriptive analysis of national crime, court and prison data. Findings show that the NSW court appearance rate is 26 per cent higher than that in Victoria. The overall conviction rate in NSW is 85.7 per cent, compared with 79.0 per cent in Victoria. The overall percentage imprisoned is significantly higher in NSW (7.5%) than in Victoria (5.4%). The mean expected time to serve among prisoners dealt with by Victorian courts is slightly longer than the mean expected time to serve among prisoners dealt with by NSW courts. The NSW remand rate is approximately 2.5 times the Victorian remand rate. The study concludes that the higher NSW imprisonment rate is attributable to a higher rate of court appearance, a slightly higher conviction rate, a higher likelihood of imprisonment and a higher likelihood of remand in custody. Details: Brisbane: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2010. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: Crime and Justice Bulletin, No. 145: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/bocsar/ll_bocsar.nsf/pages/bocsar_mr_cjb145 Year: 2010 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/bocsar/ll_bocsar.nsf/pages/bocsar_mr_cjb145 Shelf Number: 120696 Keywords: Bail (New South Wales) Conviction Rates Imprisonment Prisoners Sentencing

Author: Kramer, John H. Title: Evaluation of RIP D&A Treatment Summary: From 1980 to 2005 Pennsylvania state prison population grew by 400%. Although is not possible to assess the extent to which drug addiction was the driving force for this tremendous increase but we do know that offenders incarcerated in state prison for drug offenses increased 2354% during this time frame and drug offenders accounted for 23.9% of the growth. Offenders convicted of drug offenses are just the tip of the iceberg in terms of the role of drug abuse and crime. Support of drug abuse increases theft offenses, burglaries, robberies and other offenses as well. Beyond driving our investment in prison expansion, addiction exerts tremendous costs in terms of lost human resources, and increased health care costs. The growth in prison populations reflect public policy initiatives in the 1980's and 1999's such as the passage of mandatory minimums as our primary focus in stemming the drug abuse problem. Despite significant attempts to deter drug use though harsh penalties and attempts to limit the flow of drugs, drug use seems to have been minimally effected. A1s one Pennsylvania judge reflected to one of the authors, "Drug use is a supply and demand problem, and the more I attempt to change this with tough sentences the more convinced I am that we the way to deal with the drug problem is to reduce the demand through prevention and treatment." This comment joins with a growing refrain from criminal justice experts who see drug abuse as generally impermeable to sanctions and promising results through prevention and treatment. Pennsylvania recognized the need for community based treatment and drug treatment in 1990 by passing legislation expanding sentencing authority for judges to include Intermediate Punishment (IP) (Act 193 of 1990) and building into IP sanctions a strong drug treatment component. Importantly, Pennsylvania supported this with funding to counties for drug and alcohol treatment. The research reported here studies whether these important policy steps were effective at reducing recidivism among drug dependent offenders. Details: State College, PA: Pennsylvania State University, 2006. 93p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 8, 2011 at: http://pcs.la.psu.edu/publications/research-and-evaluation-reports/special-reports/evaluation-of-restrictive-intermediate-punishment-drug-and-alcohol-treatment-2006/SpecRptRIPDA2006.pdf#navpanes=0 Year: 2006 Country: United States URL: http://pcs.la.psu.edu/publications/research-and-evaluation-reports/special-reports/evaluation-of-restrictive-intermediate-punishment-drug-and-alcohol-treatment-2006/SpecRptRIPDA2006.pdf#navpanes=0 Shelf Number: 120715 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration Drug Abuse Treatment Drug Offenders Intermediate Punishments (Pennsylvania) Rehabilitation Sentencing

Author: Horne, Christine Title: Using Laboratory Experiments to Study Law and Crime Summary: The 19th and 20th centuries produced breakthroughs in physics, chemistry, and the biological sciences. Laboratory research played an important role in the rapid advances made in these fields. Laboratory research can also contribute progress in the social sciences and, in particular, to law and criminology. To make this argument, we begin by discussing what laboratory experiments can and cannot do. We then identify three issues in the criminological and legal literature: why violence is higher in the southern United States than in the North, the relation between the severity of punishment and crime, and the expressive effects of law. We describe the relevant data from laboratory experiments and discuss how these data complement those gained through other methods. Details: Zurich, Switzerland: Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, 2010. 33p. Source: Internet Resource: CCSS Working Paper Series 10-010: Accessed February 9, 2011 at: http://web.sg.ethz.ch/wps/pdf/CCSS-10-010.pdf Year: 2010 Country: International URL: http://web.sg.ethz.ch/wps/pdf/CCSS-10-010.pdf Shelf Number: 120732 Keywords: Experimental Methods Punishment Sentencing Violence

Author: Kempinen, Cynthia A. Title: Pennsylvania's Motivation Boot Camp Program: What Have We Leanred Over the Last Seventeen Years? 2011 Report to the Legislation Summary: Act 215 of 1990 established Pennsylvania‟s State Motivational Boot Camp Program, which opened in June 1992. The Boot Camp, which serves as a six-month alternative program to traditional prison, was intended to provide a more intense rehabilitative setting conducive to achieving the goal of crime reduction. Act 215 of 1990 also mandated the Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing and the Department of Corrections to evaluate the program and to provide annual reports to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees. Act 112 of 2004, changed the reporting requirement from every year to every other year, with the Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing and the Department of Corrections alternating years. On October 27, 2010, Governor Rendell signed Act 95 of 2010, which removed the mandatory reporting requirement. The legislation, however, still provides that the Department of Corrections and Commission on Sentencing monitor and evaluate the program to ensure that program goals are being accomplished. Since 1993, the Commission has submitted 14 reports that have provided: 1) information on the utilization of the Boot Camp; 2) an in-depth profile of the Boot Camp Offender; 3) findings from a Offender Survey designed to measure programmatic success; and 4) results from its various studies examining whether the Boot Camp has achieved its goals of reforming offenders and reducing crime. In light of Act 195 of 2010, the current Legislative Report provides a reflective summation of what we have learned from our Boot Camp evaluations over the years, as well as findings from our latest study comparing the recidivism of Boot Camp graduates with offenders released from prison. Details: Harrisburg, PA: The Commission, 2011. 60p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 14, 2011 at: http://pcs.la.psu.edu/publications/research-and-evaluation-reports/state-motivational-boot-camp-program/ResRptBC2011Rev3.pdf#navpanes=0 Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://pcs.la.psu.edu/publications/research-and-evaluation-reports/state-motivational-boot-camp-program/ResRptBC2011Rev3.pdf#navpanes=0 Shelf Number: 120764 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration (Pennsylvania) Boot Camp Offender Rehabilitation Recidivism Sentencing

Author: Warner, Kate Title: Public Judgement on Sentencing: Final Results from the Tasmanian Jury Sentencing Study Summary: This seminal study, which was funded by the Criminology Research Council, is the first reported study to use jurors in real trials to gauge public opinion about sentences and sentencing. Using jurors is a way of investigating the views of members of the public who are as fully informed of the facts of the case and the background of the offender as the judge. Based upon jurors’ responses from 138 trials, the study found that more than half of the jurors surveyed suggested a more lenient sentence than the trial judge imposed. Moreover, when informed of the sentence, 90 percent of jurors said that the judge’s sentence was (very or fairly) appropriate. In contrast, responses to abstract questions about sentencing levels mirrored the results of representative surveys. The results of the study also suggest that providing information to jurors about crime and sentencing may be helpful in addressing misconceptions in these areas. Replication of this study may be of assistance to policymakers and judges who wish to know what informed members of the public think about sentencing. Portrayals of a punitive public are misleading and calls for harsher punishment largely uninformed. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2011. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, No. 407: Accessed February 22, 2011 at: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/A/B/7/%7BAB703D46-E913-4384-B3DB-646DC27EF2D3%7Dtandi407.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Australia URL: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/A/B/7/%7BAB703D46-E913-4384-B3DB-646DC27EF2D3%7Dtandi407.pdf Shelf Number: 120848 Keywords: Judges Juries (Tasmania) Jurors Sentencing

Author: Biles, David Title: Sentence and Release Options for High-Risk Sexual Offenders Summary: The first phase of this project in mid July 2005 comprised the sending of requests for information to all Australian jurisdictions as well as the United Kingdom, Canada and New Zealand. The information sought included details of any special legislation enacted to curtail the activities of high-risk sexual offenders, any provisions in the general criminal law which could lead to the imposition of indefinite or indeterminate sentences on offenders of this type, the numbers of offenders dealt with under either of these provisions, and any evidence of the effectiveness of these measures. The United States was added to the overseas jurisdictions when a rich source of relevant information became available. This survey of the law and practice revealed that in Australia, only Victoria and Queensland had enacted special legislation on this subject. The Victorian legislation provides for the possibility of high-risk sexual offenders being ordered by a court to submit to supervision in the community for up to 15 years after any prison sentence or parole order has been served. This legislation commenced in May 2005. The Queensland legislation, which was enacted in 2003, provides for the Supreme Court, on the application of the Attorney-General, to order either continuing detention or continuing supervision in the community of serious sexual offenders who have completed their sentences. These orders must be reviewed by the Supreme Court at least every 12 months. As the legislation in both of these states is relatively recent, the numbers of offenders to whom it has been applied are quite small. In Victoria, one order with very strict conditions has been made and one other is under consideration by the courts. In Queensland, two continuing detention orders, one interim detention order and five continuing supervision orders have been made. In nearly all of the Australian jurisdictions there is provision in the general criminal law for some offenders, sometimes declared to be either dangerous or habitual, to be sentenced to indefinite prison terms. This is apparently not available in the ACT. The number of high-risk sexual offenders sentenced to indefinite terms is again relatively small, but it is difficult to be precise as other offenders, such as murderers, are commonly sentenced to life or an indefinite term. An authoritative source in the ACT estimated that there may be four cases in this jurisdiction which justify some form of special attention. The overseas law and practice presents a significantly different picture with very high numbers of sexual offenders being subjected to some form of special treatment. In the United States, for example, 15 of the 50 states have enacted civil commitment laws which provide for the detention in prison or other institution, or community supervision, for indefinite terms. The informal evidence available suggests that the numbers of offenders so committed run into the hundreds in some states. Canada also has well over 300 sexual offenders undergoing either detention or supervision in the community, many of whom are described as post warrant expiry cases. In New Zealand, specific legislation providing for extended supervision in the community for up to ten years for sexual offenders came into force in July 2004. To date a total of 32 extended supervision orders have been made by the courts. This figure may be seen as high compared with the equivalent figures in Australia. No evidence was forthcoming from Australia or overseas on the effectiveness of either the special legislation for sex offenders or the use of indefinite sentences. Most respondents said that it was too early to have any recidivism figures, but some suggested that the fact that the legislation was used must indicate an increased level of public safety as, at the very least, those offenders in detention or under very strict supervision were not committing offences. It is apparent from the information collected that there are two types of legislation that have been developed on this subject. The first is exemplified by Victoria and New Zealand, and the second is exemplified by Queensland, some parts of the United States and by Canada. There is also the possibility of either introducing or expanding the use of indefinite sentences for high-risk sexual offenders. On the basis of the analysis, it is suggested that there are four options that may be considered by the ACT Government. The options are not necessarily mutually exclusive. The options are: 1. No action, 2. Make provision for indefinite sentences, 3. Introduce post sentence continuing supervision, or 4. Introduce post sentence continuing detention. It would be logically possible to support any combination of options 2, 3 and 4, but option 1 cannot be combined with any others. Also, There may be considerable variation of the details within options 2, 3 and 4., and some of these possible variations are discussed. Following this analysis, two chapters are included which focus on the determination of highrisk sexual offending and the effectiveness of sexual offender treatment. These were prepared by a senior psychologist in ACT Corrections. Another chapter on human rights considerations was prepared by a senior officer of the ACT Department of Justice and Community Safety. These contributions to the report reflect the knowledge and points of view of two significant disciplines which are of central relevance to the subject under review. The report concludes with a discussion of a range of issues that are relevant to the terms of reference and would require careful consideration by the Government if any of options 2 to 4 are to be pursued. Apart from the ethical issue of whether or not it is acceptable to impose restrictions on the lives of individuals on the basis of probable future behaviour, a practical matter of intense interest is the potential number of offenders who would be affected by legislation that would provide for either post-sentence continuing supervision or detention. It is suggested that the high numbers identified in the USA, Canada, and perhaps even New Zealand, would not be seen as appropriate in Australia, where the numbers to date are relatively small. Other issues discussed include the level of probability of re-offending that would be reasonable to trigger additional intervention, and the type of expertise that would be needed to establish that probability. Consideration is also given to the appropriate agency for preparing cases for submission to the courts, and the desirability of a national approach to both monitoring and supervision of former sexual offenders. The consequences of a very high level of non-reporting of sexual offences are discussed, and it is suggested that this should be the subject of further research, as well as Australian research into the question of what sorts of treatment work with what sorts of offenders. Issues related to the managed release of information to victims, and the special problems presented by intellectually disadvantaged sexual offenders are then briefly discussed. Finally, attention is drawn to two papers which take opposing points of view, which are both strongly argued, and are included in the appendices to this report. The report concludes with the suggestion that this issue should be the subject of wide discussion in political circles in the relevant professions, and in the general public. Details: Canberra: Department of Justice and Community Safety, 2005. 101p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 22, 2011 at: http://www.jcs.act.gov.au/eLibrary/OtherReports/Biles%20Report.pdf Year: 2005 Country: Australia URL: http://www.jcs.act.gov.au/eLibrary/OtherReports/Biles%20Report.pdf Shelf Number: 120857 Keywords: Sentencing Sex Offenders (Australia)

Author: Porter, Nicole D. Title: The State of Sentencing 2010: Developments in Policy and Practice Summary: Today, 7.2 million men and women are under correctional supervision. Of this total, five million are monitored in the community on probation or parole and 2.3 million are incarcerated in prisons or jails. As a result the nation maintains the highest rate of incarceration in the world at 743 per 100,000 population. The scale of the correctional population results from a mix of crime rates and legislative and administrative policies that vary by state. In recent years, lawmakers have struggled to find the resources to maintain state correctional systems; 46 states are facing budget deficits in the current fiscal year, a situation that is likely to continue, according to the National Governors Association. Many states are looking closely at ways to reduce correctional costs as they seek to address limited resources. States like Kansas, Michigan, New Jersey, and New York have successfully reduced their prison populations in recent years in an effort to control costs and effectively manage prison capacity. Overall, prison populations declined in 24 states during 2009, by 48,000 persons, or 0.7 percent. During 2010, state legislatures in at least 23 states and the District of Columbia adopted 35 criminal justice policies that may contribute to reductions in the prison population and eliminate barriers to reentry while promoting effective approaches to public safety. This report provides an overview of recent policy reforms in the areas of sentencing, probation and parole, drug policy, the prison census count, collateral consequences, and juvenile justice. Highlights include: South Carolina equalized penalties for crack and powder cocaine offenses as part of a sentencing reform package that garnered bipartisan support. New Jersey modified its mandatory sentencing law that applies to convictions in “drug free school zones,” and now authorizes judges to impose sentences below the mandatory minimum in appropriate cases. Prior to the reform, more than 3,600 defendants a year were convicted under the statute, 96% of whom were African American or Latino. During 2010, state legislatures in at least 23 states and the District of Columbia adopted 35 criminal justice policies that may contribute to reductions in the prison population and eliminate barriers to reentry while promoting effective approaches to public safety. This report provides an overview of recent policy reforms in the areas of sentencing, probation and parole, drug policy, the prison census count, collateral consequences, and juvenile justice. Details: Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project, 2011. 22p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 28, 2011 at: http://sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/publications/Final%20State%20of%20the%20Sentencing%202010.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/publications/Final%20State%20of%20the%20Sentencing%202010.pdf Shelf Number: 120882 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration Corrections Criminal Justice Policy Inmates Parole Prisoners Probation Sentencing

Author: Mair, George Title: Doing Justice Locally: The North Liverpool Community Justice Centre Summary: This research project examines the changes brought about at the North Liverpool Community Justice Centre - the first and the most ambitious site of community justice in the UK. Opened in 2005 and inspired by the Red Hook Community Justice Centre in Brooklyn, the North Liverpool Centre is implementing key aspects of community justice in the UK. This includes a problem-solving approach, greater partnership working, local community engagement, and having a single judge with the capacity to review the progress of those sentenced to a community-based order. This report draws on data collected by the Centre as well as interviews with Centre staff, representatives of the agencies working at the Centre, defendants, and members of the local community to examine the innovations which have taken place. Details: London: Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, 2011. 105p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 8, 2011 at: http://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/opus1828/Doing_justice_locally.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/opus1828/Doing_justice_locally.pdf Shelf Number: 120910 Keywords: Alternative to Incarceration Community Based Corrections Community Justice Centers (U.K.) Interagency Cooperation Intermediate Sanctions Sentencing

Author: Motiuk, Laurence L. Title: Prison Careers of Federal Offenders with Criminal Organization Offences: A Follow-Up Summary: The Federal Government of Canada has taken action against organized crime by amending the Criminal Code to: 1) introduce three new offences and tough sentences that target various degrees of involvement with criminal organizations; 2) improve the protection of people a role in the justice system from intimidation against them or their families; 3) simplify the definition of “criminal organization” in the Criminal Code; 4) broaden powers of law enforcement to forfeit the proceeds of crime and, in particular, the profits of criminal organizations and to seize property that was used in a crime; and 5) establish an accountability process that establishes immunity from criminal prosecution for law enforcement officers when they commit certain acts that would otherwise be considered illegal during the course of criminal investigations. In 2005, the Research Branch of Correctional Service Canada (CSC) with the assistance of the Corrections Policy Unit of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada set out to develop a research framework and to conduct a series of analyses of available information related to exploring the impact of the legislation in general, and federal offenders who are required to serve sentences for organized crime offences, in particular. At that time, however, any interpretation of findings had to be prefaced with a caveat concerning the limitations associated with available data on which waves of analyses were to be based. As one might appreciate, the three years since the legislation had come into effect was recent so definitive statements were difficult to ascertain about the full impacts of the legislation that may be occurring in the long run. So far, when describing federal offenders with criminal organization offences it can be said that they are a group serving medium to long-term sentences for a new set of criminal code offences coupled with other offences, mainly drug offences and in some instances serious violent crimes. As a group, they were found to present prior criminal records, strong attachments to family and criminal groups. Particularly noteworthy, however, is the finding that offenders with criminal organization offences demonstrate more lifestyle stability (be married, employed and healthy) than their correctional counterparts. However, a longitudinal follow-up of their correctional careers is required before such a conclusion can be drawn. The focus of this research is on their experience while in prison. There continues to be limited research on Canadian legislation that places people convicted for organized crime offences into prison. To date, there is one study profiling federal offenders convicted for organized crime offences. The present study follows a sample of federally incarcerated offenders who were convicted of organized crime offences during their stay in federal custody. Details: Ottawa: Research Branch, Correctional Service of Canada, 2006. 17p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Brief 2009 No. B-42: Accessed March 26, 2011 at: http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/rsrch/briefs/b42/b42-eng.pdf Year: 2006 Country: Canada URL: http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/rsrch/briefs/b42/b42-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 121117 Keywords: Organized Crime (Canada) Sentencing

Author: Amnesty International Title: Death Sentences and Executions 2010 Summary: In the last decade, more than 30 countries have abolished the death penalty in law or practice. Fifty-eight countries worldwide now retain the death penalty for ordinary crimes, and less than half of these carried out executions in 2010. across all regions of the world, the last 10 years have seen important progress made on the global journey towards abolition. in 2010, the global trend towards abolition was again confirmed. The President of Mongolia announced an official moratorium on executions in January, and a bill that would abolish the death penalty has been put before the Mongolian Parliament. Gabon abolished the death penalty in February. More states than ever before voted at the un in favour of a worldwide moratorium on executions. even in states where support for the death penalty remains strong, positive steps towards restricting its use were recorded. But in the face of this clear progress, many of the states that carried out executions in 2010 did so in clear violation of international law and standards, despite their claims to the contrary in front of international human rights bodies. This report analyzes some of the key developments in the worldwide application of the death penalty in 2010, citing figures gathered by Amnesty International on the number of death sentences handed down and executions carried out during the year. Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases without exception, regardless of the nature of the crime, the characteristics of the offender, or the method used by the state to carry out the execution. Details: London: Amnesty International, 2010. 60p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 28, 2011 at: http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ACT50/001/2011/en/ea1b6b25-a62a-4074-927d-ba51e88df2e9/act500012011en.pdf Year: 2010 Country: International URL: http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ACT50/001/2011/en/ea1b6b25-a62a-4074-927d-ba51e88df2e9/act500012011en.pdf Shelf Number: 121122 Keywords: Capital Punishment Death Penalty Sentencing

Author: Jones, Craig Title: Does Forum Sentencing Reduce Re-Offending? Summary: Forum Sentencing is an adult-focussed restorative justice program that operates in two NSW sites: Liverpool and Tweed. Under the scheme, young adults who meet certain eligibility and suitability criteria can have their matter dealt with by way of a community conference rather than being dealt with in a conventional court setting. The aim of the current study was to determine whether offenders who are dealt with by way of a Forum Sentence are less likely to re-offend than those sentenced in the usual way. Forum Sentencing participants were compared with a matched sample of offenders who met the eligibility criteria for Forum Sentencing but who were sentenced in a conventional court. The two groups were compared on four measures: (a) the proportion within each group who were reconvicted of a further offence within one year of being sentenced, (b) the proportion within each group who were convicted for two or more offences within one year of being sentenced, (c) the time to first reconviction and (d) whether, on average, the Forum Sentencing group committed less serious offences than the comparison group. No evidence emerged that Forum Sentencing participants performed better on any of these outcomes. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2009. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice Number 129; Accessed April 1, 2011 at: http://www.ipc.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/bocsar/ll_bocsar.nsf/vwFiles/CJB129.pdf/$file/CJB129.pdf Year: 2009 Country: Australia URL: http://www.ipc.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/bocsar/ll_bocsar.nsf/vwFiles/CJB129.pdf/$file/CJB129.pdf Shelf Number: 121209 Keywords: Conferencing Recidivism Restorative Justice (Australia) Sentencing

Author: Mizzi, Pierrette Title: Sentencing Offenders Convicted of Child Pornography and Child Abuse Material Offences Summary: One of the more difficult sentencing tasks is to sentence an offender convicted of a child pornography offence. This applies whether the offence is a Commonwealth or State offence, or the offender is dealt with summarily or on indictment. This monograph examines the practical difficulties faced by NSW judicial officers at sentence relating to the fact-finding process and the problems that can be encountered in assessing the seriousness of a given offence. Most child pornography offenders are prosecuted in the Local Court and a large proportion of these offenders are prosecuted for offences involving the possession of child pornography. Details: Sydney: Judicial Comnmission of New South Wales, 2010. 60p. Source: Internet Resource: Monograph NO. 34: Accessed April 4, 2011 at: http://www.judcom.nsw.gov.au/publications/research-monographs-1/research-monograph-34/Monograph34.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Australia URL: http://www.judcom.nsw.gov.au/publications/research-monographs-1/research-monograph-34/Monograph34.pdf Shelf Number: 121234 Keywords: Child Pornography (Australia) Child Sexual Abuse Sentencing Sex Offenders

Author: Greene, Judith Title: Turning the Corner: Opportunities for Effective Sentencing and Correctional Practices in Arizona Summary: With a state corrections budget of $1 billion dollars threatening cuts to education and other important human services, Turning the Corner points Arizonians to important reforms in other states that have reduced prison populations while maintaining public safety. The trend in state prison population reductions that began in 2005 included 24 states by 2009. However, Arizona's prison incarceration rate went from 1 in every 749 persons in 1980 to 1 in every 170 by the end of June 2008. Its average annual prison-population growth rate between 2000 and 2008 was 5.1 percent, compared to a national average of 1.5 percent, giving Arizona the third highest incarceration rate of all states and the highest in the West. Turning the Corner highlights the practices of four states – Kansas, Michigan, New Jersey, and New York – that have recently reduced prison populations by 5, 12, 19 and 19 percent, respectively, while seeing falling property and violent crime rates. The report also spotlights three other traditionally conservative states – North Carolina, South Carolina, and Mississippi – that have revisited their sentencing practices, as well as the work of Maryland's Proactive Community Supervision (PCS) program that introduced evidence-based community supervision practices that produced a 42 percent lower rate of re-arrest for new crimes for program participants compared to traditional probation and parole methods. The work of these other states in improving sentencing and corrections practices can help Arizona introduce cost-effective alternatives that can help preserve the public purse and its safety. Details: Brooklyn, NY: Justice Strategies, 2011. 49p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 7, 2011 at: http://www.justicestrategies.org/sites/default/files/publications/AZ%20Turning%20the%20Corner%20Final%20Report.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.justicestrategies.org/sites/default/files/publications/AZ%20Turning%20the%20Corner%20Final%20Report.pdf Shelf Number: 121259 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration Community Based Corrections Corrections (Arizona) Sentencing

Author: Greene, Judith Title: Numbers Game: The Vicious Cycle of Incarceration in Mississippi’s Criminal Justice System Summary: The people of Mississippi deserve and demand crime policies that promote public safety, treat people fairly—regardless of the size of their pocketbook or the color of their skin—and use public resources wisely. Unfair, ineffective, financially unsustainable and counterproductive — all terms that, regrettably, apply to significant aspects of Mississippi’s criminal justice policy. Mississippi’s drug law enforcement infrastructure is fundamentally flawed and in dire need of reform. This report undertakes a review and analysis of some of the most troubling aspects of the state’s criminal justice system, with a particular focus on drug law enforcement, and offers recommendations for reform. Major findings in the NUMBERS GAME report include that: •Mississippi’s regional drug task force funding, contingent on the quantity of drug arrests, encourages the indiscriminate use of confidential informants to increase arrest numbers over the quality and public safety impact of the drug cases. •Poorly-structured drug laws, limiting the judicial discretion of judges, produce extremely harsh sentences for relatively minor street-level transactions involving small amounts of drugs, coupled with police enforcement strategies focused on producing high volume low-impact arrest numbers pressure defendants to work as informers, even when drug treatment might prove a better public safety option. •Black Mississippians are three times more likely than whites to go to prison on drug charges even as drug use rates are largely identical for both groups. •The secrecy that shrouds the unchecked use of confidential informants is a practice that invites abuse, undermines the fundamental legitimacy of the criminal justice system and basic social structures in targeted communities. ACLU's two year attempt to secure basic information on the practice, acknowledged by state officials as public files under Mississippi’s Public Record Act, has gone unfulfilled. Details: Brooklyn, NY: Justice Strategies; Jackson, MS: American Civil Liberties Union of Mississippi, 2011. 78p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 7, 2011 at: http://www.justicestrategies.org/sites/default/files/publications/DLRP_MississipppiReport%20Final%20Mar%202011.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.justicestrategies.org/sites/default/files/publications/DLRP_MississipppiReport%20Final%20Mar%202011.pdf Shelf Number: 121260 Keywords: Criminal Justice Reform Criminal Justice System (Mississippi) Discrimination Drug Enforcement Drug Offenders Incarceration Minorities Sentencing

Author: LaBelle, Deborah Title: Second Chances: Juveniles Serving Life Without Parole in Michigan Summary: Each year in the United States, children as young as thirteen are sentenced to die in prison. It’s called life without parole. It is estimated that thousands of children have been sentenced to life without the possibility of parole (LWOP) for crimes committed at an age when they are not considered responsible enough to live away from their parents, drive, make decisions related to their education or medical treatment, vote, leave school, or sign a contract. Children under the age of eighteen cannot legally use alcohol, serve on juries, or be drafted, because they are presumed not to have the capacity to handle adult responsibilities. These differences between childhood and adulthood are recognized throughout the world, and incorporated in international human rights documents. Despite a global consensus that children cannot be held to the same standards of responsibility as adults, in the last twenty years the trend in the United States has been to punish children the same as adults. Children are increasingly excluded from the protection of juvenile courts based on the nature of the offense, without any consideration of their maturity, culpability, or current or future danger to society. In particular, Michigan allows a child of any age to be tried as an adult, and excludes seventeen-yearolds from juvenile treatment altogether. These children are then subject to adult punishment, incarcerated in adult prisons, and may be sentenced to life without parole. Despite their young age, these juveniles are expected to negotiate the legal system and understand the consequences of decisions that could result in a life without parole sentence, even though research suggests they are not capable of understanding what “forever” means. Since the 1980s, the number of children given life sentences without hope of release has increased dramatically and the cost of warehousing them for life is staggering to our communities and to our humanity. In Michigan alone, there are now more than three hundred individuals serving life without parole for offenses committed prior to their eighteenth birthday. Under current laws, none will be given a second chance. Until now, little attention has been given to who these children are and how they have been treated by the criminal justice system. This report examines juvenile life without parole sentences imposed in Michigan for offenses committed by individuals under eighteen, as they compare to the nation and the world. The report outlines the nature and extent of these sentences, their inequities and their toll on society, and presents recommendations for a rational and humane response to juvenile crime. Details: Detroit: American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan, 2004. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 21, 2011 at: http://www.aclumich.org/sites/default/files/file/Publications/Juv%20Lifers%20V8.pdf Year: 2004 Country: United States URL: http://www.aclumich.org/sites/default/files/file/Publications/Juv%20Lifers%20V8.pdf Shelf Number: 121471 Keywords: Juvenile Detention Juvenile Offenders (Michigan) Life Sentence Life Without Parole Sentencing

Author: American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan Title: Juvenile Life Without Parole Project: Using International Law and Advocacy to Give Children a Second Chance Summary: This project delves into an under-recognized human rights problem in the United States - the imposition of life sentences without possibility of parole on children (JLWOP). JLWOP requires that a child remain in prison without release until death. Irrespective of whether the child poses a threat to society or has, or can be, rehabilitated, there is no opportunity for parole. Each year in the United States, children as young as thirteen are sentenced to spend the rest of their lives in prison without opportunity for parole. Despite a global consensus that children cannot be held to the same standards of responsibility as adults, the United States allows children to be treated and punished the same as adults. Children are increasingly excluded from the protection of juvenile courts based on the nature of the offense, without any consideration of age, maturity or culpability of the child, and without taking steps to ensure their understanding of the legal system under which they are prosecuted. Life sentences without possibility of parole have been renounced internationally as a violation of human rights in The Convention on the Rights of the Child, which specifically forbids sentences of life imprisonment for children under the age of eighteen. The United States stands alone in rejecting this article of the Convention and in the implementation of this sentence on adolescents convicted of crimes in the United States. Three years ago the ACLU of Michigan began advocacy efforts after learning that over 300 Michigan children are currently serving these unforgiving sentences. This packet includes background information, research, a list of endorsing individuals and organizations of our efforts to eliminate this practice in the State of Michigan, and recommendations about what others can do to help this effort. Details: Detroit: American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan, 2007. 66p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 21, 2011 at: http://www.aclumich.org/sites/default/files/file/pdf/JWLOPpacket.pdf Year: 2007 Country: United States URL: http://www.aclumich.org/sites/default/files/file/pdf/JWLOPpacket.pdf Shelf Number: 121472 Keywords: Human Rights Juvenile Detention Juvenile Offenders (Michigan) Life Sentence Life Without Parole Sentencing

Author: Alesina, Alberto F. Title: A Test of Racial Bias in Capital Sentencing Summary: This paper proposes a test of racial bias in capital sentencing based upon patterns of judicial errors in lower courts. We model the behavior of the trial court as minimizing a weighted sum of the probability of sentencing an innocent and that of letting a guilty defendant free. We define racial bias as a situation where the relative weight on the two types of errors is a function of defendant and/or victim race. The key prediction of the model is that if the court is unbiased, ex post the error rate should be independent of the combination of defendant and victim race. We test this prediction using an original dataset that contains the race of the defendant and of the victim(s) for all capital appeals that became final between 1973 and 1995. We find robust evidence of bias against minority defendants who killed white victims: In Direct Appeal and Habeas Corpus the probability of error in these cases is 3 and 9 percentage points higher, respectively, than for minority defendants who killed minority victims. Details: Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2011. 38p. Source: Internet Resource: NBER Working Paper Series; Working Paper 16981: Accessed May 3, 2011 at: http://papers.nber.org/papers/w16981 Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://papers.nber.org/papers/w16981 Shelf Number: 121584 Keywords: Capital Punishment Judicial Error Minorities Racial Bias Racial Disparities Sentencing

Author: Mastrobuoni, Giovanni Title: Optimal Criminal Behavior and the Disutility of Jail: Theory and Evidence On Bank Robberies Summary: This paper uses unique data on the benefits of individual crimes, in particular, 5,000 Italian bank robberies – representing 57 percent of all European bank robberies – to identify the distribution of criminals’ perceived disutility of jail or value of freedom. Bank robbers behave according to an instantaneous version of Becker’s model of crime: during bank robberies both the probability of apprehension and the average haul increase over time. At the margin this trade-off depends on: i) the criminal’s expected haul at time t, ii) its expected increase between t and t+1, iii) the hazard rate of arrest, and iv) the criminals’ disutility of ending up in jail. The optimal duration t in successful robberies allows me to identify the individual disutility of ending up in jail or value of freedom. The distribution of the disutility of jail is positively skewed and resembles a typical earnings distribution. Ability among criminals appears to be distributed like ability among workers since both earnings and the disutility of jail – an opportunity cost that is larger for more able criminals – arise from an underlying distribution of ability. Moreover, the relationship between the modus operandi of bank robberies and the derived disutility of jail time is consistent with the existence of general deterrence. Sentence enhancements appear to be correctly targeting the most able bank robbers. Finally, more able bank robbers are considerably more responsive to deterrence than less able ones. Details: Unpublished Paper, 2011. 42p. Source: Internet Resource: Working Paper: Accessed May 4, 2011 at: http://www.carloalberto.org/people/mastrobuoni/doc/ValueFreedom4.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Italy URL: http://www.carloalberto.org/people/mastrobuoni/doc/ValueFreedom4.pdf Shelf Number: 121618 Keywords: Bank Robberies (Italy) Deterrence Robbery Sentencing

Author: Great Britain. HM Inspectorate of Probation and HM Inspectorate of Prisons Title: A Joined-Up Sentence? Offender Management in Prisons in 2009/2010 Summary: The National Offender Management Service (NOMS) aims to provide a structure to manage certain more serious or prolific offenders through their custodial sentence with probation staff in the community acting as offender managers. An offender manager’s role is to assess the risk of harm to others each offender poses and the likelihood of them reoffending, and then to produce a sentence plan accordingly. By the end of 2006, offender management units had been created in prisons to manage those arrangements in custody. This report, A Joined-Up Sentence?, reflects findings from the first 13 prison establishments inspected. Inspectors found that, even taking account of the different nature of the 13 establishments, some common themes emerged:  despite considerable progress, there is still too much variation in the way in which prisoners are managed by the Prison and Probation Services;  NOMS envisaged that offender managers in the community (probation officers) would be responsible for assessing the prisoner and for driving the management of the case, but this was rarely happening, and some offender supervisors (prison officers) were expected to take on this role, often without appropriate training or guidance, and sometimes with competing operational duties;  some prisons had worked hard to ensure that all relevant prisoners had an OASys assessment, even where these should have been prepared by the offender manager, but the quality of these assessments varied, and they were rarely seen as a key document within the establishment;  sentence planning was often driven more by the availability of activities than by the assessment;  few establishments made strategic use of the OASys database to identify and provide for key areas of need in the prisoner population, which was disappointing; and  information about prisoners was held in different locations within the establishment and, worryingly, public protection information was sometimes kept separate from offender management, which impeded the safe and effective management of prisoners. Despite these criticisms, the inspection found some Offender Management Units which were well integrated into the establishment and where core custodial functions sat effectively alongside offender management. However, there needs to be considerable progress across the custodial estate before the NOMS vision of a ‘joined up sentence’ is realised and Offender Management Units operate as a hub within the establishment. Details: London: HM Inspectorate of Probation and HM Inspectorate of Prisons, 2011. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: Prison Offender Management Inspection 2: Accessed May 5, 2011 at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/inspectorates/hmi-probation/docs/A_Joined_Up_Sentence-rps.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.justice.gov.uk/inspectorates/hmi-probation/docs/A_Joined_Up_Sentence-rps.pdf Shelf Number: 121653 Keywords: Offender Supervision Offenders Prisoners (U.K.) Probation Sentencing

Author: Males, Mike Title: Striking Out: California’s “Three Strikes And You’re Out” Law Has Not Reduced Violent Crime. A 2011 Update. Summary: In March 1999, the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice (CJCJ) released a report through the Justice Policy Institute (JPI) that investigated the effects of the “Three Strikes” Law. It noted, In the wake of the widely publicized 1993 kidnapping and murder of 12-year-old Polly Klaas, California Governor Pete Wilson signed into law on March 7, 1994, one of the most punitive sentencing statutes in recent history. The law was dubbed “Three Strikes and You’re Out” because of its provision requiring 25-years-to-life prison terms for defendants convicted of any felony (or misdemeanor such as petty theft reclassified as a felony) after having previously been convicted of two specified “serious” or “violent” felonies. The law was affirmed by three-fourths of California voters through a statewide initiative in November of that year. The Three Strikes law promised to reduce violent crime by putting repeat violent offenders behind bars for life. The severe nature of the law was intended to maximize the criminal justice system’s deterrent and selective incapacitation effect. Under deterrence theory, individuals are dissuaded from criminal activity through the threat of state-imposed penalties. Selective incapacitation suggests that crime can be reduced by incapacitating the small group of repeat offenders who are responsible for a large portion of serious crime. As of December 31, 2010, 40,998 Californians were behind bars for strike offenses, including 8,727 for third strikes. While the second strike population in prisons actually declined over the 1999-2010 period, the third strike population, due to very lengthy sentences, nearly doubled. At an average of $46,700 per inmate per year, a 25-year sentence costs the State $1.1 million per inmate; a life sentence, assuming incarceration at age 43 (the average third strike commitment age) and death at 82 (the average life expectancy for a male alive at age 43) costs $1.8 million per inmate, even without adding the higher medical costs of aged prisoners. Thus, just imprisoning the current third-strike population will cost taxpayers at least $10 billion in 2010 dollars over the next 25 years. Despite its high costs, candidates of both major parties have credited the “Three-Strikes” law with reducing crime in California. However, national crime trends show that crime has been dropping in every region regardless of incarceration practices since the early 1990s. An earlier JPI study found that California’s declining crime rates were no different than in states without a Three Strikes law, while a CJCJ study found California counties that used the law the least had reductions in crime slightly larger than counties that used the law the most. Other early research found similar results, while some other studies have disagreed, and other recent reviews such as by the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law have found only mixed results. The crime control impact of the “Three Strikes and You’re Out” law is an important subject to analyze. Under deterrence and incapacitation theories, counties that most heavily used the “Three Strikes” law, thereby removing larger proportions of their criminal population from public, should experience greater crime declines than more lenient counties. Because of its broad applications and disparate enforcement, California’s “Three Strikes” law provides a rare opportunity to analyze these theories. This report updates the 1999 Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice report using 2009 and 2010 data to examine crime trends in California counties with widely varying “Three Strikes” imprisonment levels. Details: San Francisco: Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, 2011. 11p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Brief: Accessed May 17, 2011 at: http://www.cjcj.org/files/Striking_Out_Californias_Three_Strikes_And_Youre_Out_Law_Has_Not_Reduced_Violent_Crime.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.cjcj.org/files/Striking_Out_Californias_Three_Strikes_And_Youre_Out_Law_Has_Not_Reduced_Violent_Crime.pdf Shelf Number: 121736 Keywords: Deterrence Life Sentence Sentencing Three Strikes Legislation (California) Violent Crime

Author: Northern Ireland. Criminal Justice Inspection Title: Pre-Sentence Reports Summary: The Probation Board for Northern Ireland (PBNI) is best known for the supervision of offenders. An equally important but less obvious aspect of its work is the delivery of Pre-Sentence Reports (PSRs) to the courts. A PSR provides the court with an assessment of the nature and causes of a defendant’s offending, the likelihood of re-offending, the risk of harm to the public, information on the range of appropriate disposals, areas to be addressed and additional measures. These reports have a major impact on the outcomes for the offender pre and post-sentence as well as for the public at large. The PBNI prepares around 6,000 PSRs each year. The demands on the Probation Board in the production of PSRs are increasing and it is important that they are completed within a robust quality assurance framework and that they are positively received by the court in deciding their sentencing options for offenders. The purpose of the inspection was to consider how the Probation Board assures quality control of PSRs, identify areas of good practice and make recommendations aimed at improving service delivery. The overall conclusion from the inspection was that there were clear arrangements in place for the quality control of PSRs and that there was a high degree of concordance between sentencing options and the options given in the PSR. The inspection confirmed the competency of the on-going quality control mechanisms. The quality of the PSRs produced by the Probation Board were held in high regard by the courts. The inspection made a number of recommendations aimed at improving current arrangements, including the need to increase the use of Specific Sentence Reports, where appropriate, and the need to engage with the Department of Justice (DoJ) concerning the use of PSRs as a vehicle towards influencing Community Sentence Orders. Details: Belfast: Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland, 2011. 47p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 6, 2011 at: http://www.cjini.org/CJNI/files/7d/7d0d4159-4e96-4991-968e-0ef24365c699.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.cjini.org/CJNI/files/7d/7d0d4159-4e96-4991-968e-0ef24365c699.pdf Shelf Number: 121981 Keywords: Pre-Sentence Reports Pre-Sentence Reports (Northern Ireland) Probation Sentencing

Author: Blagg, Harry Title: Problem-Oriented Courts Summary: This paper addresses a number of issues linked to the emergence of problem-oriented courts. Problem-oriented courts form part of an emerging judicial sphere where the traditional focus on legal process is balanced with concern for therapeutic outcomes. Expressed simply, problem-oriented courts seek to use the authority and structure of the courts to further therapeutic goals and enhance the performance of agencies involved in delivering court mandated services. Problem-oriented courts attempt to facilitate a team approach and encourage close collaboration between agencies involved in the justice process. The problem-oriented court acts as the ‘hub’ connecting various ‘spokes’, such as drug and alcohol treatment agencies, community based corrections, probation services and domestic violence agencies, forming a holistic and integrated approach. This approach encourages magistrates and judges to take a pro-active and overtly leading role in the creation of better, well coordinated services for clients. Supporters of problem-oriented courts maintain that such courts sit outside the traditional punishment paradigm, being more concerned with treatment and rehabilitation outcomes. The orientation of the court is neatly encapsulated in the notion of ‘forward looking’ as opposed to ‘backward looking’ forms of justice – that is, sentencing practices should be geared towards encouraging positive future behaviour rather then simply punishing past actions. The future impact of problem-oriented courts on the ways the criminal justice as a whole deals with offending linked to issues such as drug and alcohol use, mental health, homelessness and social exclusion could prove to be far reaching. Moreover the problem-oriented approach – and the philosophies of therapeutic jurisprudence and, to a lesser extent, restorative justice that inform the approach – may influence the orientation of mainstream courts. The approach is largely in its infancy in Australia. There is no settled theory (although a number of theories vie for relevance) and no unified template describing how a problem-oriented court should operate. Working practices vary according to the nature of the problem the court has been developed to deal with. The long-term benefits of the problem-oriented approach and its implications for the criminal justice system remain the subject of debate, both within the judiciary and within the network of agencies a problem-oriented approach binds together to work collectively on a particular problem. Problem-oriented courts can include community or neighbourhood courts, family and domestic violence courts, mental health courts, drug courts and alcohol courts. However, the problem-oriented approach is also being used by some magistrates in general courts when dealing with particular groups of offenders. This is particularly the case where a magistrate’s court has become the site for specialist treatment and diversionary services, such as Western Australia’s courtbased drug diversion initiatives. This paper excludes discussion of Aboriginal Courts which have been extensively considered by the Law Reform Commission as part of its Aboriginal Customary Law Project. Problem-oriented courts have not emerged in a vacuum, but in response to the challenges posed by a number of seemingly intractable urban social problems (drug use, alcohol, family and domestic violence, mental illness, anti-social behaviour, fear of crime, and problems associated with ‘hyper-marginalised’ groups) apparently impervious to traditional remedies and solutions. They also reflect frustration with the often fragmented and ad hoc response of traditional justice structures, cultures and processes. Some courts, such as community or neighbourhood courts, have emerged in response to claims that the courts are out of touch with the concerns of local communities and have been mandated to directly involve local people in the delivery of justice. Problem-oriented courts have been influenced by the philosophies of restorative justice and therapeutic jurisprudence. While, as will be demonstrated later, the two philosophies cannot simply be collapsed together, they do share a common commitment to ‘humanising’ the justice process, closely integrating concerns for individual and social change into the legal process, and providing ‘forward looking’ rather than ‘backward looking’ justice outcomes. This latter concern in particular represents a paradigm shift in the way justice is conceived: less concerned with simply judging past actions than with affecting change in individuals and social contexts to ensure crime and victimisation is prevented in the future. Besides the various philosophies vying for influence in the courts, the problem-oriented court has become the site for new hybrid techniques for engaging with the needs and problems of offenders. Since the focus of problem-oriented courts extends beyond applying the law, there is a need for behavioural techniques and treatments suited to the new environment. Intervention techniques such as motivational interviewing and brief interventions, discussed later, borrowed from addiction counselling, are emerging as intervention tools within problem-oriented courts because they claim positive results within a short timeframe. Problem-oriented courts are not simply a new type of specialist court. Details: Perth: Law Reform Commission of Western Australia, 2008. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Project 96: Accessed July 7, 2011 at: http://www.lrc.justice.wa.gov.au/2publications/reports/P96-BlaggRP.pdf Year: 2008 Country: Australia URL: http://www.lrc.justice.wa.gov.au/2publications/reports/P96-BlaggRP.pdf Shelf Number: 121998 Keywords: Domestic Violence Courts Drug Courts Mental Health Courts Problem-Oriented Courts (Australia) Sentencing

Author: Western Australia. Law Reform Commission Title: Court Intervention Programs: Final Report Summary: This final report is divided into six chapters. Chapter One explains the Commission’s approach to reform, in particular, the need for legislative and policy reform to support the continued operation of court intervention programs and the Commission’s guiding principles for reform. Chapter Two (which contains the majority of the Commission’s recommendations) deals with the legal and policy issues that are relevant to all court intervention programs. Specific recommendations dealing with court intervention programs addressing drug and alcohol dependency are discussed in Chapter Three. Chapter Four considers recommendations in relation to mental impairment court intervention programs and Chapter Five considers recommendations in relation to family violence court intervention programs. Finally, recommendations in relation to general court intervention programs are contained in Chapter Six. The Final Report is intended to be read in conjunction with the Commission’s Consultation Paper, which describes how various court intervention programs operate and provides the research and analysis that support the Commission’s final recommendations. In order to avoid unnecessary duplication, the Final Report sets out the Commission’s conclusions and fi nal recommendations without repeating all of the descriptive material in the Consultation Paper. The Commission has made a total of 37 recommendations for reform in this Final Report. A list of recommendations is contained in Appendix A. For ease of reference, a list of recommendations that require legislative amendment is set out in Appendix B. Details: Perth: Law Reform Commission of Western Australia, 2009. 152p. Source: Internet Resource: Project No. 96: Accessed July 7, 2011 at: http://www.lrc.justice.wa.gov.au/2publications/reports/P96-FR.pdf Year: 2009 Country: Australia URL: http://www.lrc.justice.wa.gov.au/2publications/reports/P96-FR.pdf Shelf Number: 121999 Keywords: Court Reform Domestic Violence Courts Drug Courts Mental Health Courts Problem-Oriented Courts (Australia) Sentencing

Author: Great Britain. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary Title: Exercising Discretion: The Gateway to Justice. A study by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate on cautions, penalty notices for disorder and restorative justice Summary: In 2009, 38 per cent of the 1.29 million offences ‘solved’ by police were dealt with outside of the court system. We found that the use of out-of-court disposals has evolved in a piecemeal and largely uncontrolled way. An earlier public survey conducted on behalf of HMIC confirmed general public support for giving first-time offenders a second chance – which out-of-court options certainly offer; but this public support ebbs away when they are used for persistent offenders. Our work also suggested that victim satisfaction is high when offenders take part in RJ approaches. RJ, used appropriately, may also reduce re-offending. The substantial growth in the use of out-of-court disposals has created some disquiet among criminal justice professionals over inconsistencies in their use, in particular for persistent and more serious offending. We found wide variations in practice across police force areas in the proportion and types of offences handled out of court. In view of the growth and wide variations in practice, and the consequences for offenders and victims as well as for public confidence in the criminal justice system, we believe the time has come to formulate a national strategy to improve consistency in the use of out-of-court disposals across England and Wales, and we have made this our primary recommendation. We hope that such a strategy will draw on the good practice identified in this report, promote understanding and reduce excessive variations and inconsistencies. The strategy should be based on what works to improve victim satisfaction, reduce re-offending and provide value for money. It should take into account not only the nature of offending and offenders, but how best to achieve transparency and reassurance for the public. In making this recommendation, we are acutely aware of the challenge that a national strategy may increase the bureaucratic burdens of prosecutors and police officers. We do not believe that such increases are an automatic consequence of this recommendation. In contrast, there are more definite consequences to decisions about whether someone enters the formal criminal justice system or receives an out-of-court disposal: an individual’s chance of getting a job or travelling abroad can be affected, for instance, and there may be wider implications for public confidence. It is therefore imperative that the principles of openness and fairness are applied to the use of out-of-court disposals. This will necessarily rely on record-keeping, since confidence in a system of justice that is delivered outside the courtroom is dependent on the ability of police and prosecutors to publish information about their use, enabling the public to see how out-of-court disposals are managed locally. This record-keeping must be proportionate and can be based on existing systems. Details: London: HMIC and HMCPSI, 2011. 38p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 11, 2011 at: http://www.hmic.gov.uk/SiteCollectionDocuments/Joint%20Inspections/CJI_20110609.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.hmic.gov.uk/SiteCollectionDocuments/Joint%20Inspections/CJI_20110609.pdf Shelf Number: 122023 Keywords: Penalty Notices Police Discretion (U.K.) Restorative Justice Sentencing

Author: Mills, Helen Title: Community Sentences: A Solution to Penal Excess? Summary: This paper examines the use of community sentences as a mechanism for reducing reliance on custody in England and Wales since the late 1990s. It is an up-to-date assessment of successive attempts to manage prison demands by reforming community sentences over the past two decades and an assessment of the implications and challenges for penal reformers going forward. Details: London: Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, 2011. 27p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 2, 2011 at: http://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/rssasolutiontopenalexcess.html Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/rssasolutiontopenalexcess.html Shelf Number: 122245 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration Community Based Corrections (U.K.) Sentencing

Author: Di Tella, Rafael Title: Free to Punish? The American Dream and the Harsh Treatment of Criminals Summary: We describe the evolution of selective aspects of punishment in the US over the period 1980-2004. We note that imprisonment increased around 1980, a period that coincides with the “Reagan revolution” in economic matters. We build an economic model where beliefs about economic opportunities and beliefs about punishment are correlated. We present three pieces of evidence (across countries, within the US and an experimental exercise) that are consistent with the model. Details: Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Eocnomic Research, 2011. 53p. Source: Internet Resource: NBER Working Paper Series; Working Paper 17309: Accessed August 22, 2011 at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w17309.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w17309.pdf Shelf Number: 122429 Keywords: Economics and Crime Incarceration Rates Punishment (U.S.) Sentencing

Author: Diroll, David J. Title: Prison Crowding: The Long View, With Suggestions Summary: Most of this report takes you through the recent history of Ohio’s prison population (see A Short Primer on Prison Crowding, beginning on p. 4). As Ohio faces record deficits and record prison populations, that primer should be worth 15 minutes of your time. The table on p. 6 is especially useful. Several informed suggestions designed to ease the problem begin on p. 14. Here are a few of the report’s highlights: • Ohio prisons now hold about 50,500. That’s 6½ times the number held in 1974. That puts the prison system 31% over its rated capacity, with about 12,500 more inmates than the prisons were built to hold (p. 4). • Crowding gives the state a perverse bargain. Extra inmates add relatively little to total costs. Adding inmates in an over-capacity system only costs about $16/day in food, clothing, and medical care. To save the $60+ “total” prison costs—including construction, debt service, and added staff—the population will have to move below capacity. Many different ideas will have to be considered (p. 4). • Ohio undertook an expensive prison construction project from the mid-‘80s to the mid-‘90s, adding over 17,000 beds. But the number of inmates and their sentence lengths continually grew to exceed the system’s expanded capacity (p. 7). • For years, the prison population increased as prison intake grew. However, recent growth in Ohio’s prison population—even with mandatory sentences and scores of bills that increase penalties for particular offenses—is not driven primarily by intake (although it is a factor). It’s largely fueled by increases in inmates’ average length-of-stay (pp. 4-14). • In the past 35 years, the only period in which the Ohio prison population remained relatively static was the first decade under S.B. 2, from 1997-2006. That bill increased the actual time served for high level offenders but made tradeoffs for others, including meaningful checks on length-of-stay (pp. 8-10). • A peculiar line of U.S. Supreme Court cases led the Ohio Supreme Court to strike down S.B. 2’s key length-of-stay restrictions in 2006. Even when accounting for other factors, these decisions led to an increase in average time served of almost 5 months per inmate. The cumulative “Blakely/Foster effect” so far has been well over 4,000 beds. None of this growth came from tough-on-crime legislation (p. 14). • Sentencing Commission suggestions include: o Reenact a constitutional alternative to Foster (pp. 15); o Seriously consider the changes proposed in S.B. 10 (p. 15-16); o Treat drug and non-drug cases alike within the same sentencing range (pp. 16-17); o A sampling of other ideas begins on p. 18. • Separately, simplify the Revised Code (p. 20) and address the “missing” elements in various criminal statutes (p. 20). Details: Columbus, OH: Ohio Criminal Sentencing Commission, 2011. 21p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 26, 2011 at: http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/Boards/Sentencing/resources/Publications/MonitoringReport2011.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/Boards/Sentencing/resources/Publications/MonitoringReport2011.pdf Shelf Number: 122550 Keywords: Prison Overcrowding Prisons (Ohio) Sentencing

Author: McHutchison, Judy Title: Outcomes for NSW Periodic Detention Orders Commenced 2003 - 2004 Summary: A periodic detention order is a sentencing option available to NSW courts which authorises the sentencing of offenders to a two day a week detention period for terms up to three years. The aim of this study was to use electronically available data to measure outcomes (i.e., successful completion or revocation) for periodic detention orders commenced in 2003-4. Periodic detention orders can be revoked if an offender is convicted on another matter and sentenced to a period of full-time custody greater than a month. Orders can also be revoked if offenders otherwise fail to comply with their obligations under an order including: 􀂃 non-attendance on three or more occasions 􀂃 offences in custody. The majority of data analysed in this study was extracted from the NSW Department of Corrective Service’s (NSWDCS) Offender Integrated Management System (OIMS) on the 30th May 2006. At this date 925 orders had been completed (13 orders remained unfinalised and these were not included in this study). Details: Sydney: New South Wales Department of Corrective Services, 2006. 37p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Publication No. 48: Accessed August 26, 2011 at: http://www.correctiveservices.nsw.gov.au/_media/dcs/information/research-and-statistics/research-publication/RP048.pdf Year: 2006 Country: Australia URL: http://www.correctiveservices.nsw.gov.au/_media/dcs/information/research-and-statistics/research-publication/RP048.pdf Shelf Number: 122555 Keywords: Imprisonment Periodic Detention (Australia) Prisoners Sentencing

Author: Seal, Susan Title: A Dynamical Interpretation of the Three-Strikes Law Summary: California’s Three Strikes Law has been in effect since 1994. Advocates of this policy claim it acts as a deterrent for violent crime; yet critics allege it acts solely as an incapacitant–a device used to segregate a population of “undesirables” from the total population in an attempt to lower criminal susceptibility. To determine the true relationship between these two intimately connected phenomena, we construct a dynamical model of the Three-Strikes Law within the framework of inner-city communities located in Los Angeles County. We then compare this model to one of Los Angeles County before California implemented the Three-Strike policy–the classical incarceration model. Through qualitative analysis we determine the basic reproductive number, R0, for each of the models. Using numerical simulations, we then determine the net change in the total population of reformed inmates and the total number of incarcerated individuals due to the Three-Strikes Law. We also analyze the impact of population density on crime rates in states that utilize the Three-Strikes Law. Finally, we construct and examine a hypothetical One-Strike model to determine the impact of different strike policies on the reformed, criminal and incarcerated populations. We find that the Three-Strikes policy deters crime better than the classical incarceration policy in densely populated areas like Los Angeles County. In the context of population density, the Three-Strikes Law is a better deterrent in a sparsely populated region than a densely populated region. The optimal policy is found to be one that consists of more than three strikes. Details: Tempe, AZ: Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Arizona State University, 2007. 45p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 13, 2011 at: http://mtbi.asu.edu/files/A%20Dynamical%20Interpretation%20of%20the%20Three%20Strikes%20Law.pdf Year: 2007 Country: United States URL: http://mtbi.asu.edu/files/A%20Dynamical%20Interpretation%20of%20the%20Three%20Strikes%20Law.pdf Shelf Number: 122729 Keywords: Deterrence Punishment Repeat Offenders Sentencing Three-Strikes Law (California)

Author: Rubin, Mark Title: An Analysis of Probation Violations and Revocations in Maine: Probation Entrants in 2005-2006 Summary: In 2009, Maine was selected (with four other states) to conduct a study of probation revocations in Maine, and to provide data to the Justice Research and Statistics Association (JRSA) for a multi-state study of parole/probation revocations. This study analyzes a sample of 4,725 offenders who entered probation between January, 2005 and December, 2006 from either prison or jail, and analyzes probation violations and revocations occurring in the sample population over a 24 month period. Maine’s correctional system is unlike many others in the U.S. in that parole was abolished by the state legislature in 1976. However, probation often acts as de-facto parole in Maine, as more than two thirds of offenders enter probation from jail or prison (split sentence). Probation is a state-wide function administered by the Maine Department of Corrections (MDOC). MDOC supervises all Maine probationers across four probation regions. Since this study’s main objective is to examine variations in probation violations and revocation practices, we must first understand how Maine’s unique correctional laws and administration constrain and influence probation decision-making. The next section of this report briefly describes those aspects of Maine’s sentencing system and probation supervision regulations that may influence probation recidivism rates. Details: Portland, ME: Maine Statistical Analysis Center, University of Southern Maine Muskie School of Public Service, 2010. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Technical Report: Accessed September 15, 2011 at: http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/justiceresearch/Publications/Adult/Maine_Probation_Violations_%20Revocations_Entrants2005_06.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/justiceresearch/Publications/Adult/Maine_Probation_Violations_%20Revocations_Entrants2005_06.pdf Shelf Number: 122742 Keywords: Probation (Maine) Probation Revocations Probation Violations Probationers Recidivism Revocations Sentencing

Author: Lawrence, Alison Title: Principles of Effective State Sentencing and Corrections Policy A Report of the NCSL Sentencing and Corrections Work Group Summary: The NCSL Sentencing and Corrections Work Group project was developed under an NCSL partnership with the Public Safety Performance Project (PSPP) of the Pew Center on the States. The NCSL project responds to the challenges faced by states as they consider corrections and sentencing policies that both manage state spending and protect the public. The Pew PSPP was launched in 2006 to help states advance fiscally sound, data-driven policies and practices in sentencing and corrections. Pew’s work has included research, technical assistance, and funding and overseeing a variety of efforts both in states and nationally to support strategies that protect public safety, hold offenders accountable and control corrections costs. The NCSL Criminal Justice Program assembled the Sentencing and Corrections Work Group in 2010. The bipartisan, 18-member group includes officers of NCSL’s Law and Criminal Justice Committee and other legislators who are recognized as leaders on these issues. The group had a one-year work plan to discuss and identify overarching principles for effective state sentencing and corrections policy and to identify key issues and approaches that explain and illustrate the recommendations. The issues addressed by the NCSL work group reflect the important role of state legislatures in enacting policies that manage prison populations and costs, address offender and community needs, and contribute to the safe and fair administration of criminal justice. The discussions took place during a difficult, recessionary budget climate. A major interest of the work group was how to have an immediate effect on state public safety dollars while also ensuring that the public safety is protected into the future. Many concepts addressed in the Principles reflect recent advances in resource-sensitive policies that actually reduce risk and recidivism. Mindful that sentencing and corrections policies reach into various levels and branches of government, the Principles also reflect the value that lawmakers place on stakeholders throughout criminal justice systems in policy development and discussions. Apparent throughout the Principles is the importance of interbranch and intergovernmental collaboration, information exchange and evaluation in working toward effective sentencing and corrections policies. It is the intent of NCSL and this work group that the Principles and examples presented here will help guide and inform many aspects of state sentencing and corrections policy now and well into the future. Details: Washington, DC: National Conference of State Legislatures, 2011. 51p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 25, 2011 at: http://www.ncsl.org/documents/cj/pew/WGprinciplesreport.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.ncsl.org/documents/cj/pew/WGprinciplesreport.pdf Shelf Number: 123141 Keywords: Corrections Administration Costs of Criminal Justice Criminal Justice Administration Criminal Justice Policy (U.S.) Sentencing

Author: Abram, David S. Title: Building Criminal Capital vs Specific Deterrence: The Effect of Incarceration Length on Recidivism Summary: In evaluating the efficacy of most modern criminal justice systems, a vital relationship to understand is that between incarceration length (and likelihood) and recidivism. Because most previous attempts to estimate this relationship suffer from omitted variables bias, even the sign is unknown. In this paper, I build on previous work identifying substantial heterogeneity in attorney ability in a public defender office with random case assignment. I make use of this variation to address the omitted variables problem by instrumenting for sentence length and incarceration rate using the randomly assigned public defender. A negative relationship between recidivism and sentence length goes away when instrumenting for sentence. Similarly, a positive and statistically significant relationship between recidivism and incarceration becomes insignificant in the IV regressions. However the regression results do not reveal the full story, as the relationships are rather nonlinear. A graphical examination reveals a negative relationship between recidivism and sentence length and also recidivism and incarceration rate, particularly for shorter sentences and lower incarceration rates. In addition, longer sentences tend to lead to more severe crimes upon offender release. Put together, these findings provide some evidence for a mild specific deterrent effect, but one that rapidly diminishes. Details: Berkeley, CA: Law and Economics Workshop, 2010. 42p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 29, 2011 at: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/2fj8691d Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/2fj8691d Shelf Number: 123179 Keywords: Deterrence Punishment Recidivism Sentencing

Author: Freeman, Linda Title: Comparison of Case Outcomes: Household Member Assault/Battery Cases and Non-Household Member Assault/Battery Cases Summary: This report looks at cases disposed statewide in New Mexico for calendar year 2008. During 2008, NM District Courts disposed of 1,860 cases that had at least one assault or battery charge. In NM, if the victim of an assault or battery meets the definition of a household member (HHM) “a spouse, former spouse, parent, present or former stepparent, present or former parent-in-law, grandparent, grandparent-in-law, a co-parent of a child or a person with whom a person has had a continuing personal relationship” (NMSA 30-3-11) the defendant can be charged with a specific charge that is identifiable and different than if the victim does not meet the definition. For the purposes of this study, the existence of separate statutes allows us to compare the case outcomes when the victim meets the HHM definition compared to when the victim is not a HHM. The analysis used in this report is based on the most serious charge in the case. All cases disposed in 2008 that had any assault/battery or assault/battery HHM charges were selected from data that is provided to the New Mexico Sentencing Commission (NMSC) by the New Mexico Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC). After the initial case selection, it was determined whether or not the assault/battery or assault/battery HHM charge was the most serious charge in the case or a lower charge. Lower charges are considered less serious and we categorize cases by the most serious charge. Typically the most serious charge in the case is first count in the case; we refer to it as the top charge. Cases were categorized by their most serious charge and then grouped by whether or not it was a HHM or non-HHM crime anywhere in the charges. Prosecution rates, disposition and sentencing analysis were computed for each category of cases. Details: Albuquerque, NM: New Mexico Sentencing Commission, 2011. 9p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 22, 2011 at: Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 123426 Keywords: Aggravated Assault Assaults (New Mexico) Sentencing Victims of Assault

Author: O'Hear, Michael M. Title: Solving the Good Time Puzzle: Why Following the Rules Should Get You Out of Prison Early Summary: Good-time programs have long been an important part of the American penal landscape. At least twenty-nine states and the federal government currently offer prison inmates early release, sometimes by many years, in return for good behavior. Written a generation ago, the leading scholarly article on the subject presented a strong case against good time, which has yet to be effectively addressed. Although good time is traditionally justified by reference to its usefulness in deterring inmate misconduct — credits can be denied or withdrawn as a penalty for violations of prison rules — the article questioned how it could possibly be just to impose additional incarceration based on mere violations of administrative regulations. In response to this important challenge, the present Essay proposes a new way to conceptualize good-time credits, specifically, as a way to recognize atonement. Drawing on increasingly influential communicative theories of punishment, the Essay argues that good time can be seen as congruent with (and not, as is commonly supposed, in opposition to) the basic purposes of sentencing. The Essay then proposes reforms that would help good-time programs more fully to embody the atonement ideal. Details: Milwaukee, WI: Marquette University Law School, 2011. 64p. Source: Internet Resource: Marquette Law School Legal Studies Paper No. 11-25: Accessed January 17, 2012 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1969072 Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1969072 Shelf Number: 123649 Keywords: Early Release Good-Time Sentencing

Author: Gotsch, Kara Title: Breakthrough in U.S. Drug Sentencing Reform: The Fair Sentencing Act and the Unfinished Reform Agenda Summary: Last year's (2010) passage of the federal Fair Sentencing Act, legislation that reduced the 100-to-1 sentencing disparity for crack cocaine offenses and eliminated the five-year mandatory minimum for simple possession of crack cocaine, reformed a law universally condemned for its harshness and for the racial disparity it produced. The reform is part of a larger movement to reconsider long mandatory minimum sentences for low-level drug offenses that pervade sentencing policy in the United States as well as in Latin America. Passage of the Fair Sentencing Act in August 2010 marked the first time in 40 years that the U.S. Congress eliminated a mandatory sentence. The legislation was historic at a time when intense partisan wrangling over a broad range of issues on Capitol Hill dominated debate and stymied action. Hopefully, the breakthrough represented by the Fair Sentencing Act will contribute to a broader movement to address disproportionate punishment and ensure a fairer justice system. WOLA’s new report by Kara Gotsch, director of advocacy at The Sentencing Project, describes the effort that led to passage of the Fair Sentencing Act and points to the unfinished sentencing reform agenda. The report highlights the importance of the reform beyond U.S. borders and argues that “given the United States’ role as the principal architect and major proponent of a global drug control system that has emphasized ‘zero-tolerance’ and criminal sanctions, the passage of the Fair Sentencing Act is a milestone not only for U.S. policy, but also for reform advocates in other countries.” Details: Washington, DC: Washington Office on Latin America, 2011. Source: Internet Resource: January 31, 2012 at http://sentencingproject.org/doc/dp_WOLA_Article.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://sentencingproject.org/doc/dp_WOLA_Article.pdf Shelf Number: 123914 Keywords: Drug Laws (U.S.) Mandatory Minimum Sentences Sentencing Sentencing Reform

Author: United States Sentencing Commission Title: Report to Congress: Mandatory Minimum Penalties in the Federal Criminal Justice System Summary: This report assesses the impact of mandatory minimum penalties on federal sentencing, particularly in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Booker v. United States, which rendered the federal sentencing guidelines advisory. The United States Sentencing Commission prepared this report pursuant to a congressional directive contained in section 4713 of the Matthew Shepherd and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009, Pub L. No. 111–84, and the Commission's general authority under 28 U.S.C. §§ 994–995, as well as its specific authority under 28 U.S.C. § 995(a)(20) to "make recommendations to Congress concerning modification or enactment of statutes relating to sentencing, penal, and correctional matters that the Commission finds to be necessary and advisable to carry out an effective, humane, and rational sentencing policy." Details: Washington, DC: The Sentencing Commission, 2011. 369p., app. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 1, 2012 at: http://www.ussc.gov/Legislative_and_Public_Affairs/Congressional_Testimony_and_Reports/Mandatory_Minimum_Penalties/20111031_RtC_Mandatory_Minimum.cfm Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.ussc.gov/Legislative_and_Public_Affairs/Congressional_Testimony_and_Reports/Mandatory_Minimum_Penalties/20111031_RtC_Mandatory_Minimum.cfm Shelf Number: 123919 Keywords: Booker v. United States Mandatory Minimum Sentences Punishment Sentencing

Author: Office of Criminal Justice Research, Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles Title: Special Report: Lifetime Likelihood of Going to a Georgia State Prison Summary: The current study relies on life tables techniques to estimate the lifetime likelihood of going to prison in the State of Georgia. The “lifetime likelihood of incarceration” measurement reflects the percentage of Georgia residents who should be expected to be incarcerated in a State prison at some point during their lifetime. These lifetime estimates are based on established life table techniques frequently used by demographers and actuaries to summarize today’s first-time admission prison rate and age-specific mortality rates (referred to as double decrement life table), as well as the techniques used by the Department of Justice in estimating U.S. rates in the 1997 report, Lifetime Likelihood of Going to State or Federal Prison. Georgia men (17.8%) are over seven times more likely than women to be incarcerated in prison at least once during their lifetime. Among Georgia women, black females (4.6%) are three times more likely to enter prison at least once during their life compared to white females (1.5%). Among Georgia men, four out of every ten black males (38.5%) will likely go to a Georgia state prison sometime over the course of their lives. The likelihood of a Georgia man going to prison (17.8%) is nearly double that of the national average (9.0%). The likelihood of incarceration for Georgia females (2.5%) was over two times that of the national average (1.1%). The likelihood of black Georgia men being incarcerated (38.5%) is ten points higher than that of the rest of the nation (28.5%). White males in Georgia are more than twice as likely (9.3%) to be incarcerated than white males elsewhere in the U.S. (4.4%). Details: Atlanta, Georgia: Office of Criminal Justice Research, Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles, 1999. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 14, 2012 at http://ars-corp.com/_view/PDF_Files/LifetimeLikelihoodofGoingtoaGeorgiaStatePrison1999.pdf Year: 1999 Country: United States URL: http://ars-corp.com/_view/PDF_Files/LifetimeLikelihoodofGoingtoaGeorgiaStatePrison1999.pdf Shelf Number: 124140 Keywords: Adult Corrections (Georgia) Corrections Imprisonment Race/Ethnicity Sentencing

Author: Tasmania. Department of Justice, Sentencing Advisory Council. Title: Arson & Deliberately Lit Fires Summary: The Sentencing Advisory Council’s Consultation Paper into its first referral from the Attorney-General was released on 20 December 2011. The Sentencing Advisory Council is committed to giving the members of the community the opportunity to express their views about sentencing issues in Tasmania. The purpose of this Consultation Paper is to assist in the discussion about the legislative framework, sentencing options, intervention and community information programs available for adults and juveniles involved in fire setting in Tasmania. The Sentencing Advisory Council is inviting responses from all relevant stakeholders and members of the community on the range of questions posed in the Consultation Paper. The Council intends to use its responses to inform its advice to the Attorney-General. Details: Tasmania: Sentencing Advisory Council, Department of Justice, 2011. Source: Consultation Paper No. 1: Internet Resource: Accessed February 18, 2012 at http://www.sentencingcouncil.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/187507/Arson_and_deliberately_lit_fires_-_consultation_paper.pdf Year: 2011 Country: International URL: http://www.sentencingcouncil.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/187507/Arson_and_deliberately_lit_fires_-_consultation_paper.pdf Shelf Number: 124182 Keywords: Adult Offenders Arson (Tasmania) Juvenile Offenders Legislation Sentencing

Author: Rogers, Audrey Title: From Peer-To-Peer Networks to Cloud Computing: How Technology is Redefining Child Pornography Laws Summary: Child pornography circulating in cyberspace has ballooned into the millions. To punish this flood, the law must accurately delineate culpable conduct. Technology such as peer-to-peer networks has erased the divisions among traders of child pornography, and, therefore, the differentials in punishment have lost their underpinnings. The current sentencing controversy surrounding child pornographers is merely the tip of the iceberg of the larger need to revamp the offenses themselves. This paper provides a framework for a normative critique of the offenses and their sentences. It suggests the law could better reflect technology by comporting with a refined harm rationale that rests on the fundamental injury to the victim’s dignity and privacy. Drawing on comparisons to diverse laws such as the Geneva Convention’s ban on photographs of prisoners of war, this paper states all traders in child pornography violate the rights of the children depicted and therefore inflict harm, albeit at different levels. Accordingly, the paper proposes three categories: producers, traders, and seekers of child pornography with base sentences varying accordingly. Starting at the same base level, the Sentencing Commission could then propose enhancements or departures to distinguish among the traders and their individual culpability. Details: Social Science Research Network, 2012. 41p. Source: Working Paper Series: Internet Resource: Accessed March 9, 2012 at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2006664& Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2006664& Shelf Number: 124403 Keywords: Child Pornography Cybercrimes Internet Crimes Sentencing Sentencing Reform

Author: Ryan, Meghan J. Title: Breakthrough Science and the New Rehabilitation Summary: Breakthroughs in pharmacology, genetics, and neuroscience are transforming how society views criminals and thus how society should respond to criminal behavior. Although the criminal law has long been based on notions of culpability, science is undercutting the assumption that offenders are actually responsible for their criminal actions. Further, scientific advances have suggested that criminals can be changed at the biochemical level. The public has become well aware of these advances largely due to pervasive media reporting on these issues and also as a result of the pharmaceutical industry’s incessant advertising of products designed to transform individuals by treating everything from depression to sexual dysfunction. This public familiarity with and expectation of scientific advances has set into motion the resurrection of the penological theory of rehabilitation that has lain dormant since the mid-1970s. The New Rehabilitation that is surfacing, however, differs in form from the rehabilitation of the earlier era by effecting change through biochemical interventions rather than through attempting to change an offender’s character. This raises novel concerns about this New Rehabilitation that must be examined in light of the science that has sparked its revival. Details: Unpublished, 2010. 51p. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2019368 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2019368 Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 20, 2012 at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2019368 Year: 9368 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2019368 Shelf Number: 124608 Keywords: Criminal Psychology Drugs and Crime Rehabilitation Sentencing Sentencing Reform

Author: Pew Center on the States Title: Public Opinion on Sentencing and Corrections Policy in America Summary: As part of the Public Safety Performance Project's work with states to improve public safety and control corrections costs, we collaborated with two of the nation's leading polling firms, The Mellman Group and Public Opinion Strategies, to explore public opinion on sentencing and corrections issues across the country. The firms conducted a national survey of 1,200 likely voters to measure underlying attitudes and support for specific policy changes. Download the summary of findings. (Adobe PDF) Key Takeaways • American voters believe too many people are in prison and the nation spends too much on imprisonment. • Voters overwhelmingly support a variety of policy changes that shift non-violent offenders from prison to more effective, less expensive alternatives. • Support for sentencing and corrections reforms (including reduced prison terms) is strong across political parties, regions, age, gender, and racial/ethnic groups. Details: Washington, DC: Pew Center on the States, 2012. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 3, 2012 at: http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewcenteronthestatesorg/Initiatives/PSPP/PEW_NationalSurveyResearchPaper_FINAL.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewcenteronthestatesorg/Initiatives/PSPP/PEW_NationalSurveyResearchPaper_FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 124804 Keywords: Corrections Criminal Justice Policy Public Opinion Survey (U.S.) Sentencing

Author: Pew Center on the States Title: Time Served: The High Cost, Low Return of Longer Prison Terms Summary: Over the past four decades, criminal justice policy in the United States was guided largely by a central premise: the best way to protect the public was to put more people in prison. A corollary was that offenders should spend longer and longer time behind bars. The logic of the strategy seemed inescapable—more inmates serving more time surely equals less crime—and policy makers were stunningly effective at putting the approach into action. As the Pew Center on the States has documented, the state prison population spiked more than 700 percent between 1972 and 2011, and in 2008 the combined federal-statelocal inmate count reached 2.3 million, or one in 100 adults. Annual state spending on corrections now tops $51 billion and prisons account for the vast majority of the cost, even though offenders on parole and probation dramatically outnumber those behind bars. Indeed, prison expansion has delivered some public safety payoff. Serious crime has been declining for the past two decades, and imprisonment deserves some of the credit. Experts differ on precise figures, but they generally conclude that the increased use of incarceration accounted for one-quarter to one-third of the crime drop in the 1990s. Beyond the crime control benefit, most Americans support long prison terms for serious, chronic, and violent offenders as a means of exacting retribution for reprehensible behavior. But criminologists and policy makers increasingly agree that we have reached a “tipping point” with incarceration, where additional imprisonment will have little if any effect on crime. Research also has identified new offender supervision strategies and technologies that can help break the cycle of recidivism. Across the nation, these developments, combined with tight state budgets, have prompted a significant shift toward alternatives to prison for lower-level offenders. Policy makers in several states have worked across party lines to reform sentencing and release laws, including reducing prison time served by nonviolent offenders. The analysis in this study shows that longer prison terms have been a key driver of prison populations and costs, and the study highlights new opportunities for state leaders to generate greater public safety with fewer taxpayer dollars. Details: Washington, DC: Pew Charitable Trusts, 2012. 65p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 26, 2012 at: http://www.pewstates.org/uploadedFiles/PCS_Assets/2012/Prison_Time_Served.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.pewstates.org/uploadedFiles/PCS_Assets/2012/Prison_Time_Served.pdf Shelf Number: 125400 Keywords: Costs of Criminal Justice Criminal Justice Expenditures Criminal Justice Policy Imprisonment Inmates Prison Population Sentencing

Author: Bushway, Shawn D. Title: Sentencing Guidelines and Judicial Discretion: Quasi-experimental Evidence from Human Calculation Errors Summary: There is a debate about whether advisory non-binding sentencing guidelines affect the sentences outcomes of individuals convicted in jurisdictions with this sentencing framework. Identifying the impact of sentencing guidelines is a difficult empirical problem because court actors may have preferences for sentencing severity that are correlated with the preferences that are outlined in the guidelines. But, in Maryland, ten percent of the recommended sentences computed in the guideline worksheets contain calculation errors. We use this unique source of quasi-experimental variation to quantify the extent to which sentencing guidelines influence policy outcomes. Among drug offenses, we find that the direct impact of the guidelines is roughly ½ the size of the overall correlation between recommendations and outcomes. For violent offenses, we find the same ½ discount for sentence recommendations that are higher than they should have been, but more responsiveness to recommendations that are too low. We find no evidence that the guidelines themselves directly affect discretion for property offenders, perhaps because judges generally have substantial experience with property cases and therefore do not rely on the errant information. Sentences are more sensitive to both accurate and inaccurate recommendations for crimes that occur less frequently and have more complicated sentencing. This suggests that when the court has more experience, the recommendations have less influence. More tentative findings suggest that, further down the decision chain, parole boards counteract the remaining influence of the guidelines. Details: Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2011. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: NBER Working Paper Series; Working Paper 16961: Accessed July 2, 2012 at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w16961 Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w16961 Shelf Number: 125444 Keywords: Judicial Discretion Punishment Sentencing Sentencing Guidelines (U.S.)

Author: Bandyopadhyay, Siddhartha Title: Acquisitive Crime: Imprisonment, Detection and Social Factors Summary: This report measures the impact of several factors determining crime rates in 43 Police Force Areas in England and Wales between 1993 and 2008. They use new local sentencing data released by the Ministry of Justice following a Freedom of Information request. The report estimates that a one-month increase of the average sentence length for each offence type in a typical year would prevent, in the following year: •4,800 recorded burglaries •4,700 recorded frauds The report also estimates the effect of a radical change in the current policy of early release at the half-way stage. If offenders were made to serve two-thirds of their sentence in custody by default rather than the current half, England and Wales would see in the following year: •21,000 fewer recorded burglaries •11,000 fewer recorded frauds Details: London: Civitas, 2012. 15p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 11, 2012 at: http://www.civitas.org.uk/crime/crimeanalysis2012.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.civitas.org.uk/crime/crimeanalysis2012.pdf Shelf Number: 125538 Keywords: Crime Rates Imprisonment (U.K.) Punishment Sentencing

Author: Ringland, Clare Title: Intensive Correction Orders vs other Penalties: Offender Profiles Summary: Aim: To examine the profile of offenders given intensive correction orders in New South Wales and to compare these offenders with those who received other penalties. Method: Details of offenders’ demographic and offence characteristics, prior convictions and penalties were examined. Logistic regression models were developed to compare those who received intensive correction orders with those who received other penalties. Results: Between 1 October 2010 and 30 September 2011, 488 offenders in NSW were given an intensive correction order. The majority of offenders were male (89%); on average, they were 32.7 years of age, with 5.3 prior proven court appearances, and most commonly they were convicted of traffic and vehicle regulatory offences (40%). When compared with offenders receiving periodic detention, a suspended sentence with supervision, a community service order or a sentence of imprisonment, those who received intensive correction orders were most similar to those who received periodic detention in the preceding year. However, they were more likely to be female, have a prior prison sentence and live in a major city than those who had received periodic detention. Conclusion: The profile of offenders receiving intensive correction orders was very similar to the profile of those who previously received periodic detention. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2012. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice Number 163: Accessed July 11, 2012 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/bocsar/ll_bocsar.nsf/vwFiles/CJB163.pdf/$file/CJB163.pdf Year: 2012 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/bocsar/ll_bocsar.nsf/vwFiles/CJB163.pdf/$file/CJB163.pdf Shelf Number: 125543 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration Community Based Corrections Offenders (Australia) Sentencing

Author: Lai, Gloria Title: Drugs, Crime and Punishment: Proportionality of Sentencing for Drug Offences Summary: Proportionality is one of the key principles of the rule of law aiming to protect people from cruel or inhumane treatment. The principle has been established in interna­tional and regional human rights agree­ments and many countries have adopted reflections of it in their constitution or penal code. Its applica­tion to drug-related offences is firstly the responsibility of the legislators, in defining the level of penalisa­tion of certain behaviours. The level of penalisation should be deter­mined according to the severity of damage that a certain behaviour causes to others or to society. Download the briefing (PDF) In the second instance, the courts and judges have to apply the principle of proportionality in defining the appropriate punishment for a particular case; and finally, proportionality also plays a role in the execu­tion of this punishment. This briefing paper looks at specific criteria of proportionality developed in the context of drug control and describes a number of recent attempts to recalibrate the often grossly disproportionate nature of current drug laws and their enforce­ment around the world. The core requirement of proportionality is that an individual’s rights and freedoms may only be limited to the extent that it is appro­priate and necessary for achieving a legiti­mate aim. Such standards further require that of the range of available op­tions for restricting an individual’s rights and free­doms in order to achieve a legiti­mate aim, the option that is least intrusive to fundamental rights should be adopted. In the context of drug offences, a legitimate aim of punishment should correspond with the basic objective of the UN drug control conventions: to improve the health and welfare of mankind. As a result, a propor­tionate sentence for a drug offence should be determined in accordance with the potential harm that a controlled sub­stance may cause to the health and welfare of a community. The principle of proportionality is under­stood in international law as an essential means for safeguarding fundamental human rights. Unfortunately, its applica­tion has often been limited to scaling the severity of punishment without questioning in principle the need to inflict a punish­ment at all – a problematic limitation, especially in the con­text of the contempo­rary drug policy debate where punishment is no longer assumed to be a necessary response for all drug-related acti­vities. Applying the principle of proportion­ality to drug control should transcend any predis­position towards punishment per se. The trend towards decriminalisation of posses­sion for personal use is a clear example that abstaining from punishment may well be the most appropri­ate outcome of a propor­tionality check of drug laws and sentencing practices for certain drug-related activities. RECOMMENDATIONS • Governments should review their laws, sentencing guidelines and practices for drug offences to evaluate their compliance with existing standards of proportionality. • A proportionality check should consider as an option that activities relating to certain acts or substances may be dealt with outside the realm of criminal law. For example, the possession, purchase or cultivation of drugs for personal use should not constitute offences. • Proportionate sentencing frameworks should distinguish between the type of drugs and the scale of the illicit activity, as well as the role and motivation of the offender : serious or organised traffickers; micro-traffickers (low-level dealers or smugglers); people dependent on drugs; and people who use drugs occasionally (or ‘recreationally’). • For drug-related offences committed due to drug dependency or to meet basic economic needs, services such as treatment, education, aftercare, rehabilitation or social integration should be offered as more humane, effective and proportionate alternatives to conviction. • For micro-trafficking offences, reduced or provisional sentences, as well as alternatives to imprisonment, should be promoted. The socio-economic circumstances in which an offence was committed and the financial gains of the offender should be considered as important mitigating factors. • Ensuring the consistent application of proportionate sentencing laws and guidelines should include addressing institutional biases against drug offenders, for example amongst judges. • The death penalty for drug offences should be entirely abolished. Details: Amsterdam: Transnational Institute, 2012. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Series on Legislative Reform of Drug Policies Nr. 20: Accessed July 20, 2012 at: http://www.druglawreform.info/images/stories/documents/dlr20.pdf Year: 2012 Country: International URL: http://www.druglawreform.info/images/stories/documents/dlr20.pdf Shelf Number: 125695 Keywords: Drug Offenders Drug Offenses Punishment Sentencing

Author: Warren, Roger K. Title: Using Offender Risk and Needs Assessment Information at Sentencing: Guidance for Courts from a National Working Group Summary: During the last two decades, substantial research has demonstrated that the use of certain practices in criminal justice decision making can have a profound effect on reducing offender recidivism. One of these practices is the use of validated risk and needs assessment (RNA) instruments to inform the decision making process. Once used almost exclusively by probation and parole departments to help determine the best supervision and treatment strategies for offenders, the use of RNA information is expanding to help inform decisions at other points in the criminal justice system as well. The use of RNA information at sentencing is somewhat more complex than for other criminal justice decisions because the sentencing decision has multiple purposes— punishment, incapacitation, rehabilitation, specific deterrence, general deterrence, and restitution—only some of which are related to recidivism reduction. This document provides guidance to help judges and others involved in the sentencing decision understand when and how to incorporate RNA information into their decision making process. The Guide begins with a discussion of why courts should consider the use of RNA information in their sentencing decisions, reviews the principles of a research- or evidence-based approach to sentencing, identifies other uses of risk assessments not covered in the Guide, and offers a set of Guiding Principles for incorporating RNA information into the court’s sentencing decisions. The Guide and its Principles are the result of the deliberations of a National Working Group on Using Risk and Needs Assessment Information at Sentencing, interviews with practitioners in jurisdictions that have or are considering using RNA information at sentencing, and a review of relevant literature. The National Working Group offers the Guide as a starting point for courts using offender assessment information with the understanding that its advice will continue to be refined as new research and lessons from the field expand current knowledge. Details: Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts, 2011. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 20, 2012 at: http://www.ncsc.org/~/media/Files/PDF/Services%20and%20Experts/Areas%20of%20expertise/Sentencing%20Probation/RNA%20Guide%20Final.ashx Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.ncsc.org/~/media/Files/PDF/Services%20and%20Experts/Areas%20of%20expertise/Sentencing%20Probation/RNA%20Guide%20Final.ashx Shelf Number: 125709 Keywords: Courts Judges, Decision Making Offender Risk Assessment Sentencing

Author: Males, Mike Title: Can California County Jails Absorb Low-Level State Prisoners? Summary: California spends nearly $1.3 billion per year to imprison 26,300 offenders whose primary sentencing offense was a low-level property or drug crime. For nearly 11,000 of these, the low-level sentencing offenses were classed as second or third strikes. The advisability of imposing long, strike-enhanced sentences for low-level second or third offenses is the subject of other publications. This publication focuses on the remaining 15,400 low-level, non-strike prisoners who constituted 9% of the state prison population as of December 31, 2009, and cost taxpayers nearly $750 million annually to lock up (CDCR, 2011). California counties vary 13-fold in their rates of sentencing such low-level offenders to California state prison, from 227 per 100,000 population in Kings County to 17 per 100,000 in Contra Costa (see Appendix). More than one-fourth of the total prisoners from Calaveras county were sentenced for low-level, non-strike offenses, five times the percentage in Los Angeles. Counties are imposing radically varying burdens on state taxpayers to incarcerate their lowpriority offenders at $50,000 each per year. This publication addresses the question of whether sufficient jail capacity is available at the county level to which state prisoners can be transferred in order to help achieve Governor Jerry Brown’s goal of reducing state prison populations by moving low-level offenders to local jails (CCPOA, 2011). Under Governor Jerry Brown’s realignment policies, counties will no longer be allowed to commit certain categories of offenders to state prison, but instead will be required to develop county-based alternatives. A second question involves how low-level offenders should be handled in terms of incarceration versus alternative sentencing. Details: San Francisco: Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, 2011. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: Legislative Policy Study: Accessed July 25, 2012 at: http://www.cjcj.org/files/Can_California_County_Jails_Absorb_Low-Level_State_Prisoners.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.cjcj.org/files/Can_California_County_Jails_Absorb_Low-Level_State_Prisoners.pdf Shelf Number: 125765 Keywords: Costs of Criminal Justice Costs of Imprisonment Jails (California) Prisons Sentencing

Author: Klingele, Cecelia M. Title: Changing the Sentence Without Hiding the Truth: Judicial Sentence Modification as a Promising Method of Early Release Summary: Last year, as the State of California struggled with a $42 billion budget deficit, its financial inability to correct constitutionally-deficient prison conditions led a federal court to order the release of 40,000 state prisoners. In Oregon, Michigan, Connecticut, Vermont, and Delaware, spending on corrections now exceeds spending on higher education. Across the nation, more than 1 of every 100 Americans is behind bars. When the financial crisis of 2008 dealt its blow, state correctional budgets were already nearing a breaking point. Now, in the wake of unprecedented budget shortfalls, state governments have been forced to confront a difficult reality: the ever-increasing prison population has come at too high a price. The question is no longer whether to reduce the number of prisoners, but how. Reversing years of ever-harsher sentencing policies, jurisdictions throughout the United States are trying to cut costs by expanding good time credit, increasing parole eligibility, and authorizing new forms of early release. This Article examines judicial sentence modification, an often overlooked ameliorative mechanism that has potential benefits many other forms of early release lack. For states wishing to promote early release in a manner that is both transparent and publicly accountable, judicial sentence modification is a promising, and potentially sustainable, new mechanism for sentence reduction. Details: Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Law School, 2010. 49p. Source: Internet Resource: University of Wisconsin Legal Studies Research Paper No. 1109: Accessed August 3, 2012 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1576131 Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1576131 Shelf Number: 125853 Keywords: Compassionate Release Costs of Criminal Justice Early Release Earned Release Credit Good Time Meritorious Good Time Parole Sentencing State Budgets

Author: Harvard Law School. Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice Title: Three Strikes: The Wrong Way to Justice. A Report on Massachusetts' Proposed Habitual Offender Legislation Summary: This report provides critical information to the public and to Massachusetts state legislators about the likely long-term impact of the proposed changes to Massachusetts’ Habitual Offender Law (S 2080 AND H 3818). These changes are currently being debated in the Legislature’s Conference Committee. At a time when many states are moving to repeal or amend their “three strikes” laws in order to take a more balanced approach to public safety, Massachusetts has inexplicably chosen to move in the “wrong direction.” The report offers a detailed analysis of the most problematic provisions of the bills that are almost certain to cost taxpayers far more than originally estimated, increase the likelihood of unnecessarily lengthy prison sentences for low-level offenders, further burden an already severely overcrowded prison system—putting employees and prisoners at risk—and divert precious state resources away from education, basic services, infrastructure improvement, and job creation. The legislation will almost certainly further exacerbate the stark racial disparities that characterize the state’s prison population. There is still time for the Commonwealth to take a different approach to public safety. Justice Reinvestment is a project of the Council of State Governments’ Justice Center. It can offer Massachusetts a consensus-building, data-driven process for reducing the state’s prison population without sacrificing public safety. This approach has been effectively employed in seventeen other states, including many of our New England neighbors. Details: Cambridge, MA: Harvard Law School, Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice, 2012. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 8, 2012 at: http://charleshamiltonhouston.org/assets/documents/publications/CHHIRJ%203%20Strikes%20Report-Merged.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://charleshamiltonhouston.org/assets/documents/publications/CHHIRJ%203%20Strikes%20Report-Merged.pdf Shelf Number: 125905 Keywords: Habitual Offenders Punishment Sentencing Three Strikes Laws

Author: Bartels, Lorana Title: Sentencing Scammers: Law and Practice Summary: Consumer fraud costs Australians almost $1b a year and most of this fraud involves scams in which individuals are persuaded to part with an upfront, or advance, fee, with the promise of large financial or other gain in the future. In this paper, consideration is given to the sentencing issues that apply in cases of this nature. In particular, the author examines the application of the key sentencing purposes, such as deterrence and rehabilitation, and the sentencing principles applied by courts, such as the proportionality principle, and the challenges that may arise in this context. Key sentencing factors often cited in aggravation or mitigation are also reviewed, before an examination of some of the issues relating to specific sentencing options is undertaken. This paper goes some way in providing a brief analysis of sentencing practices. However, further research is required to better explore how sentencers respond to consumer fraud matters. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2012. 7p. Source: Internet Resource: Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice No. 443: Accessed September 10, 2012 at: http://www.aic.gov.au/en/publications/current%20series/tandi/441-460/tandi443.aspx Year: 2012 Country: Australia URL: http://www.aic.gov.au/en/publications/current%20series/tandi/441-460/tandi443.aspx Shelf Number: 126283 Keywords: Consumer Fraud (Australia) Consumer Protection Deterrence Financial Crimes Sentencing

Author: Taussig, Isabel Title: Penalties and Reconviction Risk Among Offenders Convicted of Drug Driving Summary: The aims of this study was to investigate: 1) penalties for drug driving; 2) risk of reconviction among drug drivers; and 3) how penalties and reconviction risk vary according to offender characteristics. Information for 3,770 offenders with proven drug driving offences (2007 - 2011) was extracted from the NSW re-offending database. Aims (1) and (2) were addressed by identifying the most serious penalties for drug driving and the number of convictions accumulated over 12 and 24 months. Aim (3) was addressed by building logistic regression models identifying independent predictors of penalty and recidivism. The results showed that the most common principal penalty for drug driving was a fine (60.2% received a fine and the average fine was $581). While 17.2 per cent of offenders had their matters dismissed without conviction, most dismissals (84%) also included a good behaviour bond. Offenders were less likely to have their matters dismissed if they were younger, had concurrent charges or a prior criminal record. One-third (35.3%) had been convicted for a new offence within 24 months. Recidivism was higher for offenders who had a prior criminal record, were not on bail and/or were Indigenous. Conclusion: The most common outcomes for drug driving are fines and dismissals. Those who have their matters dismissed tend to share characteristics with those at lower risk of recidivism. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2012. 11p. Source: Internet Resource: Bureau Brief, Issue Paper No. 79: Accessed September 18, 2012 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/bocsar/ll_bocsar.nsf/vwFiles/BB79.pdf/$file/BB79.pdf Year: 2012 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/bocsar/ll_bocsar.nsf/vwFiles/BB79.pdf/$file/BB79.pdf Shelf Number: 126370 Keywords: Driving Under the Influence (Australia) Drugged Driving Drugs and Driving Recidivism Reoffending Sentence Length Sentencing

Author: Gerber, Monica Title: Retribution as Revenge and Retribution as Just Deserts Summary: Public attitudes towards law-breakers shape the tone and tenor of crime-control policy. The desire for retribution seems to be the main motivation underpinning punitive attitudes towards sentencing, yet there is some confusion in the research literature over what retribution really means. In this paper we distinguish between retribution as revenge (as the desire to punish criminal offenders to retaliate a past wrong by making the offender suffer) and retribution as just deserts (as the preference to restore justice through proportional compensation from the offender). Results from an online survey (n=176) provide evidence of two distinct dimensions of retribution, but we also show that these two dimensions have different ideological and motivational antecedents, and have different consequences in terms of the treatment of criminal offender. We find that retribution as revenge is associated with the motivation to enforce status boundaries with criminal offenders, as well as ideological preferences for power and dominance (as expressed by social dominance orientation) and in-group conformity (as expressed by right-wing authoritarianism). Endorsement of retribution as revenge also predicts the support of harsh punishment and the willingness to deny fair procedures. By contrast, retribution as just deserts is mainly predicted by a value restoration motive and by right-wing authoritarianism. After controlling for revenge, retribution as just deserts predicts support for procedural justice in the criminal courts. We conclude with the idea that beliefs about proportionality and compensation work as a buffer against the negative effects of revenge. Details: London: London School of Economics & Political Science - Methodology Institute, 2012. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Working Paper; Accessed September 21, 2012 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2136237 Year: 2012 Country: International URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2136237 Shelf Number: 126397 Keywords: Just Deserts Procedural Justice Punishment Retribution Revenge Sentencing

Author: George, Thomas P. Title: Domestic Violence Sentencing Conditions and Recidivism Summary: This study examined the types of sentence conditions imposed on domestic violence offenders, the combination of conditions that formed offenders’ sentences, and the relationship between the type of sentence received and recidivism. A total of 66,759 individuals charged with a domestic violence offense from 2004 through 2006 in Washington State courts were included in the study, 41% of whom had conditions imposed at sentencing. Over 100 different types of conditions were used during the study period, which were then reduced to 14 condition categories. Offenders received, on average, over six different conditions. Proscriptions, fines, jail, and probation were the most common conditions imposed, each included in over half of all sentences. The combinations of conditions within sentences were then examined, and ten types of sentences were selected for analysis. Logistic regression was used to predict both domestic violence recidivism and any type of subsequent offense, controlling for a number of offender and case characteristics. Results indicated that, when compared to offenders who received sentences involving only fines and/or proscriptions, those who also complied with either probation, victim-oriented treatment, or probation and treatment had lower odds of committing another domestic violence offense during the five-year follow-up period. Any sentence that included a jail term along with fines and/or proscriptions was associated with higher odds of domestic violence recidivism. Results were similar when examining recidivism in general with one exception; sentences that included anger management interventions were also associated with lower odds of recidivating. Offenders who completed state-certified domestic violence treatment, on the other hand, did not have significantly lower or higher odds of recidivating when compared to offenders who received only fines and/or proscriptions. Results suggest a need to re-examine how domestic violence offenders are sentenced as well as whether current models of domestic violence treatment are effective in preventing further violence. Details: Olympia, WA: Washington State Center for Court Research, Administrative Office of the Courts, 2012. 31p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 27, 2012 at: http://www.ofm.wa.gov/sac/nchip/DV_sentencing_conditions_recidivism.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.ofm.wa.gov/sac/nchip/DV_sentencing_conditions_recidivism.pdf Shelf Number: 126477 Keywords: Abusive Men Domestic Violence Offenders (Washington, State) Family Violence Punishment Recidivism Sentencing Violence Against Women

Author: Jacobson, Jessica Title: Public Attitudes to the Sentencing of Drug Offences Summary: This study explored public attitudes to the sentencing of a variety of drug offences. The study used a qualitative methodology, involving focus groups conducted in various locations across England and Wales. A short pre-discussion questionnaire was also used to collect basic demographic information on participants and to gauge early views on the sentencing of drug offences. The findings provide valuable insights into public reactions to this issue, although they should not be regarded as necessarily representative of the views of the wider population. The key findings from the research are presented below. • Participants did not generally wish to see custodial penalties for drug possession offences; nor did they necessarily want substantial custodial penalties for small-scale supply and small to medium-scale importation offences. • However, they wanted lengthy custodial sentences for medium to large-scale supply and large-scale importation offences. • They tended to favour sentences that were more punitive than current practice, although this may have been a function of the group dynamics within the focus groups; however, their preferences for medium-scale importation offences were often more lenient. • The punitiveness of attitudes towards serious supply and importation offences reflects a focus on the harm caused by this kind of offending, which was expressed through concerns with: - the distinction between possession offences and other kinds of drug offences; - the impact of different types of drug on users; and - the quantity of the drug(s) involved in a given offence. • Overall, notions of offender culpability played a lesser part than harm in participants’ sentencing preferences; nevertheless offences were deemed to be substantially more serious where: - the offender made a large amount of profit from the offence; - the offender had previous convictions; or - minors were exploited in the offence. • Participants expressed a wide range of views on the relevance of personal factors that may aggravate or mitigate a sentence, and some were resistant to the general principle of taking the offender’s personal circumstances into account in sentencing. Details: London: Sentencing Council, 2011. 77p. Source: Internet Resource: Sentencing Council Research Series 01/11; http://sentencingcouncil.judiciary.gov.uk/docs/Drugs_research_report.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://sentencingcouncil.judiciary.gov.uk/docs/Drugs_research_report.pdf Shelf Number: 126754 Keywords: Drug Offenders Drug Offenses Public Attitudes (U.K.) Public Opinion Punishment Sentencing

Author: Dawes, William Title: Attitudes to Guilty Plea Sentence Reductions Summary: This report presents findings from research Ipsos MORI carried out for the Sentencing Council to examine attitudes towards guilty plea sentence reductions. It consisted of a face-to-face quantitative survey with the general public, discussion groups with the general public, interviews with those who had been a victim of crime or who had witnessed a crime and interviews with offenders. Key findings include:  The public often perceive sentencing as too lenient. They feel that too often it can work in favour of offenders, rather than providing justice for victims. For the public, sentence lengths given to offenders are an important indicator of justice being served.  The public in this research had limited knowledge of the workings of the Criminal Justice System (CJS), especially sentencing, and they reported their views as being highly influenced by the media and word of mouth. Whilst the quantitative survey revealed a degree of familiarity with the principles of guilty plea sentence reductions, qualitative discussions indicated awareness was based on the broad concept of sentences receiving reductions, with participants less certain of the role guilty pleas played in determining sentence outcome. Therefore, the public were generally unaware of the nuances of the guilty plea reductions principle and initially tended to be generally unsupportive of reductions in sentencing for those entering a guilty plea.  Those who had a better understanding of the system and how it works were more likely to report confidence in the system and in sentencing policies. As such those who had been a victim or who had witnessed a crime were more likely to be supportive of sentence reductions than a broader general public audience.  While the general public’s view of justice being served centred largely on the sentence handed down, victims and witnesses tended to have a more holistic view. They gave consideration to offender circumstances and whether the punishment allowed for rehabilitation and support as well as closure for victims and witnesses. For many, re-offending was a key concern and so there was support for punishments that acted as a deterrent and changed offender behaviour. Indeed, both the general public and victims and witnesses thought that persistent offenders, through their actions, have forfeited their right to a reduction.  The public assume that the key motivation for the guilty plea sentence reduction is to reduce resources (time and money), but they prefer the idea of it as something which helps prevent victims having to give evidence and experiencing emotional trauma whilst doing this. There is a strong sense that the drive for cost savings should not impact on a system effectively delivering justice.  There is more support for sentence reductions if the guilty plea is entered at an early point. The benefits – both economic and emotional – are more tangible at this point, and both the public and victims and witnesses are less likely to feel that the offender can ‘play the system’. On the other hand offenders say they are less likely to enter an early plea, but prefer to weigh up the evidence against them first.  There is generally little support for a reduction for a guilty plea made at the court door or once the trial has started amongst the public and many victims and witnesses, although the small number of victims of more serious offences included in this study often felt that reductions at this stage could be acceptable. There was an indication that the prospect and reality of attending court proved more traumatic for this group, and they therefore may be more open to late reductions.  For the general public, there was weak support for higher levels of reductions beyond the current guideline range of up to 33% and a fifth (20%) felt that there should be no reduction at all. Supporting this, when survey respondents were asked whether the reduction should be increased from a third if an offender pleads guilty at the earliest opportunity, 58% disagreed and only 22% agreed. A small number of victims of more serious offences were, however, more supportive if it spared them having to testify in court.  The public (and some victims and witnesses) do not like the idea of a universal approach to reductions – in fact, the public in the survey were less likely to say that an offender pleading guilty to an offence should be given a more lenient sentence in most/all cases (21%) and more likely to say it never should result in a more lenient sentence (29%). They instead think that this should depend on certain factors/circumstances relating to the offender or offence type. For instance, views were often much more punitive towards violent crimes as opposed to those against businesses, and likewise towards repeat offenders versus first time offenders.  The language and discourse of the reductions did not sit well with people. They were very resistant to the idea of an offender being ‘rewarded’ for admitting they were guilty of an offence; rather they spontaneously suggested that defendants should be further penalised for not admitting guilt if they are subsequently found guilty.  Offenders in this study were often unsure what their sentence was likely to be when weighing up how to plead, and felt that decisions on sentence lengths were inconsistent. This made it difficult for them to calculate exactly what the impact of a set reduction to their sentence would be. Offenders also questioned the extent to which reductions for early guilty pleas were actually being applied, with a number feeling that it was very difficult to understand exactly how their final sentence had been determined. However, when probed on the level of reductions, offenders in this study were broadly content with the current discount of a third for an early guilty plea, and felt that without the reduction there was little incentive to admit guilt.  The main factor determining whether or not offenders plead guilty was the likelihood of being found guilty at trial. The key ‘tipping point’ here was when offenders realised that the chances of them being found guilty were greater than being found not guilty. Weight of evidence and advice from solicitors/barristers were pivotal in offenders’ assessments of whether they were likely to be found guilty and therefore crucial in determining when a guilty plea was entered. There was little evidence from the research that increasing the reduction further would encourage more offenders to plead guilty at an earlier stage, given the reduction only becomes a driver of entering a guilty plea at such a point that an offender considers a conviction to be the likely outcome. Details: London: Sentencing Council, 2011. 89p. Source: Internet Resource: Sentencing Council Research Series 02/11; Accessed October 19, 2012 at: http://sentencingcouncil.judiciary.gov.uk/docs/Attitudes_to_Guilty_Plea_Sentence_Reductions_(web).pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://sentencingcouncil.judiciary.gov.uk/docs/Attitudes_to_Guilty_Plea_Sentence_Reductions_(web).pdf Shelf Number: 126755 Keywords: Guilty Pleas (U.K.) Public Attitudes Public Opinion Punishment Sentencing

Author: Nicholls, Carol McNaughton Title: Attitudes to Sentencing Sexual Offences Summary: This report outlines findings of research conducted by Natcen Social Research on victim/survivor1 and public attitudes to sentencing sexual offences. This research was conducted on behalf of the Sentencing Council for England and Wales, to inform their current review of guidelines on sentencing sexual offences, and in accordance with their statutory duties to “produce analysis and research on sentencing”, “promote a clear, fair and consistent approach to sentencing”, and “work to improve public confidence in sentencing.”2 An evidence review was completed as phase one of the research, and suggested that there was a need for up-to-date and methodologically robust research on public and victim/survivor views and sexual offences sentencing. The review identified that new research was needed to explore a range of offences and that not only concentrated on offences such as rape. Qualitative research was the favoured methodology as it allowed research participants the opportunity to provide explanations for the reasons given for suggested sentences, discuss their level of awareness of sentencing, and in the case of research with victim/survivors, enabled interviews to be conducted that were responsive and tailored to personal experience. There are, however, limits to the scope of any research project and this study is no exception – the focus here was on exploring public and victim/survivors’ attitudes and experiences of the sentencing of different sexual offences, and there was not scope to explore a range of additional issues, such as views on the existing sentencing guidelines for sexual offences or the effectiveness of different sanctions. Aims and objectives In this context the aims and objectives of the research were to:  map awareness of the various sanctions for sexual offences that are available;  understand what are considered to be appropriate sanctions and sentences for a range of sexual offences, the reasons for this and the relative gravity of sexual offences against each other and in comparison to other offences;  identify the range of aggravating and mitigating factors that influenced the nature of participants’ responses to the appropriate type and length of sentence, including which factors are more or less important when considering the sentence; and  discuss the purpose of sentencing sexual offences. And in addition, with victim/survivors of sexual offences and their family:  describe the experiences of people affected by sexual offences and the seriousness and harm of the offence; and  where relevant, understand their experience of the sentencing process and the personal impact of the sentence. Details: London: Sentencing Council, 2012. 118p. Source: Internet Resource: Sentencing Council Research Series 01/12: Accessed November 2, 2012 at: http://sentencingcouncil.judiciary.gov.uk/docs/Attitudes_to_Sentencing_Sexual_Offences_(web).pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://sentencingcouncil.judiciary.gov.uk/docs/Attitudes_to_Sentencing_Sexual_Offences_(web).pdf Shelf Number: 126817 Keywords: Public Attitudes Public Opinion Punishment Sentencing Sex Offenders (U.K.) Sex Offenses

Author: Orr, Kate Skellington Title: Perceptions of Summary Criminal Justice in Scotland Summary: In July and August 2011, three deliberative research workshops were held with members of the public in Scotland: one each in Ayr, Livingston and Aberdeen. This was part of a wider evaluation to explore the impact of Summary Justice Reforms (SJR) on victims and witnesses, as well as to gauge public perceptions of the summary justice system, and the reforms overall. This report focuses specifically on participant’s understanding, perceptions and expectations of the Summary Criminal Justice System in Scotland; how people view justice per se; and what could be done to improve or maximise public confidence in the system. The research found that there was limited and often inaccurate knowledge of the criminal justice system in Scotland among participants in this research. Participants did, however, want to know more about the system and there was a desire for fewer barriers to information, including the removal of jargon in the system, to make it more accessible. Participants wanted to see greater respect for victims and witnesses in the system, including better treatment at court and the receipt of case progress information at all stages of the justice process. The public court experience was perceived to be intimidating and not easy to understand, and this was compounded by perceptions that professionals working within the court system (including defence and prosecution agents) were unsympathetic to how daunting the experience may be for members of the public. Participants perceived the current system to treat the accused better than victims and witnesses, and believed that the court and prison system was not taken seriously by some offenders. Views on sentencing were complex. Community sentences and community payback were generally well supported by all participants as a means of delivering ‘visible justice’, which directly benefited those affected by the crimes. Views on custodial sentences were more varied with views expressed that while prison sentences needed to be imposed in a fair and consistent manner, they also needed to be sufficiently tough that offenders would be deterred from committing further crimes. Restoring and improving social values of respect for justice and authority overall was seen as a key underlying challenge to improving public confidence in the future. There was no suggestion, however, that responsibility for this should necessarily sit with the justice system. Details: Edinburgh: Scottish Government Social Research, 2012. 55p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 26, 2012 at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0040/00405883.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0040/00405883.pdf Shelf Number: 127004 Keywords: Courts Criminal Justice System Public Opinion Sentencing Summary Criminal Justice (Scotland) Victims of Crimes Witnesses

Author: Thompson, Jill Title: Rape Sentencing Study: Statutory Sentencing Provisions for Rape, Defilement, and Sexual Assault in East, Central, and Southern Africa Summary: In the past ten to twelve years, several countries in East, Central and Southern Africa have responded to the problem of violence against women and children by amending outdated criminal laws relating to rape and other forms of sexual and gender-based violence. Legislative reforms have ranged from minor changes to existing penal code provisions, to major overhauls of sexual offences law. Changes have included redefining and/or adding new offences; making sexual offences gender neutral; putting in place evidentiary and procedural protections for victims; and increasing penalties for sexual crimes. As part of the reform process, several countries in the region have enacted mandatory minimum sentences for sexual offences such as rape and “defilement.” These have generally emerged in response to public outcry over high rates of sexual violence - particularly against children, and the widespread perception among the public and some lawmakers that perpetrators were not being adequately punished for these crimes. Proponents argued that high mandatory sentences would have a deterrent effect on sexual violence, and that victims would be more likely to report if they believed that perpetrators would be sent to jail. Others argued that statutory minimums would ensure appropriate retribution and lead to greater consistency in sentencing. A further rationale was found in the HIV epidemic - high sentences were viewed by many as necessary to curb the spread of HIV to women and children from sexual assault. Details: Lusaka, Zambia: Population Council, 2012. 40p. Source: Legislative Review: Internet Resource: Accessed December 16, 2012 at http://www.popcouncil.org/pdfs/2012RH_RapeSentencingStudy.pdf Year: 2012 Country: Africa URL: http://www.popcouncil.org/pdfs/2012RH_RapeSentencingStudy.pdf Shelf Number: 127214 Keywords: AIDS (Disease) HIV (Viruses) Legislation Rape (Africa) Sentencing Sexual Assault Sexual Violence

Author: Connor, John M. Title: Problems with Prison in International Cartel Cases Summary: Around the year 2000, the Antitrust Division announced a new policy that would substitute more frequent and more severe prison sentences for heavier corporate fines in criminal cartel cases. This article documents that the Division has indeed imprisoned more cartel managers and obtained longer sentences, but has failed to achieve other goals. The elimination of no-jail plea deals has not been realized; the number of imprisoned executives per firm has not risen appreciably; adoption of criminalization by other jurisdictions is glacial; almost half of those executive who go to trial are acquitted; extradition is rare and problematic; and the number of fugitives is growing. Identifying the optimal mix of corporate and individual sanctions for deterrence remains elusive. Details: West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University, 2012. 45p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 17, 2012 at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2166414 Year: 2012 Country: International URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2166414 Shelf Number: 127233 Keywords: Business Cartels Corporate Crime Prisons Sentencing

Author: Warner, Kate Title: Jury Sentencing Survey Summary: The study has three immediate aims: To investigate a new method of ascertaining public opinion by assessing the feasibility of using juries as a source of informed public opinion. To develop a new way of improving public knowledge about sentencing by using jurors as conduits of information. To ascertain attitudes to sentencing from an informed sector of the public. The broader aim of the study is to counter populist penal punitiveness by addressing the "comedy of errors"; namely, the situation that criminal justice policy and practice is not based on a proper understanding of public opinion, and public opinion is not based on a proper understanding of policy and practice. Public opinion surveys conducted across the world over the last four decades consistently find that between 70 and 80 percent of respondents think that sentences are too lenient. More sophisticated research has led researchers to label this „a methodological artefact "a result of the way in which public opinion has been measured" (Gelb 2008a: 45). It has been found that people have little accurate knowledge of crime and the criminal justice system, that those who have better knowledge are less punitive and that when given more information, people become less punitive. This suggests that a strategy to counter penal punitiveness is to improve public knowledge about crime and sentencing matters and to devise better methods of ascertaining informed public opinion. The provision of a better measure of informed public attitudes (in contrast to uninformed and flawed public opinion polls) will provide the basis for a reasoned argument for politicians and policy advisers to use when resisting calls made by the popular print and broadcasting media to increase penalties and to get tough on crime. Providing a source of informed public opinion, which can be fed into the criminal justice system, has the potential to improve public confidence in the system. Because of the relationship between ratings of confidence in the courts and perceptions of severity - those who report that sentences are too lenient are less confident in the courts - improving confidence in the courts can also reduce punitiveness. The Research Questions: The following six research questions were formulated: 1. How can juries be utilised as a source of public opinion about sentencing? Do they have the willingness and capacity to participate in a study exploring their views on sentencing? How willing are jurors to respond to invitations to stay and listen to sentencing proceedings? Do they have the willingness to read and the capacity to understand briefing information about sentencing? Are jurors willing to complete a survey form about sentencing? Are jurors willing to respond to requests to be interviewed about their views? 2. How receptive are jurors to learning about crime trends and sentencing? 3. To what extent are jurors (as newly informed members of the public) satisfied with the sentence imposed by the judge? 4. What kind of information affects public satisfaction with sentencing? Listening to the sentencing submissions? Knowledge of crime trends? Information about sentencing law and sentencing patterns? 5. What variables affect jurors' satisfaction with sentence? Variables relating to juror demographics? Variables relating to the offence type? Variables relating to the offender? Variables relating to the victim? 6. To what extent do the views of jurors as members of the public coincide or differ from those of the judge as expressed in the sentencing comments? Details: Report to the Australian Criminology Research Council, 2010. 156p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 14, 2013 at: http://www.criminologyresearchcouncil.gov.au/reports/0607-4.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Australia URL: http://www.criminologyresearchcouncil.gov.au/reports/0607-4.pdf Shelf Number: 127618 Keywords: Juries (Australia) Jurors Public Opinion Punishment Sentencing

Author: Owens, Emily G. Title: Truthiness in Punishment: The Far Reach of Truth-in-Sentencing Laws in State Courts Summary: Truth-in-Sentencing laws require that violent felons serve large fractions of their sentences behind bars. While generally assumed to increase time behind bars, there is wide scope for TIS laws to be undone; prosecutors and defense attorneys may strategically manipulate charges to make defendants TIS ineligible, and judges may reduce sentences for individuals convicted of TIS eligible crimes. Using a large sample of defendants arrested for violent felonies and charged between 2000 and 2004, I find no evidence of charge or sentence manipulation associated with conviction for a TIS eligible offense. In contrast, I find that people who are arrested for TIS eligible crimes, but avoid the law by pleading guilty to TIS ineligible misdemeanors are dealt with more severely by the criminal justice system. This spillover effect of TIS laws into misdemeanor sanctions suggests that instead of undoing legislative intent, judges honor the spirit of TIS by increasing punishment for all violent offenders, not just those technically subject to the law. Details: Unpublished paper, 2011. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 1, 2013 at: http://www.socialsciences.cornell.edu/0912/Owens.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.socialsciences.cornell.edu/0912/Owens.pdf Shelf Number: 127745 Keywords: Judicial Decision Making Punishment Sentencing Truth-In-Sentencing (U.S.)

Author: Haugh, Todd Title: Sentencing the Why of White Collar Crime Summary: “So why did Mr. Gupta do it?” That question was at the heart of Judge Jed Rakoff’s recent sentencing of Rajat Gupta, a former Wall Street titan and the most high-profile insider trading defendant of the past 30 years. The answer, which the court actively sought by inquiring into Gupta’s psychological motivations, resulted in a two-year sentence, eight years less than the government requested. What was it that Judge Rakoff found in Gupta that warranted such a modest sentence? While it was ultimately unclear to the court exactly what motivated Gupta to commit such a “terrible breach of trust,” it is exceedingly clear that Judge Rakoff’s search for those motivations impacted the sentence imposed. This search by judges sentencing white collar defendants — the search to understand the “why” motivating defendants’ actions — is what this article explores. When judges inquire into defendants’ motivations, they necessarily delve into the psychological justifications defendants employ to free themselves from the social norms they previously followed, thereby allowing themselves to engage in criminality. These “techniques of neutralization” are precursors to white collar crime, and they impact courts’ sentencing decisions. Yet the role of neutralizations in sentencing has been largely unexamined. This article rectifies that absence by drawing on established criminological theory and applying it to three recent high-profile white collar cases. Ultimately, this article concludes that judges’ search for the “why” of white collar crime, which occurs primarily through the exploration of offender neutralizations, is legally and normatively justified. While there are potential drawbacks to judges conducting these inquiries, they are outweighed by the benefits of increased individualized sentencing and opportunities to disrupt the mechanisms that make white collar crime possible. Details: Chicago: llinois Institute of Technology - Chicago-Kent College of Law, 2013. 69p. Source: Internet Resource: Chicago-Kent College of Law Research Paper: Accessed April 6, 2013 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2244569 Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2244569 Shelf Number: 128296 Keywords: Punishment Sentencing White Collar Crime (U.S.) White Collar Offenses

Author: Chmura, Thorsten Title: Selfishness As a Potential Cause of Crime. A Prison Experiment Summary: For a rational choice theorist, the absence of crime is more difficult to explain than its presence. Arguably, the expected value of criminal sanctions, i.e. the product of severity times certainty, is often below the expected benefit. We rely on a standard theory from behavioral economics, inequity aversion, to offer an explanation. This theory could also explain how imperfect criminal sanctions deter crime. The critical component of the theory is aversion against outperforming others. To test this theory, we exploit that it posits inequity aversion to be a personality trait. We can therefore test it in a very simple standard game. Inequity averse individuals give a fraction of their endowment to another anonymous, unendowed participant. We have prisoners play this game, and compare results to findings from a meta-study of more than 100 dictator games with non-prisoners. Surprisingly, results do not differ, not even if we only compare with other dictator games among close-knit groups. To exclude social proximity as an explanation, we retest prisoners on a second dictator game where the recipient is a charity. Prisoners give more, not less. Details: Bonn, Germany: Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, 2013. 33p. Source: Internet Resource: Preprints of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods Bonn 2013/5: Accessed April 6, 2013 at: http://www.coll.mpg.de/pdf_dat/2013_05online.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Germany URL: http://www.coll.mpg.de/pdf_dat/2013_05online.pdf Shelf Number: 128314 Keywords: Criminal Sanctions Moral Beliefs Punishment Rational Choice Theory Selfishness Sentencing Severity of Punishment

Author: FAMM (Families Against Mandatory Minimums) Title: Turning Off the Spigot. How Sentencing Safety Valves Can Help States Protect Public Safety and Save Money Summary: During the 1980s and 1990s, lawmakers with good intentions voted to enact many mandatory minimum sentences in an effort to reduce crime. Lawmakers across the country were led to believe that mandatory minimum prison sentences were necessary to remove drug dealers from the streets and stop the flow of illegal drugs into our communities. This national movement toward harsh punishment has had the opposite effect of its intentions as many states have seen an unprecedented increase in their inmate populations without a proportionate benefit to public safety. Mandatory minimums are a one-size-fits-all approach to sentencing that have taken away judges’ discretion and force the sentencing of offenders without consideration of the individual circumstances of a case. Mandatory sentences have been extended from applying to “big-time dealers” to many smaller fish who deal drugs to support their own addiction. At least two-thirds of our inmates have drug addiction issues. Mandatory minimums have been a driving force behind Pennsylvania’s inmate population increase from 8,000 in 1980 to 51,000 in 2011. FAMM’s work on fair sentencing issues is changing attitudes here in Pennsylvania and across the country as many states are now moving toward fairer sentencing practices. FAMM has provided valuable advice and insight to the Pennsylvania Senate Judiciary Committee and to me personally as we work toward prison reform. This report examines several states’ “safety valve” statutes — legislation that allows judges to bypass a mandatory sentence under certain circumstances. I support legislation that would provide a safety valve for cases where the mandatory minimum sentence would be unjust. A federal law providing for a safety valve was enacted in 1994. Since that time nearly 80,000 federal drug offenders facing mandatory minimum sentences have received the benefit of the safety valve, saving the federal government an estimated $25,000 per prisoner, per year for each year shaved off of the sentence. About one-third of states have enacted some type of safety valve statute, with considerable cost savings and without a reduction in public safety. The following report should serve as a guide to lawmakers and policy advisors across the country who are seeking to reduce their states’ inmate populations and save precious resources currently spent on incarceration. FAMM has demonstrated that we can be tough on crime as well as smart on crime. Details: Washington, DC: FAMM, 2013. 23p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 16, 2013 at: http://www.famm.org/Repository/Files/Turning%20Off%20the%20Spigot%20web%20final.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.famm.org/Repository/Files/Turning%20Off%20the%20Spigot%20web%20final.pdf Shelf Number: 128382 Keywords: Costs of Corrections Drug Offenders Mandatory Minimum Sentences (U.S.) Punishment Sentencing

Author: Rushford, Michael Title: Rationalizing Realignment; A perspective on California's return to alternative sentencing Summary: The combined impact of the national recession (which has caused a major reduction in tax revenue) and unsustainable spending policies during the earlier boom have placed unprecedented weight on state governments to significantly reduce spending. Corrections departments have become a major focus of these spending reductions for several reasons. Policies enacted over the past three decades that required longer prison sentences for violent and habitual criminals have increased prison populations in many larger states. Prominent social scientists, criminologists, and academics have criticized these “tough on crime” sentencing policies as a naive abandonment of their growing expertise at identifying low risk offenders who were unsuitable for incarceration and prescribing treatment programs to rehabilitate high risk offenders.1 The favorable publicity enjoyed by these critics and the volumes of research they have produced to support their conclusions have provided a plausible argument in the defense of states which have chosen alternative sentencing rather than to increase prison capacity to accommodate the increased inmate population. California, perhaps more than any other state, is at the center of the conflict between the “tough on crime” sentencing, which has had broad popular support, and the alternative sentencing policies advanced by social scientists and encouraged by the mainstream media. Details: Sacramento, CA: Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, 2012. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 4, 2013 at: http://www.cjlf.org/publications/RationalizingRealignment2012.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.cjlf.org/publications/RationalizingRealignment2012.pdf Shelf Number: 128651 Keywords: Costs of Criminal Justice Criminal Justice Expenditures Criminal Justice Reform Criminal Justice Systems (California, U.S.) Sentencing

Author: Victoria. Sentencing Advisory Council Title: Victoria's Prison Population 2002 to 2012 Summary: This report from the Sentencing Advisory Council has found that Victoria’s prison population has increased by nearly 40% over the last 10 years, a rate faster than increases in the general population. Victoria’s Prison Population 2002-2012 concludes that growth in Victoria’s prison population is due to a combination of factors, including: increased lengths of prison sentences increased use of custodial sentences in the higher courts increases in offences against the person, drug offences and offences against good order. The prison population rose from 3,540 in 2002 to 4,884 in 2012. This resulted in the imprisonment rate increasing to 111.7 people in prison per 100,000 adults; however, in 2012 Victoria still had the second lowest imprisonment rate in Australia. Alongside an increase in the imprisonment rate, there has been a significant increase in the number of prisoners held on remand, representing over 20% of the prison population in 2012. The average length of prison sentences has increased, with the average expected time to serve for prisoners rising 22.2% over the ten-year period, from 40.1 to 49 months. Details: Melbourne: Victorian Sentencing Advisory Council, 2013. 39p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 23, 2013 at: http://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/content/publications/victorias-prison-population-2002-2012 Year: 2013 Country: Australia URL: http://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/content/publications/victorias-prison-population-2002-2012 Shelf Number: 128786 Keywords: Incarceration Rates Prisoners Prisons (Australia) Sentencing

Author: O'Hear, Michael M. Title: Not Just Kid Stuff? Extending Graham and Miller to Adults Summary: The United States Supreme Court has recently recognized new constitutional limitations on the use of life-without-parole (LWOP) sentences for juvenile offenders, but has not clearly indicated whether analogous limitations apply to the sentencing of adults. However, the Court’s treatment of LWOP as a qualitatively different and intrinsically more troubling punishment than any other sentence of incarceration does provide a plausible basis for adults to challenge their LWOP sentences, particularly when they have been imposed for nonviolent offenses or on a mandatory basis. At the same time, the Court’s Eighth Amendment reasoning suggests some reluctance to overturn sentencing practices that are in widespread use or otherwise seem to reflect deliberate, majoritarian decisionmaking. This Essay thus suggests a balancing test of sorts that may help to account for the Court’s varied Eighth Amendment decisions in noncapital cases since 1991. The Essay concludes by considering how this balancing approach might apply to the mandatory LWOP sentence established by 21 U.S.C. §841(b)(1)(A) for repeat drug offenders. Details: Milwaukee, WI: Marquette University Law School, 2013. 75p. Source: Internet Resource: Marquette Law School Legal Studies Paper No. 13-14 : Accessed May 29, 2013 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2267595 Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2267595 Shelf Number: 128843 Keywords: Life Imprisonment Life Sentence Life Without Parole (U.S.) Sentencing

Author: Johnston, E. Lea Title: Humane Punishment for Seriously Disordered Offenders: Sentencing Departures and Judicial Control Over Conditions of Confinement Summary: At sentencing, a judge may foresee that an individual with a major mental disorder will experience serious psychological or physical harm in prison. In light of this reality and offenders’ other potential vulnerabilities, a number of jurisdictions currently allow judges to treat undue offender hardship as a mitigating factor at sentencing. In these jurisdictions, vulnerability to harm may militate toward an order of probation or a reduced term of confinement. Since these measures do not affect offenders’ day-to-day experience in confinement, these expressions of mitigation fail to protect adequately those vulnerable offenders who must serve time in prison. This article argues that judges should possess the authority to tailor the conditions of vulnerable, disordered offenders’ carceral sentences to ensure that sentences are humane, proportionate, and appropriate for serving the intended aims of punishment. To equalize, at least in part, conditions of confinement for this population, judges should consider ordering timely and periodic mental health evaluations by qualified professionals, disqualifying facilities with insufficient mental health or protective resources, specifying the facility or unit where an offender will serve or begin his sentence, and mandating certain treatment in prison. Allowing judges to exercise power over correctional conditions in this way will allow judges to fulfill better their institutional function of meting out appropriate, humane, and proportionate punishments, subject prison conditions to public scrutiny and debate, and help reform the image and reality of the criminal justice system for some of society’s most vulnerable individuals. Details: University of Florida, Levin College of Law, 2013. 57p. Source: Internet Resource: Draft: Accessed May 29, 2013 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2267612 Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2267612 Shelf Number: 128844 Keywords: Imprisonment Mentally Ill Offenders Proportional Punishment Punishment (U.S.) Sentencing

Author: Cattell, Jack Title: Results from the Offender Management Community Cohort Study (OMCCS): Assessment and sentence planning Summary: This report uses the Ministry of Justice’s Offender Management Community Cohort Study (OMCCS), a longitudinal cohort study of offenders who started Community Orders between October 2009 and December 2010. This is the first, baseline, report from the study, and explores which offenders are sentenced to Community Orders, which offenders on Community Orders have their needs assessed, and what their needs are; and sentence planning and how sentences are tailored for these offenders. Community Orders, for offenders aged 18 and over, were introduced in England and Wales in 2005 to enable judges and magistrates to tailor sentences according to the particular nature of the offence and the offender. Community Orders comprise a ‘menu’ of possible requirements, such as unpaid work or treatment for drug problems, which can be imposed by the courts individually or combined.1 Offenders serving sentences in the community are assessed to identify the risk of harm that they pose to the community. A proportion of them also go through a formal process to identify the needs they have that may lead to further offending. Identifying needs associated with an offender’s risk of reoffending2 allows resources to be directed towards those needs, optimising the reduction of harm. This assessment is the first step in the National Offender Management Model (NOMM). The role and effectiveness of Community Orders have come under renewed scrutiny recently. The Ministry of Justice consultation ‘Punishment and Reform: effective community sentences’ (MoJ, 2012) proposed that there was a lack of public confidence in Community Orders that might be addressed by increasing their punitive content. This has led to changes to ensure that every Community Order contains a punitive requirement unless there are exceptional circumstances. A subsequent consultation, ‘Transforming Rehabilitation: A revolution in the way we manage offenders’ (MoJ, 2013), set out proposals for reforming 1 At the time the OMCCS was carried out there were 12 requirements. This has now been increased to 14 requirements under The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. 2 Known as ‘criminogenic’ needs; these are needs which are known to influence offending behaviour for an individual. the provision of services in the community to reduce reoffending and deliver improved value for money. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2013. 109p. Source: Internet Resource: Ministry of Justice Analytical Series: Accessed June 21, 2013 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/206734/results-omccs.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/206734/results-omccs.pdf Shelf Number: 129036 Keywords: Community Orders Community Sentences Offender Management (U.K.) Probation Recidivism Sentencing

Author: Waller, Mark S. Title: Testing the Cost Savings of Judicial Diversion. Final Report Summary: Adopted in 1973 and named after then-Governor Nelson Rockefeller, the Rockefeller drug laws required lengthy prison sentences for felony-level drug sale and possession offenses. When punitive drug enforcement strategies peaked in late 1980s and early 1990s, as many as 10,000 drug offenders in New York were sentenced to state prison each year (10,785 in 1990). Reform legislation, adopted in April 2009, included several “judicial diversion” provisions that went into effect six months later, giving judges the discretion to link offenders charged with drug- or property-related felonies to treatment, primarily through New York’s existing network of drug courts. Drug courts seek to halt the revolving door of addiction and arrest by linking addicted offenders to drug treatment and rigorous judicial monitoring. Drug courts bring together judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, treatment providers and court staff in a collaborative effort to enforce compliance with court orders. Drug courts also use classic behavioral modifi cation strategies (swift and certain sanctions and incentives) that are designed to motivate substance abusers to maintain a drug-free and crime-free life. Key Findings Researchers at NPC Research and the Center for Court Innovation compared the change in treatment participation in the year before the reform took effect and the year after using publicly available case-level data in all 62 counties. For the cost-benefi t analysis, the researchers extrapolated to the entire state results obtained through an in-depth comparison of costs associated with court-ordered treatment and conventional case processing in 10 representative counties. Key fi ndings include: — Court-ordered treatment enrollment increased by 77 percent in the year after October 7, 2009, when the judicial diversion provisions of drug law reform went into effect. — Changes in treatment enrollment varied widely by region and county, indicating that the precise impact of Rockefeller drug law reform depends heavily on local culture and practice. For instance, enrollment increased by more than 200 percent in 13 of New York’s 62 counties and by 1 to 200 percent in 25 counties; enrollment remained the same in 6 and decreased in 18 counties. — The greatest increase in treatment enrollment took place in the suburbs of New York City, which saw a 728 percent increase—mostly stemming from a change from seven to 326 treatment participants in Nassau County and from 30 to 215 participants in Suffolk County. — Offenders sent to treatment consumed signifi cantly fewer criminal justice resources than similar offenders processed the year before judicial diversion went into effect. In particular, offenders sent to treatment spent signifi cantly fewer days than the comparison group on probation or jail sentences stemming from the initial criminal case and—due to reductions in re-offending over a three-year follow-up period—also spent fewer days serving prison sentences that stemmed from future criminal cases. — Those felony-level offenders who enrolled in treatment due to judicial diversion were a higher-risk/higher-need population (e.g., longer and more serious drug use history and more prior arrests and convictions) than the offenders who were enrolled in treatment previously. This trend puts New York State more closely in line with national research demonstrating that high-risk/high-need offenders are particularly suitable for intensive interventions such as drug courts. — Judicial diversion in New York will yield a projected net benefi t of $5,144 per offender over fi ve years, resulting in cost-benefi t ratio of 1 to 2. That is, for every taxpayer dollar invested in the program, there will be a $2 return in the form of criminal justice resources saved after 5 years. When victimization costs are included—representing the cost to crime victims whenever there is a property or violent crime—the net benefi t is $13,284 per offender, and the cost-benefi t ratio increases to a return of $3.56 per dollar spent. (Judicial diversion produces substantial victimization savings by reducing the quantity of new property crimes and crimes against persons.) As Testing the Cost Savings of Judicial Diversion documents, sending cases to treatment in lieu of incarceration or probation can free up signifi cant criminal justice resources. But only subsequent policymaker decisions can determine whether actual savings will be realized. Among other things, realizing cost savings depends on continuing to send a high volume of felony-level defendants to treatment. Details: New York: Center for Court Innovation; Portland, OR: NPC Research, 2013. 84p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 25, 2013 at: http://www.courtinnovation.org/sites/default/files/documents/NY_Judicial%20Diversion_Cost%20Study.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.courtinnovation.org/sites/default/files/documents/NY_Judicial%20Diversion_Cost%20Study.pdf Shelf Number: 129152 Keywords: Cost-Benefit Analysis Drug Offender Treatment Programs Drug Offenders Judicial Diversion Rockefeller Drug Laws (New York, U.S.) Sentencing

Author: Iakobishvili, Eka Title: Cause for Alarm: The Incarceration of Women for Drug Offences in Europe and Central Asia, and the need for Legislative and Sentencing Reform Summary: This report sets out to answer two basic questions. 1. How many women are in prison for drugs in Europe and Central Asia? 2. What proportion of the total female prison population do these women comprise? It represents the first attempt to collate such figures for the whole region, and the answers highlight a growing problem. Namely that too many women are in prison for non-violent drug offences in the region. The answers also raise numerous other questions that beg further research. Every year, an increasing number of women come into conflict with the law. There are now more than half a million women and girls in penal institutions around the world.1 It has also been estimated that over 100,000 women are incarcerated in European prisons on any given day.2 Harm Reduction International’s research of fifty-one European and Central Asian countries suggests that there are over 112,500 women in prison across the region. Of these, 28% – or 31,400 women – are in prison for drug offences.3 This represents more than one in four incarcerated women in the region, demonstrating the impact of drug laws and drug enforcement on rates of imprisonment of women. In fact, drug offences outstrip by a considerable margin all others as the reason for women entering prison. This percentage, however, hides considerable national variation. In a few countries, less than 10% of women in prison are serving sentences for drugs. But in others this figure is between 40—50%, and in some cases reaches as high as 70%. It should always be remembered, however, that behind these statistics are real individuals; women whose individual circumstances and lives are masked by the top-line numbers. The vast majority are in prison for non-violent drug offences, for which women are disproportionately imprisoned. In some countries, many are ‘drug mules’. They are mostly women from socially and economically marginalised backgrounds, whose crimes are driven by poverty. A large number struggle with mental health or drug dependence issues, or both. Low literacy levels are all too common, as are histories of sexual and physical abuse. Many are also mothers. This report is intended to shed light on these problems, beginning with the influence of drug enforcement on female prison populations. Given the high percentage of women incarcerated across the European and Central Asian region for drug offences, it is clear that legal and sentencing reform is an urgent requirement. Details: London: Harm Reduction International, 2012. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 28, 2013 at: http://www.ihra.net/files/2012/03/11/HRI_WomenInPrisonReport.pdf Year: 2012 Country: International URL: http://www.ihra.net/files/2012/03/11/HRI_WomenInPrisonReport.pdf Shelf Number: 129206 Keywords: Female Drug Offenders Female Inmates Female Offenders (Europe, Central Asia) Sentencing

Author: Jarjoura, Roger Title: Review of IDOC Admission Cohort of D Felony and Select C Felony Offenders Summary: In 2011, the Indiana State Legislature's Criminal Code Evaluation Commission formed a committee, since called the Data Analysis Work Group (DAWG). One goal of this group was to examine why certain low-level and nonviolent felony offenders spend very short periods of incarceration (often less than 365 days) in IDOC. In September 2011, representatives of the Indiana University Public Policy Institute's Center for Criminal Justice Research (CCJR) met with DAWG committee members to discuss the possibility of collecting data to understand the issues that lead to short periods of incarceration in IDOC for low-level and nonviolent felony offenders. CCJR was contracted to conduct a study to better understand the processes that ultimately result in offenders sentenced to IDOC where the most serious conviction offense is a D felony or selected nonviolent C felonies. CCJR's goal for the study was to provide rich case-level data on all D felony cases and the eligible nonviolent C felonies that were admitted to the IDOC for a three-month period in 2011 to inform policy discussions surrounding efforts to change incarceration practices in the state of Indiana. This report summarizes findings of this study. Details: Indianapolis: Indiana University, Center for Criminal Justice Research, 2012. 78p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 5, 2013 at: https://archives.iupui.edu/handle/2450/6766 Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: https://archives.iupui.edu/handle/2450/6766 Shelf Number: 129539 Keywords: Criminal Justice Policy Criminal Justice Systems Felony Offenders Sentencing

Author: Prospero, Moises Title: Jail as a Condition of Felony Probation Summary: Although the literature has found that incarceration generally has no effect on recidivism, alternative sentencing practices have been found to have some reductions on recidivism rates. Jail as a condition of felony probation (JCFP) is the practice of sentencing convicted felony offenders to jail for up to a year as a privilege for receiving probation. The purpose of this article is to describe the use of JCFP throughout the state of Utah and to reveal the effects of time in jail on recidivism. The results of the present study found that individuals served approximately 70% of time sentenced and that this trend was similar across offense types and most counties. Both the survival analyses and the linear regression model revealed that longer periods of time spent in jail for similar offenses did not reduce or increase the likelihood of recidivism. Additionally, the study did not find an “optimal time” for jail to reduce recidivism. The study also found that the largest effect on recidivism was risk level of offenders, which highlights the need for assessment and provision of appropriate services to address offender needs in order to reduce reoffense. Details: Salt Lake City: Center for public Policy & Administration, University of Utah, 2009. 9p. Source: Internet Resource: Policy In-depth: 09-30-2009: Accessed August 7, 2013 at: http://cppa.utah.edu/_documents/publications/criminal-justice/jail-as-condition-of-probation.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://cppa.utah.edu/_documents/publications/criminal-justice/jail-as-condition-of-probation.pdf Shelf Number: 129569 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration Felony Probation (Utah, U.S.) Jail Recidivism Sentencing

Author: Disley, Emma Title: Lessons learned from the planning and early implementation of the Social Impact Bond at HMP Peterborough Summary: At a time when government finances are stretched there is growing interest in finding new ways to fund public services which improve social outcomes. One new funding model currently being tested is a Social Impact Bond (SIB). A SIB is a form of payment by results (PBR) in which funding is obtained from private investors to pay for interventions to improve social outcomes. If these interventions succeed in improving outcomes, this should result in savings to government and wider benefits to society. As part of a SIB, the government agrees to pay a proportion of these savings back to the investors. If outcomes do not improve, investors do not receive a return on their investment. In September 2010 the first ever SIB was launched in the UK. Approximately £5 million of investment funding from private individuals and charities is being used to pay for interventions for offenders serving short prison sentences (less than 12 months) at HMP Peterborough, a prison in eastern England. RAND Europe has been commissioned to evaluate the development, implementation and operation of this first ever SIB. This report is the first output from the evaluation. It identifies early lessons from the development and implementation of SIB at HMP Peterborough. Such lessons may inform future SIBs or wider payment-by-results (PBR) pilots under consideration by the Ministry of Justice and other government departments. Details: Cambridge, UK: RAND Europe, 2011. 91p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 10, 2013 at: http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR1166.html Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR1166.html Shelf Number: 129617 Keywords: Costs of Criminal Justice Incarceration Interventions Offender Rehabilitation Prisons Sentencing Social Impact Bonds (U.K.)

Author: Atkins, Helen Title: ‘What Judges Think About Prostitution’: Assessing the considerations and measures employed by members of the judiciary for sentencing women who sell sex Summary: Criminal justice responses to prostitution have existed in Britain for centuries. In recent decades, the landscape has transformed dramatically and continues to do so at a rapid pace. The advancement of mobile communications and transnational travel, the feminisation of globalisation – women migrants outnumbering their male counterparts, shifting attitudes towards sexuality and paid sex, and the evolution of a contemporary counter‐trafficking movement have all contributed to the composition of the early 21st century sex industry. Despite the confluence of these unequivocally modern elements, an ancient debate concerned with the legitimacy and morality of prostitution persists unabated. Interpretations of choice and coercion, how these factors impact upon entry into and departure from the sex industry, and how they should be measured, analysed and incorporated into policy and practice dominate the philosophical and practical terrain. It is not the purpose of this report to examine legal, social or political issues within the parameters of a wider ethics debate, but rather to focus upon one critical aspect of justice in relation to prostitution. Through their analysis and application of the law, judges are uniquely positioned to affect outcomes for women who pass through the criminal justice system as a result of prostitution. The role of the judiciary is therefore central in securing appropriate responses for women who sell sex. Details: London: The Griffins Society, 2010. 53p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Paper 2010/02: Accessed August 22, 2013 at: http://www.thegriffinssociety.org/Griffins_Report_2010_02_FULL%20-%20updated_Apr13.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.thegriffinssociety.org/Griffins_Report_2010_02_FULL%20-%20updated_Apr13.pdf Shelf Number: 129668 Keywords: Judges Prostitutes Prostitution (U.K.) Sentencing Sex Industry Sex Workers

Author: Subramanian, Ram Title: Sentencing and Prison Practices in Germany and the Netherlands: Implications for the United States Summary: Germany and the Netherlands have significantly lower incarceration rates than the United States and make much greater use of non-custodial penalties, particularly for nonviolent crimes. In addition, conditions and practices within correctional facilities in these countries - grounded in the principle of "normalization" whereby life in prison is to resemble as much as possible life in the community - also differ markedly from the U.S. In February 2013 - as part of the European-American Prison Project funded by the California-based Prison Law Office and managed by Vera - delegations of corrections and justice system leaders from Colorado, Georgia, and Pennsylvania together visited Germany and the Netherlands to tour prison facilities, speak with corrections officials and researchers, and interact with inmates. Although variations in the definitions of crimes, specific punishments, and recidivism limit the availability of comparable justice statistics, this report describes the considerably different approaches to sentencing and corrections these leaders observed in Europe and the impact this exposure has had (and continues to have) on the policy debate and practices in their home states. It also explores some of the project's practical implications for reform efforts throughout the United States to reduce incarceration and improve conditions of confinement while maintaining public safety. Details: New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2013. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: accessed October 1, 2013 at: http://www.vera.org/sites/default/files/resources/downloads/european-american-prison-report.pdf Year: 2013 Country: International URL: http://www.vera.org/sites/default/files/resources/downloads/european-american-prison-report.pdf Shelf Number: 131576 Keywords: Punishment Sentencing Sentencing Reform

Author: Utkin, V.A. Title: Alternative Sanctions in Russia: Status, Problems and Prospects Summary: PRI's Moscow office has produced a new resource looking at the range of non-custodial sanctions available in Russia - how they developed, their application and impact in practice and how their effectiveness can be enhanced going forward. Details: Moscow: Penal Reform International, 2013. 61p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 7, 2013 at: http://www.penalreform.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Alternative-sanctions-in-Russia_English.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Russia URL: http://www.penalreform.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Alternative-sanctions-in-Russia_English.pdf Shelf Number: 131606 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration Criminal Law Prisons Punishment (Russia) Sentencing

Author: Corriher, Billy Title: Criminals and Campaign Cash: The Impact of Judicial Campaign Spending on Criminal Defendants Summary: As state supreme court campaigns become more expensive and more partisan, the fear of being portrayed as "soft on crime" is leading courts to rule more often for prosecutors and against criminal defendants. That is the disturbing finding of this Center for American Progress study, which explores the impact on the criminal justice system of the explosion in judicial campaign cash and the growing use of political attack ads in state supreme court elections, which have increased pressure on elected judges to appear "tough on crime." In carrying out this study, CAP collected data on supreme courts that, between 2000 and 2007, saw their first election in which the candidates and independent spenders spent more than $3 million. This includes high courts in Illinois, Mississippi, Washington, Georgia, Wisconsin, Nevada, and West Virginia. For each of these courts, CAP examined 4,684 rulings in criminal cases for a time period starting five years before a given state's first $3 million high court election and ending five years after that election. The findings reveal a clear trend: As campaign cash increased, the courts studied began to rule more often in favor of prosecutors and against criminal defendants. - The 2004 Illinois Supreme Court race broke judicial campaign spending records. As Illinois voters were bombarded with attack ads featuring violent criminals, the high court ruled in favor of the prosecution in 69 percent of its criminal cases - an 18 percent increase over the previous year. - Some states saw a sharp increase in rulings for the state just after their first elections in which spending reached $3 million. Mississippi's high court, for example, saw its first $3 million election in 2000 and some nasty political attack ads that same year. When the next judicial election rolled around two years later, in 2002, Mississippi's justices ruled against criminal defendants in 90 percent of the high court's criminal cases - a 20 percent increase from 2000. - After two politically charged races in 2007 and 2008, the Wisconsin Supreme Court's percentage of rulings for the state shot to 90 percent during the 2009 and 2011 election years. - The correlations were strongest in years that saw more ads produced and paid for by independent groups unaffiliated with the candidates - ads that tended to be more negative than those of the candidates. The one court in the study that saw no independent spending, the Nevada Supreme Court, did not exhibit a tendency to rule for the state during big-money elections. - The Washington and Georgia high courts saw a huge spike in independent spending in 2006, followed by a sharp decline. The percentage of rulings against criminal defendants in these courts also peaked in 2006 and then dropped precipitously as the campaign cash and attack ads disappeared. These results suggest that, just as judges are more likely to rule against criminal defendants as elections approach, state supreme courts are more likely to rule for the state as the amount of money in high court elections increases. These findings have important implications for the debates over reforming our criminal justice system. In the past 50 years, the U.S. government has cracked down on drug crimes and provided financial incentives for states to do the same. The so-called War on Drugs has resulted in over-incarceration and the growth of private prisons, which has given certain companies a financial incentive in maintaining this status quo. But as the financial cost of the nation's drug war has become clear, Americans are debating whether our punitive approach is working. The federal government is scaling back the use of harsh mandatory minimums, and some states, including Georgia, are experimenting with alternative sentencing. If reformers want to stop over-incarceration and ensure that criminal defendants are treated fairly, they must also speak out about the politicization of judicial elections and the tarring of judges as being soft on crime in attack ads, a practice that compels courts to rule for the state and against defendants. The enormous sums of money spent in recent judicial elections have fueled an increase in attack ads targeting judges. State supreme court candidates raised more than $200 million between 2000 and 2009 - two and a half times more than in the 1990s. A record $28 million was spent on television ads in 2012 high court elections, with half of this money coming in the form of independent spending, according to Justice at Stake and the Brennan Center for Justice. These independent spenders are more likely than the candidates' campaigns to run attack ads. Details: Washington, DC: Center for American Progress, 2013. 112p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 7, 2013 at: http://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/CampaignCriminalCash-4.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/CampaignCriminalCash-4.pdf Shelf Number: 131575 Keywords: Campaign Contributions Courts Criminal Justice Reform Judges (U.S.) Judicial System Sentencing

Author: American Civil Liberties Union Title: A Living Death: Life without Parole for Nonviolent Offenses Summary: Life in prison without a chance of parole is, short of execution, the harshest imaginable punishment. Life without parole (LWOP) is permanent removal from society with no chance of reentry, no hope of freedom. One should expect the American criminal justice system to condemn someone to die in prison only for the most serious offenses. Yet across the country, thousands of people are serving life sentences without the possibility of parole for nonviolent crimes as petty as siphoning gasoline from an 18-wheeler, shoplifting three belts, breaking into a parked car and stealing a woman's bagged lunch, or possessing a bottle cap smeared with heroin residue. In their cruelty and harshness, these sentences defy common sense. They are grotesquely out of proportion to the conduct they seek to punish. They offend the principle that all people have the right to be treated with humanity and respect for their inherent dignity. This report documents the thousands of lives ruined and families destroyed by sentencing people to die behind bars for nonviolent offenses, and includes detailed case studies of 110 such people. It also includes a detailed fiscal analysis tallying the $1.784 billion cost to taxpayers to keep the 3,278 prisoners currently serving LWOP for nonviolent offenses incarcerated for the rest of their lives. Our findings are based on extensive documentation of the cases of 646 prisoners serving LWOP for nonviolent offenses in the federal system and nine states. The data in this report is from the United States Sentencing Commission, Federal Bureau of Prisons, and state Departments of Corrections, obtained pursuant to Freedom of Information Act and open records requests filed by the ACLU. Our research is also based on telephone interviews conducted by the ACLU with prisoners, their lawyers, and family members; correspondence with prisoners serving life without parole for nonviolent offenses; a survey of 355 prisoners serving life without parole for nonviolent offenses; and media and court records searches. Details: New York: ACLU, 2013. 240p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 23, 2013 at: https://www.aclu.org/files/assets/111813-lwop-complete-report.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://www.aclu.org/files/assets/111813-lwop-complete-report.pdf Shelf Number: 131697 Keywords: Life Imprisonment Life Sentence (U.S.) Life Without Parole Punishment Sentencing

Author: Lowenkamp, Christopher T. Title: Investigating the Impact of Pretrial Detention on Sentencing Outcomes Summary: In the criminal justice system, the time between arrest and case disposition is known as the pretrial stage. Each time a person is arrested and accused of a crime, a decision must be made as to whether the accused person, known as the defendant, will be detained in jail awaiting trial or will be released back into the community. But pretrial detention is not simply an either-or proposition; many defendants are held for a number of days before being released at some point before their trial. The release-and-detention decision takes into account a number of different concerns, including protecting the community, the need for defendants to appear in court, and upholding the legal and constitutional rights afforded to accused persons awaiting trial. It carries enormous consequences not only for the defendant but also for the safety of the community. Little is known about the impact of pretrial detention on sentencing outcomes. The limited research indicates that pretrial detention is related to the type and length of sentence received. While little is known about the impact of pretrial detention on felony sentence length, even less is known about the impact on the sentencing of misdemeanants. Data on 153,407 defendants booked into a jail in Kentucky between July 1, 2009, and June 30, 2010, were used to answer one broad research objective: Investigate the relationship between pretrial detention and sentencing. Depending on the associated research question, subsamples of cases were drawn from this larger dataset of 153,407 defendants. Multivariate models were generated that controlled for relevant factors including risk level, supervision status, offense type, offense level, time at risk in the community, demographics, and other factors. Two critical findings related to the impact of pretrial detention were revealed. 1. Pretrial Detention and Sentence to Jail and Prison - Defendants who are detained for the entire pretrial period are much more likely to be sentenced to jail and prison. Low-risk defendants who are detained for the entire pretrial period are 5.41 times more likely to be sentenced to jail and 3.76 times more likely to be sentenced to prison when compared to low-risk defendants who are released at some point before trial or case disposition. Moderate and high-risk defendants who are detained for the entire pretrial period are approximately 3 times more likely to be incarcerated than similar defendants who are released at some point. 2. Pretrial Detention and Length of Sentence to Jail and Prison - Defendants who are detained for the entire pretrial period receive longer jail and prison sentences. While the effects for all risk levels are substantial and significant, the largest effects are seen for low-risk defendants. Details: Houston, TX: Laura and John Arnold Foundation, 2013. 21p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 23, 2013 at: http://arnoldfoundation.org/sites/default/files/pdf/LJAF_Report_state-sentencing_FNL.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://arnoldfoundation.org/sites/default/files/pdf/LJAF_Report_state-sentencing_FNL.pdf Shelf Number: 131700 Keywords: Bail Pretrial Detention (Kentucky) Sentencing

Author: Aos, S. Title: Prison, Police, and Programs: Evidence-Based Options that Reduce Crime and Save Money Summary: Since the 1990s, the Washington State legislature has directed the Washington State Institute for Public Policy to identify policies with an "evidence-based" track record of improving certain public policy outcomes. Outcomes of interest have included, among others, education, child welfare, crime, and mental health. This report updates and extends WSIPP's list of well-researched policies that reduce crime. We display our current tabulation of evidence-based prevention, juvenile justice, and adult corrections programs, and we include our initial reviews of prison sentencing and policing. As with our previous lists, we find that a number of public policies can reduce crime and are likely to have benefits that exceed costs. We also find credible evidence that some policies do not reduce crime and are likely to have costs that exceed benefits. The legislature has previously used this type of information to craft policy and budget bills. This updated list is designed to help with subsequent budgets and policy legislation. Details: Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2013. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: (Doc. No. 13-11-1901): Accessed March 12, 2014 at: http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/1396/Wsipp_Prison-Police-and-Programs-Evidence-Based-Options-that-Reduce-Crime-and-Save-Money_Full-Report.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/1396/Wsipp_Prison-Police-and-Programs-Evidence-Based-Options-that-Reduce-Crime-and-Save-Money_Full-Report.pdf Shelf Number: 131886 Keywords: Costs of Criminal Justice Evidence-Based Practices Policing Prisons Sentencing

Author: Subramanian, Ram Title: Playbook for Change? States Reconsider Mandatory Sentences Summary: Since 2000, at least 29 states have taken steps to roll back mandatory sentences, with 32 bills passed in just the last five years. Most legislative activity has focused on adjusting penalties for nonviolent drug offenses through the use of one or a combination of the following reform approaches: 1) expanding judicial discretion through the creation of so-called "safety value" provisions, 2) limiting automatic sentence enhancements, and 3) repealing or revising mandatory minimum sentences. In this policy report, Vera's Center on Sentencing and Corrections summarizes state-level mandatory sentencing reforms since 2000, raises questions about their impact, and offers recommendations to jurisdictions considering similar efforts Details: New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2014. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 19, 2014 at: http://www.vera.org/sites/default/files/resources/downloads/mandatory-sentences-policy-report-v2b.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.vera.org/sites/default/files/resources/downloads/mandatory-sentences-policy-report-v2b.pdf Shelf Number: 132066 Keywords: Drug Offenders Mandatory Minimum Sentences Punishment Sentencing Sentencing Reform

Author: Justice Policy Institute Title: Billion Dollar Divide: Virginia's Sentencing, Corrections and Criminal Justice Challenge Summary: Billion Dollar Divide points to racial disparities, skewed fiscal priorities, and missed opportunities for improvements through proposed legislation, and calls for reforms to the commonwealth's sentencing, corrections and criminal justice system. While other states are successfully reforming their sentencing laws, parole policies and drug laws, Virginia is lagging behind and spending significant funds that could be used more effectively to benefit public safety in the commonwealth. Details: Washington, DC: Justice Policy Institute, 2014. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 19, 2014 at: http://www.justicepolicy.org/uploads/justicepolicy/documents/billiondollardivide.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.justicepolicy.org/uploads/justicepolicy/documents/billiondollardivide.pdf Shelf Number: 132068 Keywords: Correctional Institutions Criminal Justice Reform Drug Policy Parole Racial Disparities Sentencing Sentencing Reform

Author: Sentencing Project Title: The State of Sentencing 2013: Developments in Policy and Practice Summary: The United States has the highest rate of incarceration in the world and keeps 7.2 million men and women under correctional supervision. More than 2.2 million are in prison or jail while nearly five million are monitored in the community on probation or parole. The scale of the nation's correctional population results from a mix of crime rates and legislative and administrative policies that vary by state. Today, there is general agreement that the high rate of incarceration resulted from deliberate policy choices that impose punitive sentences which have increased both the numbers of people entering the system and how long they remain under correctional control. These policies include an expansion of life without parole as a sentencing option and lengthy terms under community supervision. Despite the nation's four-decade era of mass incarceration, the Bureau of Justice Statistics reported that the prison population dropped in 2012 for the third consecutive year. About half of the 2012 decline - 15,035 prisoners - occurred in California, which decreased its prison population in response to a 2011 Supreme Court order to relieve prison overcrowding. But eight other states - Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Maryland, New York, North Carolina, Texas, and Virginia - showed substantial decreases of more than 1,000 inmates, and more than half the states reported some drop in the number of prisoners. Previous changes in policy and practice may have contributed to the modest decline. Lawmakers have cited the growth in state corrections spending at the expense of other priorities as a reason to change sentencing policies and practices. During 2013, legislators in at least 31 states adopted 47 criminal justice policies that may help to reduce the prison population, improve juvenile justice outcomes, and eliminate the barriers that marginalize persons with prior convictions. The policy reforms outlined in this report document changes in sentencing, probation and parole, collateral consequences and juvenile justice. Highlights include: Six states - Colorado, Hawaii, New Hampshire, Oregon, South Dakota, and Vermont - expanded alternatives to incarceration for certain drug offenses. Three states - Kansas, Oregon, and South Dakota - authorized earned discharge from community supervision. Maryland abolished the death penalty as a sentencing option. Today, 18 states and the District of Columbia no longer authorize the death penalty. Oregon became the third state to authorize racial impact statements for any change to criminal laws or sentencing codes. Five states - California, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, and Rhode Island - adopted or expanded policies to address employment barriers for persons with a prior criminal history. Georgia and Nebraska enacted comprehensive juvenile justice measures that included provisions to expand alternatives to incarceration for certain youth. At least eight states - Arkansas, Delaware, Louisiana, Nebraska, South Dakota, Texas, Wyoming, and Utah - modified juvenile list without parole policies. Details: Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project, 2014. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 22, 2014 at: http://sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/sen_State%20of%20Sentencing%202013.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United Arab Emirates URL: http://sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/sen_State%20of%20Sentencing%202013.pdf Shelf Number: 132114 Keywords: Criminal Justice Policies Criminal Justice Reform Prison Sentences Prisoners Punishment Sentencing

Author: Klein, Susan R. Title: Why Federal Prosecutors Charge: A Comparison of Federal and New York State Arson and Robbery Filings, 2006-2010 Summary: Academic, judges, lobbyists, special interest groups, and the defense bar all love to complain about the undue discretion held by federal prosecutors. Criticism has intensified over the last few decades, as the federal criminal code has grown to more than 4,500 prohibitions, a fair number of which replicate nearly identical state offenses. Little empirical evidence, however, attempts to discern what, if anything, is distinctive about the cases charged in federal rather than state court, and what might be motivating federal prosecutors to make their charging decisions. Our study aims to shed some light on this subject. In Part II, we describe our efforts to collect data on the characteristics of cases prosecuted under arson and robbery statutes from three sources: (1) the United States Sentencing Commission ("USSC"); (2) the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services ("DCJS"); and (3) Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reports. In Part III, we explain how we combined the USSC and New York State DCJS data before proceeding to our empirical analysis. First, we conduct a simple, bivariate analysis comparing the frequency with which our independent variables are observed in federal versus state arson and robbery cases. We note where we believe the observed, bivariate relationship is likely explained by confounding variables. Second, we proceed to utilize a more sophisticated logistic regression model to simultaneously examine the effect of our independent variables on the choice between federal versus state prosecution for arson and robbery. We find statistically significant evidence that cases prosecuted under federal arson and robbery statutes are more likely to include circumstances such as a conspiracy, a minor victim, use of a weapon, and serious recidivism. In Part IV, we conclude by discussing the higher plea rates and longer sentences imposed under federal as opposed to state criminal justice systems. We argue that where crimes involve the above-noted more egregious circumstances, federal prosecutors are more likely motived to prosecute the crime in expectation of a likely guilty plea and longer sentence. Our study provides much needed empirical evidence to support this rational view of federal prosecutorial discretion. Details: Austin, TX: University of Texas School of Law, 2014. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: U of Texas Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 557 : Accessed April 22, 2014 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2422582 Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2422582 Shelf Number: 132116 Keywords: Arsonists Prosecution Prosecutorial Discretion Punishment Robbery Sentencing

Author: Dana, Shahram Title: Blood Diamonds and Mass Atrocities: Cutting a New Paradigm from Coarse Jurisprudence Summary: 150,000 human beings dead; 200,000 women raped; thousands of limbs amputated; countless children forced to kill their own parents, forced into sexual slavery, and forced into the battlefields; and 2.6 million persons displaced. These are just some of the facts and figures of the 10 year war in Sierra Leone. There is another number of significance: Nine. That is the number of individuals held criminally responsible for these atrocities. After more than 10 years and 300 million dollars, the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) convicted and sentenced just nine men. With the work of the court near complete, we are afforded an opportunity to evaluate its work and legacy. While writers have reviewed the work of international tribunals from a variety of perspectives, an examination of their sentencing legacy has been largely ignored or discounted. This article fills that lacuna in scholarship by advancing an innovative sentencing framework for international trials and articulating a new theory on atrocity sentencing that is both explanatory and instructive. My theory and framework both have general applicability to all international criminal tribunals, including the International Criminal Court (ICC). The article also contributes to the development of international law and legal scholarship in other ways. It is the first law review article to provide a comprehensive critique of all sentencing judgments of the SCSL. In addition to filling that gap, this article goes further to systematize the sentencing jurisprudence, identify key contributions, provide a normative assessment, link sentencing narratives to broader ones about the Sierra Leone conflict and atrocities, and advance an original theory and legal framework that breaks new ground on international sentencing and punishment. Consequentially, the article has immediate legal significance because, inter alia, the theory advanced herein speaks to punishing and sentencing Heads of State, an issue currently on appeal. Beyond its immediate impact, the article makes an enduring contribution by, inter alia, its legal and normative analysis that orders and illuminates ICL and develops a sentencing framework of general applicability. Parts II and III provide, respectively, a background to the Sierra Leona decade long war and a legal analysis of the cases and sentencing jurisprudence. Part IV offers an assessment of the SCSL's sentencing legacy by identifying its key contributions to the ICL sentencing law and linking its sentencing discourse to narratives about the conflict, just war, legitimacy, justice, and Sierra Leonean society. Part V develops a normative assessment of the court's judgments and sentencing practice. I argue that the judges at the SCSL have adopted punitive model for international criminal justice and that this reorientation is a positive development. I also criticize the court's failure to develop a sentencing framework capable of implementing the punitive model. Part VI contributes an original theory and sentencing framework to international law and ICL scholarship. Here, I also re-conceptualize concepts at the heart of ICL and its sentencing practice, such as gravity, modes of liability, and the role of the accused. My theory pulls together these three major outcome determinative sentence variables to effectuate their harmonized consideration for the purpose of sentence allocations and just distribution of punishment among actors responsible for atrocity crimes. l call this theory "enabler responsibility" or "enabling atrocity." I argue that enabler responsibility influences the sentence, especially of atrocity perpetrators at the very top of the hierarchy, even if unarticulated as a factor. The "enabler responsibility" theory closes the explanatory gap in sentencing judgments, including Charles Taylor's punishment. Details: Unpublished paper, 2014. 78p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 28, 2014 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2244391 Year: 2014 Country: Sierra Leone URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2244391 Shelf Number: 132198 Keywords: Blood Diamonds Crimes Against Humanity International Criminal Court Punishment Sentencing War Crimes

Author: Cattell, Jack Title: Implementation of Community Orders: Results from the Offender Manager Community Cohort Study Summary: This report uses the Ministry of Justice's (MoJ) Offender Management Community Cohort Study (OMCCS), a longitudinal cohort study of adult offenders who started Community Orders between October 2009 and December 2010. The report describes how Community Orders were implemented by exploring the way sentences were delivered and how this varied for different types of offender. The report also looks at offenders' compliance with their sentence. The findings from this report will be useful in the development of policy and practice of Community Orders and supervision in the community. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2014. 58p. Source: Internet Resource: Ministry of Justice Analytical Series: Accessed May 8, 2014 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/295658/implementation-of-community-orders.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/295658/implementation-of-community-orders.pdf Shelf Number: 132306 Keywords: Community Orders Community Sentences Offender Management (U.K.) Probation Recidivism Sentencing

Author: Raphael, Steven Title: A New Approach to Reducing Incarceration While Maintaining Low Rates of Crime Summary: The United States incarcerates people at a higher rate than any other country in the world. Large increases in the U.S. incarceration rate over the past three decades are costly in terms of explicit expenditures, as well as in terms of the collateral social consequences for those who serve time and for the communities from which they come. Increases in incarceration rates do reduce crime. At the nation's current high incarceration rates, however, the crime-fighting effects of incarceration are much smaller than they were when the incarceration rate was much lower. Based on recent research and the experiences of several states, we believe that there is substantial room to reduce incarceration rates in the United States without adversely impacting crime rates. The policy choices that have increased the nation's incarceration rate since the early 1990s have been particularly ineffective at combating crime. We argue that states should reevaluate their policy choices and reduce the scope and severity of several of the sentencing practices that they have implemented over the past twenty-five or thirty years. We propose that states introduce a greater degree of discretion into their sentencing and parole practices through two specific reforms: (1) a reduction in the scope and severity of truth-in-sentencing laws that mandate that inmates serve minimum proportions of their sentences, and (2) a reworking and, in many instances, abandonment of mandatory minimum sentences. We also propose that states create incentives for localities to limit their use of state prison systems. Details: Washington, DC: The Hamilton Project, 2014. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Discussion Paper 2014-03: Accessed May 10, 2014 at: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/papers/2014/05/01%20reduce%20incarceration%20maintain%20low%20crime%20raphaels%20stollm/v5_thp_raphaelstoll%20discpaper.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/papers/2014/05/01%20reduce%20incarceration%20maintain%20low%20crime%20raphaels%20stollm/v5_thp_raphaelstoll%20discpaper.pdf Shelf Number: 132320 Keywords: Criminal Justice Policy Incarceration Rates Sentencing

Author: Subramanian, Ram Title: Drug War Detente? A Review of State-level Drug Law Reform, 2009-2013 Summary: From 2009 through 2013, more than 30 states passed nearly 50 bills changing how their criminal justice systems define and enforce drug offenses. In reviewing this legislative activity, the Vera Institute of Justice's Center on Sentencing and Corrections found that most efforts have focused on making change in one or a combination of the following five areas: mandatory penalties, drug sentencing schemes, early release mechanisms, community-based sanctions, and collateral consequences. By providing concise summaries of representative legislation in each area, this review aims to be a practical guide for policymakers in other states and the federal government looking to enact similar reforms. Details: New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2014. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 12, 2014 at: http://www.vera.org/sites/default/files/resources/downloads/state-drug-law-reform-review-2009-2013.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.vera.org/sites/default/files/resources/downloads/state-drug-law-reform-review-2009-2013.pdf Shelf Number: 132328 Keywords: Drug Control Drug Offenders Drug Policy Drug Reform Illicit Drugs Sentencing War on Drugs

Author: Weatherburn, Don Title: Why is the NSW Prison Population Growing? Summary: Aim: To provide a preliminary analysis of the rapid rise in the NSW prison population from January 2013 to March 2014. Method: Descriptive analysis of court, crime, arrest and correctional data, and ARIMA modelling of prison trends. Results: The key factors responsible for the recent rise in the NSW prison population appear to be a higher rate of arrest for serious crime and an increase in the proportion of convicted offenders given a prison sentence. There is no evidence that prisoners during 2013 are spending longer in custody but there is evidence the length of stay in custody may increase over the coming year. If the current trend in inmate numbers continues, the NSW prison population will rise by another 17 per cent (i.e., to about 12,500 inmates) by March 2015. Conclusion: Early consideration should be given to measures that reduce the demand for prison accommodation and/or expand prison capacity. Keywords: prison, Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2014. 7p. Source: Internet Resource: Issue Paper No. 95: Accessed May 15, 2014 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/agdbasev7wr/_assets/bocsar/m716854l4/bb95.pdf Year: 2014 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/agdbasev7wr/_assets/bocsar/m716854l4/bb95.pdf Shelf Number: 132355 Keywords: Imprisonment Incarceration Inmates Prisoners (Australia) Prisons Sentencing

Author: Johnson, Sarah Title: An Analysis on the Effects of Earned Time for Inmates Charged with Robbery Summary: "Good time" - or "earned time", as it is called in Iowa - is a vehicle by which incarcerated inmates are able to earn time off their sentences beyond the time they actually serve. In Iowa, for example, imprisoned inmates exhibiting good behavior earn 1.2 additional days off their sentences for each day served so that, for example, a Class C sentence with a maximum term of ten years can actually expire in just over 4.5 years. Earned time policies were created to serve two critical functions: 1) to allow for the management of prison populations by releasing compliant inmates while keeping inmates incarcerated who are believed to pose more societal risk; and 2) to promote positive inmate behavior while incarcerated, ensuring the safety of other inmates and correctional staff. The purpose of this analysis is to examine the latter contention: do earned time policies achieve their intended purpose by reducing institutional misconduct? Institutional misconduct rates were examined among inmates who were newly admitted to prison between FY2006-FY2008 after originally having been charged with either Robbery-1 or Robbery-2. A conviction under either of these offenses requires serving a mandatory minimum sentence of 70 percent of the maximum prison sentence before being eligible for release. A second component to these mandatory minimum sentences is the limited accrual of earned time, capped at 15 percent to be applied after 70 percent of the sentence has been served. This analysis compares misconduct rates between offenders serving a 70 percent sentence and offenders who escaped the mandatory minimum and were convicted of an alternative (non-70%) crime. Offenders in this analysis are referred to as the 70 percent and non-70 percent groups. The analysis provided the following findings: - Inmates serving non-70 percent sentences tended to have higher amounts of total misconduct than the 70 percent group during year-two and -three of incarceration when examining independent incarceration years (i.e. not cumulatively). - Misconduct rates tended to decrease for both the 70 percent and non-70 percent groups as release approached, although this reduction occurred much earlier for the 70 percent group. - Misconduct rates began to decrease for the 70 percent group around five-and-one-half years prior to release and hovered around zero to six percent until release, while misconduct rates began to decrease for the non-70 percent group only within the last year-and-one-half of incarceration. - Age was one of the strongest and most consistent significant predictors of institutional misconduct. Significant predictors of misconduct during years-two and �three of incarceration also included offender custody classification and facility security level. It is important to note that sentence type (70% or non-70%) was not found to be a significant predictor of offender misconduct. While the findings from this report appear to suggest that earned time has little influence on offender misconduct, it is important to acknowledge the possible effects that removal or modification of the policy could have on misconduct rates. While findings suggest that the rates of misconduct are higher for the non-70% than the 70 percent group, it is possible that, absent earned time policies, misconduct rates could increase or decrease. It should also be remembered that our findings relate specifically to a certain group of offenders (i.e., inmates originally charged with robbery) who are not necessarily representative of prison inmates as a whole. The analysis also occurs within a unique sentencing structure that contains element of both indeterminate and determinate sentencing. It should also be said that these findings should not necessarily suggest abolishment or modification of current earned time practices. Simply doing away with earned time, within Iowa's current sentencing structure, would result in a nearly immediate rise in prison population. Without earned time, a ten-year sentence would actually expire in ten years rather than the current 4.54 years, a change likely to delay discretionary releases (i.e., paroles and work releases) as well as expirations of sentence. While abolishing or reducing the opportunity for earned time may be attractive in terms of "truth in sentencing," such a change should not be made without considering the possible impact on the size of Iowa's prison population. Details: Des Moines, IA: Iowa Department of Human Rights, Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning, Statistical Analysis Center, 2014. 55p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 30, 2014 at: https://humanrights.iowa.gov/sites/default/files/media/CJJP_Analysis%20on%20the%20Effects%20of%20Earned%20time%20for%20Inmates%20Charged%20with%20Robbery.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://humanrights.iowa.gov/sites/default/files/media/CJJP_Analysis%20on%20the%20Effects%20of%20Earned%20time%20for%20Inmates%20Charged%20with%20Robbery.pdf Shelf Number: 132567 Keywords: Early Release Earned Time Good Time Prisoners Robbery Sentencing

Author: Evans, Douglas N. Title: Punishment Without End Summary: Criminal justice punishments are an investment that societies make to protect the safety and order of communities. Following decades of rising prison populations, however, U.S. policymakers are beginning to wonder if they have invested too much in punishment. Policies adopted in previous decades now incarcerate large numbers of Americans and impose considerable costs on states. Mass incarceration policies are costly and potentially iatrogenic-i.e. they may transform offenders into repeat offenders. Public officials and citizens alike often assume that known offenders pose a permanent risk of future offending. This belief entangles millions of offenders in the justice system for life, with little hope of being fully restored to a non-criminal status. Yet, research indicates that risks posed by ex-offenders decline over time. At some point, which this report terms "risk convergence," the probability that an ex-offender will commit a new offense reaches a level that is indistinguishable from the general public. Societies gain nothing from ineffective and inefficient criminal justice policies that impose punishments on offenders far beyond the point of risk convergence. These policies waste resources and hinder ex-offenders struggling to rebuild legitimate lives when they pose no greater risk to the public safety than any of their neighbors. There are, of course, solutions to this problem. This report addresses some of the solutions being implemented across the country. Details: New York: John Jay College of Criminal Justice, Research & Evaluation Center, 2014. 21p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 16, 2014 at: http://jjrec.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/jf_johnjay1.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://jjrec.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/jf_johnjay1.pdf Shelf Number: 132688 Keywords: Mass Incarceration Punishment Sentencing

Author: Quan, Lisa T. Title: Reallocation of Responsibility: Changes to the Correctional System in California Post-Realignment Summary: On October 1, 2011, California's long troubled correctional system began operating under a new framework created by Assembly Bill 109 (AB 109). Formally known as the 2011 Public Safety Realignment Act, AB 109 was largely a result of the state's failure to control overcrowding and its consequences for inmates in California's 33 state prisons. In 2009, a three-judge federal panel ordered the state to reduce its prison population to 137.5% of design capacity-a reduction of about 30,000 people-within two years. In mid-2011, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that order in Brown v. Plata. By signing the Realignment bill, Governor Jerry Brown put the state on the path toward compliance with the court order. More broadly, his action launched a titanic policy shift in California criminal justice, perhaps the most sweeping such change since the adoption of determinate sentencing in the 1970's. Once known as a state that relied heavily on prison to punish parole violators and other lower-level offenders, California under Realignment began shifting responsibility for most non-serious, non-violent, non-sexual (N3) felons from the state to the counties. Through the initiative's first two years, counties have received more than $2 billion to manage the new load of offenders in jails, on probation, and through evidence-based programs in the community. While several other states have also begun favoring the use of local sanctions over prison for less serious offenders, the scale of California's effort makes it an experiment of unparalleled national significance. Although it is too early to draw solid conclusions about Realignment's effects on long-term crime and recidivism, at least one outcome is clear: As the Legislature intended, AB 109 has shifted a large share of correctional control from the state to the local level. Two years after the law's implementation, the majority of California adults in the correctional system has been "realigned" and now undergoes local supervision as jail inmates and probationers. As a result, California now ranks below the national average in the proportion of adults it imprisons and places on parole. The state's probation population, meanwhile, has ballooned, with the number of probationers per 100,000 jumping 30% from 2010 to 2012. Details: Stanford, CA: Stanford Law School, Stanford Criminal Justice Center, 2014. 45p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 25, 2014 at: https://www.law.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publication/458403/doc/slspublic/CC%20Bulletin%20Jan%2014.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://www.law.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publication/458403/doc/slspublic/CC%20Bulletin%20Jan%2014.pdf Shelf Number: 132777 Keywords: Corrections (California) Criminal Justice Policy Criminal Justice Reform Prison Overcrowding Probationers Public Safety Realignment Sentencing

Author: Weisberg, Robert Title: Assessing Judicial Sentencing Preferences After Public Safety Realignment: A Survey of California Judges Summary: Public Safety Realignment ("AB 109") made drastic changes to California's criminal justice system by transferring authority for the supervision of most non-violent, nonserious, and non-sexual offenders from the state to the 58 counties. This study aims to better examine the perceived effect of AB 109 on Superior Court (trial) judges in California who sentence offenders. Through the use of a modified factorial survey, we queried judges on their sentencing choices between felony probation and new California Penal Code 1170(h) county jail sentences. We received responses from 112 judges throughout California, representing 35 counties or 96% of the state population, including the 10 most populous counties in California. The responses revealed judicial preferences that emphasize a desire to deploy sentencing to manage offenders. The preferences generally aim at a combination of a "taste of jail" and rigorous community supervision, whether that is a traditional felony probation sentence or an 1170(h) split sentence. Our study found that more than half of judges surveyed preferred to give an 1170(h) sentence over a felony probation sentence, except when the judge was aware of an offender's substance abuse problem or mental illness, or when the judge was trying to lengthen the period of incarceration or mandatory supervision. In addition, when judges chose an 1170(h) sentence, they selected a split sentence over a straight jail sentence almost half the time. However, among judges who chose split sentences, there was a tremendous variation in the chosen fraction as between jail time and supervision. Drawing from our findings, we strongly recommend that the California Legislature and/or the California judiciary clarify the relationship between traditional felony probation and an 1170(h) split sentence, and develop guidance and consensus on when and how to use split sentences. In addition, counties should enhance and increase the availability of effective community-based treatment resources, because improved treatment programs will likely increase judges' confidence in embracing these sentencing options. Details: Stanford, CA: Stanford Law School, Stanford Criminal Justice Center, 2014. 142p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 25, 2014 at: https://www.law.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publication/443996/doc/slspublic/Judges%20Report%20Feb%2028%202014%20Final.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://www.law.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publication/443996/doc/slspublic/Judges%20Report%20Feb%2028%202014%20Final.pdf Shelf Number: 132779 Keywords: Corrections Criminal Justice Policy Criminal Justice Reform Judges Prison Overcrowding Probation Public Safety Realignment (California) Sentencing

Author: Victoria (Australia). Sentencing Advisory Council Title: The Imposition and Enforcement of Court Fines and Infringement Penalties in Victoria: Report Summary: Court fines and infringement penalties are the most common sanctions for criminal behavior imposed in Victoria. For most members of the community, the only interaction they will experience with the criminal justice system as offenders is as the recipient of an infringement notice, most likely for a driving- or parking-related offence. While infringement offending is of a relatively low level of seriousness when compared with offending sentenced in the courts, the sheer volume of infringement notices issued each year (some 6 million in 2012-13) means that their enforcement has far reaching consequences for the credibility of the criminal justice system. Similarly, given the large number of sentences handed down in Victorian courts that are fines, the enforcement of court fines affects both the credibility of, and judicial confidence in, the imposition of fines as a sentence. Currently, a substantial number of people do not pay their court fines and infringement penalties. Around a third of all infringement penalties are not paid prior to enforcement action, and around two-fifths of Magistrates' Court fines are neither paid nor discharged. Until a fine or penalty is paid or discharged, the recipient has effectively avoided the penal consequence of their offending behaviour. Enforcement - through payment, or through discharge by non-monetary means - is therefore crucial to achieving the purposes of an infringement penalty or the purposes of sentencing for which a fine was imposed. This report represents the Sentencing Advisory Council's response to the Attorney-General's request for advice on the imposition and enforcement of fines as a sentence by Victorian courts. This report also presents recommendations in relation to the Attorney's request for advice on particular matters, such as the number of infringement matters heard in open court, the conversion of fines to an order for community work or an order for imprisonment, and harmonising the enforcement procedures for court fines with those for infringement penalties. Details: Melbourne: Sentencing Advisory Council, 2014. 435p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 28, 2014 at: http://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Imposition%20and%20Enforcement%20of%20Court%20Fines%20and%20Infringement%20Penalties%20in%20Victoria.pdf Year: 2014 Country: Australia URL: http://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Imposition%20and%20Enforcement%20of%20Court%20Fines%20and%20Infringement%20Penalties%20in%20Victoria.pdf Shelf Number: 132785 Keywords: Fines (Australia) Punishment Sentencing

Author: McMillon, David Title: Modeling the Underlying Dynamics of the Spread of Crime Summary: The spread of crime is a complex, dynamic process that calls for a systems level approach. Here, we build and analyze a series of dynamical systems models of the spread of crime, imprisonment and recidivism, using only abstract transition parameters. To find the general patterns among these parameters - patterns that are independent of the underlying particulars - we compute analytic expressions for the equilibria and for the tipping points between high-crime and low-crime equilibria in these models. We use these expressions to examine, in particular, the effects of longer prison terms and of increased incarceration rates on the prevalence of crime, with a follow-up analysis on the effects of a Three-Strike Policy. Details: PLoS ONE, 9(4): e88923 Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 22, 2014 at: http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0088923 Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0088923 Shelf Number: 133795 Keywords: Prisoners Prisons Punishment (U.S.) Sentencing Three-Strikes Legislation Violence Crime

Author: Minson, Shona Title: Mitigating Motherhood: A study of the impact of motherhood on sentencing decision in England and Wales Summary: This is an exploratory study of the impact of motherhood on mitigation in sentencing decisions in England and Wales. Previous studies have explored the influence of personal mitigation on sentencing decisions but little is known about the way in which judges interpret motherhood in this context. A growing number of children are separated from their mothers by imprisonment, and the state has a duty to protect them from discrimination or punishment suffered as a consequence of the actions of their parents. This study is a preliminary study exploring the visibility of these children in the sentencing process, and examining whether the caring responsibilities of a defendant mother are treated as personal mitigation to reduce sentence length. The study adopts a qualitative and mixed methods approach, combining semi-structured interviews with sentencing transcripts analysis to provide a multi-faceted view of this complex area. The findings highlight that discretion in the application of mitigation leads to inter and intra judge inconsistency. Personal factors including knowledge and experience influence a judge's use of pre-sentence reports. The defendants' sentence was more likely to be mitigated by motherhood if the judge had considered a pre-sentence report, regardless of whether the judge agreed with the recommendations of the report. Details: London: Howard League for Penal Reform, 2014. 46p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 22, 2014 at: https://d19ylpo4aovc7m.cloudfront.net/fileadmin/howard_league/user/pdf/Publications/motherhood_and_sentencing.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://d19ylpo4aovc7m.cloudfront.net/fileadmin/howard_league/user/pdf/Publications/motherhood_and_sentencing.pdf Shelf Number: 133801 Keywords: Children of Prisoners Families of Prisoners Female Offenders (U.K.) Sentencing

Author: Hans, Valerie P. Title: The Death Penalty: Should the Judge or the Jury Decide Who Dies? Summary: This article addresses the effect of judge versus jury decision making through analysis of a database of all capital sentencing phase hearing trials in the state of Delaware from 1977-2007. Over the three decades of the study, Delaware shifted responsibility for death penalty sentencing from the jury to the judge. Currently, Delaware is one of the handful of states that gives the judge the final decision making authority in capital trials. Controlling for a number of legally-relevant and other predictor variables, we find that the shift to judge sentencing significantly increased the number of death sentences. Statutory aggravating factors, stranger homicides, and the victim's gender also increased the likelihood of a death sentence, as did the county of the homicide. We reflect on the implications of these results for debates about the constitutionality of judge sentencing in capital cases Details: Ithaca, NY: Cornell Law School, 2014. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Working Paper Series: Accessed November 18, 2014 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2513371 Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2513371 Shelf Number: 134121 Keywords: Capital Punishment Death Penalty (U.S.) Judges Juries Sentencing

Author: Victoria. Sentencing Advisory Council Title: Exploring the Relationship between Community-Based Order Conditions and Reoffending Summary: 1.1 This report examines the relationship between conditions imposed on offenders as part of a community-based sentence and subsequent reoffending. Specifically, the report considers community-based orders (CBOs) imposed by the Magistrates' Court of Victoria between 1 July 2007 and 30 June 2009, with a focus on (a) how magistrates used different combinations of conditions and (b) how offender and offence characteristics, including reoffending rates, differed between offenders who did and did not receive 'supervision' as a condition of their order. The analysis provides an insight into the interaction between decisions made by sentencers in relation to community-based sentencing and subsequent reoffending within the Victorian criminal justice system. 1.2 Although the CBO was abolished in January 2012, this report is highly relevant to the CBO's replacement: the community correction order (CCO). Despite an increased range of conditions available under the latter order, recent research suggests that magistrates are using CCOs in a very similar manner to how they were using CBOs. Thus, the report is still likely to provide an insight into the expected reoffending patterns for CCOs. 1.3 The Council defines reoffending as any offending that followed the imposition of the index sentence and was sentenced in any Victorian court to 30 June 2012. Defined this way, the overall reoffending rate for offenders who received a CBO is 42.6%. 1.4 There are multiple methods for examining reoffending. The methodology used in this report is consistent with the approach taken by the New South Wales (NSW) Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research (BOCSAR) in their analysis of reoffending in NSW. This method differs from the Productivity Commission's analysis in a number of significant ways, including: - focusing on reoffending that follows the imposition (as opposed to completion) of a community order; - counting reoffending that results in fines; and - including reoffending that occurs between three and five years post-sentence (as opposed to two years). 1.5 Unpaid community work, assessment/treatment, and supervision were the main conditions attached to CBOs. At least one of these three conditions was included in 97.2% (n = 6,177) of the CBOs imposed during the index period. The focus of this report is on the supervision condition. Of the sample of 6,177 offenders, 45% (n = 2,791) received supervision as at least one of the conditions of a CBO (the 'Supervision CBO' group) while the remaining 55% (n = 3,386) did not (the 'No Supervision CBO' group). The Supervision CBO group had a significantly higher reoffending rate than the No Supervision CBO group (49.5% compared with 36.9%). Details: Melbourne: Sentencing Advisory Council, 2014. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 20, 2014 at: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Exploring%20the%20Relationship%20between%20Community-Based%20Order%20Conditions%20and%20Reoffending.pdf Year: 2014 Country: Australia URL: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Exploring%20the%20Relationship%20between%20Community-Based%20Order%20Conditions%20and%20Reoffending.pdf Shelf Number: 134174 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration Community Supervision Community-Based Corrections (Australia) Recidivism Reoffending Sentencing

Author: Council of State Governments Justice Center Title: Justice Reinvestment in Nebraska: Analysis and Policy Framework Summary: This report summarizes comprehensive analyses of sentencing, corrections, probation, and parole data presented to Nebraska's Justice Reinvestment Working Group. It outlines strategies and policy options to avert prison population growth and reduce recidivism in the state by holding people convicted of the lowest-level felonies accountable with probation and treatment, reducing the number of people leaving prison unsupervised, and strengthening parole supervision. The report also offers strategies for supporting victims of crime through improved restitution collection. If implemented, the report's suggested policies would reinvest $32.8 million in recidivism reduction strategies and avert $306.4 million in prison costs Details: New York: Council of State Government, Justice Center, 2015. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 28, 2015 at: http://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/JusticeReinvestmentinNebraska.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 134445 Keywords: Criminal Justice Reform Criminal Justice Systems Justice Reinvestment (Nebraska) Parole Probation Recidivism Sentencing

Author: Berry, William W., III Title: Eighth Amendment Presumptions: A Constitutional Framework for Curbing Mass Incarceration Summary: The Supreme Court's conceptualization of the Eighth Amendment over the past decade has focused on narrow exceptions to the ability of the states to punish criminal offenders, excising particular punishments based on characteristics of the offender or crime. What is missing, however, is a set of broader guiding principles delineating the line between acceptable and impermissible punishments. The Court itself, in Kennedy v. Louisiana, acknowledged as much, describing the case law as "still in search of a unifying principle." In light of this vacuum, this article proposes a new approach to the application of the Eighth Amendment. The absence of regulation of excessive and disproportionate punishments by state legislatures over the past two decades has resulted in the largest prison population in the history of the human race. Instead of merely being a tool that merely removes a few types of offenses and offenders from the purview of state legislatures, the Eighth Amendment should also serve as a more robust guide to shape state penal practices. To that end, this Article argues for the development of a series of Eighth Amendment presumptions - guiding principles that would govern the punishment practices of legislatures without excluding them from the conversation. Currently, the Eighth Amendment serves to identify the constitutional "exceptions" to the "rules" promulgated by the legislatures. This Article's approach would reverse that status quo, with the Court articulating general rules and the legislatures then developing (and justifying through careful study) the exceptions to the rules. Indeed, an examination of the Court's Eighth Amendment cases suggests this "presumptive" sentiment is already implicit in much of the thinking of the Court. Part I of the Article briefly explains the shortcomings of the current evolving standards of decency doctrine and its devastating consequences. Part II of the Article explores the concept of presumptions, exploring how presumptions operate and demonstrating their virtues. The Article then argues in Part III for the reimagining of the Eighth Amendment as an Amendment of constitutional presumptions combining elements from the Court's past cases with the needs arising from three decades of neglecting the decisions of legislatures. Finally, Part IV demonstrates how this conceptual framework would work in practice. Details: University, MS: University of Mississippi School of Law, 2015. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 26, 2015 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2567962 Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2567962 Shelf Number: 134680 Keywords: Death Penalty (U.S.) Mandatory Sentencing Parole Punishment Sentencing Supreme Court

Author: Callinan, Ian Title: Review of the Parole System in Victoria Summary: Parole is the conditional release of an offender from custody. When an offender is granted parole, they serve the unexpired portion of their prison sentence in the community. Offenders who do not obtain parole and are released at the end of their sentence are not subject to the supervision, support and ongoing rehabilitation that parole provides. If the prospect of parole is removed from a prisoner, there is less incentive to undertake steps designed to reduce the risk of reoffending. The Adult Parole Board decides whether an offender will be released on parole. When deciding whether to release an offender on parole, the Board�s most important consideration is community safety. Parole is served under the supervision of a Community Corrections Officer and on conditions fixed by the Adult Parole Board. While on parole, an offender is still considered to be under sentence. The purpose of parole is to supervise and support the reintegration of offenders into the community. This supervision and support benefits the wider community by reducing the risk that offenders will commit further offences when released into the community. Review of the Parole System in Victoria In May 2013, the Victorian Government commissioned former High Court Justice Ian Callinan AC to carry out a review of the Adult Parole Board�s operations. Details: Melbourne: Department of Justice - Corrections Victoria, 2013. 122p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 1, 2015 at: http://assets.justice.vic.gov.au/corrections/resources/11ee85a1-67c5-4493-9d81-1ce49941cce5/reviewadultparoleboardv1.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Australia URL: http://assets.justice.vic.gov.au/corrections/resources/11ee85a1-67c5-4493-9d81-1ce49941cce5/reviewadultparoleboardv1.pdf Shelf Number: 135119 Keywords: Community Based Corrections Offender Supervision Parole (Australia) Sentencing

Author: Slobogin, Christopher Title: Plea Bargaining and the Substantive and Procedural Goals of Criminal Justice: From Retribution and Adversarialism to Preventive Justice and Hybrid-Inquisitorialism Summary: Plea bargaining and guilty pleas are intrinsically incompatible with the most commonly-accepted premises of American criminal justice - to wit, retributivism and adversarialism. This article argues that the only way to align plea bargaining with the substantive and procedural premises of American criminal justice is to change those premises. It imagines a system where retribution is no longer the lodestar of criminal punishment, and where party-control of the process is no longer the desideratum of adjudication. If, instead, plea bargaining were seen as a mechanism for implementing a sentencing regime focused primarily on individual crime prevention rather than retribution (as in the salad days of indeterminate sentencing), and if it were filtered through a system that is inquisitorial (i.e., judicially-monitored) rather than run by the adversaries, it would have a much greater chance of evolving into a procedurally coherent mechanism for achieving substantively accurate results. Details: Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University - Law School, 2014. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Vanderbilt Public Law Research Paper No. 15-4 : Accessed April 2, 2015 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2583898 Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2583898 Shelf Number: 135141 Keywords: Plea Bargaining Punishment Retribution Sentencing

Author: Folsom-Smith, Christine Title: Enhanced Sentencing in Tribal Courts: Lessons Learned from Tribes Summary: The Tribal Law & Order Act of 2010 (TLOA)1 was signed into law on July 29, 2010 by President Obama. The TLOA amends the Indian Civil Rights Act by allowing felony sentencing for certain crimes through the provision of enhanced sentencing authority, establishes new minimum standards for protecting defendants' rights in the tribal court system, and encourages federally-recognized Indian tribes (tribes) to consider the use of alternatives to incarceration or correctional options as a justice system response to crime in their communities. Further, the Act authorizes the Attorney General to permit tribes access to National Crime Information Center (NCIC) data, and to grant concurrent jurisdiction/retrocession to the federal government by tribes in Public Law 83-280 as amended, often referred to as PL 280 states. The decision to implement enhanced sentencing authority is left up to each individual tribe. A handful of tribes have begun or have completed establishing the mechanisms required under TLOA to pronounce enhanced sentences. This publication is designed to provide a brief overview, not a comprehensive review, of the changes under TLOA regarding enhanced sentencing authority, offer considerations for correctional/detention and community corrections programming related to enhanced sentences, and provide tribes with a checklist to help guide discussions around implementation of enhanced sentencing authority. Additionally, this publication explores the adoption of TLOA's enhanced sentencing authority through interviews with several tribal court judges and personnel who have been intricately involved in establishing the provisions required to convey enhanced sentences, highlighting the beginning of change at the tribal level, the processes and challenges faced by these courts, the current status of the implementation as of the date of the interviews, and any other aspects of implementation that the interviewees shared. Finally, this publication will provide information on financial resources to fund enhanced sentencing authority implementation. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. National Institute of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance, 2015. 17p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 8, 2015 at: https://www.bja.gov/Publications/TLOA-TribalCtsSentencing.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://www.bja.gov/Publications/TLOA-TribalCtsSentencing.pdf Shelf Number: 135180 Keywords: American Indians Indians of North America Sentencing Tribal Courts (U.S.)

Author: Guenzburger, Gloriam Vanine Title: Differences Between Jail Sentences and Jail Terms Actually Served among DUI offenders In Selected California Counties Summary: Records of 32.7% of California's DUI offenders convicted in 2006, who received jail or a jail alternative sentence, were used to compare jail terms at sentencing to actual jail time served, and to describe used alternative sanctions to jail. County data systems' variation, tracking methods, quality and completeness of data, and lack of communication between Courts and Sheriff's Departments limited sample size and representativeness. Percentages of jail time served across participating counties ranged from 0 to 67% for 1st offenders, 0 to 47% for 2nd offenders, and 0 to 67% for 3rd offenders. Median percentages of jail sentences actually served across participating counties were 0%, 19%, and 38% for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd offenders, respectively. Alternative sentences were used more often on 1st DUI offenders, less so on 2nd offenders, and least often on 3rd offenders. The most popular alternative sentences in lieu of jail options were Sheriff's Work Program and Caltrans Work Program. Jail sentences reported to DMV greatly overstate amount of jail time actually served by DUI offenders. Further evaluation of effectiveness of jail time served by California DUI offenders is not possible at present because California's DUI Offender Tracking System does not keep good track of offenders. Recommendations are: results from previous California DMV studies and/or studies from other states showing jail terms as ineffective in reducing alcohol-involved crashes or DUI recidivism should be taken with caution; efforts should be made so California's DUI Offender Tracking System is consistent with NHTSA's 2006 guidelines; DMV's court abstract collection system should require jail terms keyed in, if disposition code "J" is present; DMV's JAG project to assess accuracy and timeliness of DUI conviction data sent to DMV should be finished, and its findings used in conjunction of this study's findings to enable the implementation of recommendations from NHTSA's 2011 California Traffic Records Assessment. Details: Sacramento: California Department of Motor Vehicles, 2012. 71p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 15, 2015 at: http://apps.dmv.ca.gov/about/profile/rd/r_d_report/Section_5/S5-239.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://apps.dmv.ca.gov/about/profile/rd/r_d_report/Section_5/S5-239.pdf Shelf Number: 135229 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration Driving Under the Influence (California) Drunk Driving Jails Sentencing

Author: Kantorowicz, Elena Title: Day-Fines: Should the Rich Pay More? Summary: Fine is an efficient method of sanctioning since the burden on the taxpayer for enforcing it is low and the offender is even transferring wealth to the society. However, using the law and economics analysis, this paper suggests that the day-fine is a superior model to other forms of fines. This pecuniary measure takes into account the income of the offender alongside with the severity of the offense. Consequently, criminals with different socioeconomic status committing the same crime would pay the same portion of their wealth but not the same absolute amount of money. Using this structure the day-fine has a potential to deter the rich and the poor and avoid the costly sanction of imprisonment. Details: Rotterdam: Erasmus University Rotterdam, 2015. 23p. Source: Internet Resource: Rotterdam Institute of Law and Economics (RILE) Working Paper Series No. 2014/12 : Accessed April 21, 2015 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2387442 Year: 2014 Country: International URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2387442 Shelf Number: 135323 Keywords: Crime and Economics Day Fines Sentencing

Author: Fleetwood, Jennifer Title: Sentencing reform for drug trafficking in England and Wales Summary: Internationally, laws and sentencing practices tend to treat drug supply offences very harshly, often with the stated aim of deterrence. International drug trafficking is subject to the longest penalties, from 8-30 years, and up to the death penalty. Long sentences are often applied under inflexible legislation with little or no attention to individual mitigating circumstances, or the offenders' role or gains, resulting in disproportionately heavy penalties for minor offenders, such as drug couriers. This paper discusses recent changes to sentencing in England and Wales, which aim to recognise drug couriers as a distinct category, and so attribute lesser, more proportionate punishment. This innovation did not involve substantive change to drug laws, and reform has been achieved through revising sentencing practice by issuing guidelines for sentencers. This minor reform impacts on one specific group of beneficiaries only: drug couriers. Sentencing in England and Wales operates according to a complex categorisation of activities and separates possession, different types of selling and production activities, and international trafficking. This sentencing innovation is broadly a step in the right direction in that it will reduce punishments for many, but not all, drug couriers. It suggests that taking role into account offers the possibility of more proportionate sentences for drug couriers. Details: London: International Drug Policy Consortium, 2015. 15p. Source: Internet Resource: Briefing paper: accessed May 1, 2015 at: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/64663568/library/IDPC-briefing-paper_Sentencing-reform-for-drug-trafficking-in-the-UK.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/64663568/library/IDPC-briefing-paper_Sentencing-reform-for-drug-trafficking-in-the-UK.pdf Shelf Number: 135488 Keywords: Drug Couriers Drug Mules Drug Policy Drug Policy (U.K.) Sentencing

Author: Borden, Barbara Ann Title: Summary: This study examined the impact of risk factors and existing federal sentencing policies and practices on the likelihood of recidivism for female white collar offenders. The research combined and expanded prior literature on female offending, white collar crime, and recidivism, by creating a "profile" of the female white collar offender, identifying risk factors of recidivism from female offending and feminist pathways literature present in the population of federal female white collar offenders, and informing revision of current federal sentencing policies that result in the imposition of unnecessarily harsh sanctions for this group of low-risk, first-time (and likely one-time), female offenders. No prior studies have applied theories of feminist pathways offending to recidivism by female white collar offenders. Data from a recent national data set of offenders who began a term of federal probation or supervised release between October 1, 2004 and September 30, 2007 were used to provide a fresh look at female white collar offenders sentenced after implementation of the mandatory United States Sentencing Guidelines, but before judicial discretion was returned to federal sentencing courts by the United States Supreme Court. Overall, the study found that female white collar offenders are plagued by risks of recidivism common to all types of female offenders, including those recognized in pathways literature, and their profile more closely resembles the female offender than the public's image of a "white collar" offender. Details: Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma, 2014. 164p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: https://shareok.org/bitstream/handle/11244/13389/2014_Borden_Barbara_A_Dissertation.pdf?sequence=2 Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://shareok.org/bitstream/handle/11244/13389/2014_Borden_Barbara_A_Dissertation.pdf?sequence=2 Shelf Number: 135501 Keywords: Female Offenders Punishment Recidivism Sentencing White Collar Offenders (U.S.)

Author: Ronken, Carol Title: Two Strikes and They're Out! Mandatory Sentencing and Child Sex Offenders Summary: In July 2012 the Queensland Government passed a bill enforcing a two strikes approach for repeat child sex offenders. The two strikes approach will apply to sex offenders who have previously been convicted of an offence that attracts a maximum sentence of life imprisonment and who have been released and who then commit another sexual offence that attracts a maximum sentence of life. This paper is an updated version of our original Two Strikes position paper and includes discussion of concerns expressed about the introduction of the Queensland legislation. Details: Arundel BC, Qld: Bravehearts, Inc., 2013. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Position Paper: Accessed June 3, 2015 at: http://www.bravehearts.org.au/images/pictures/large/Two_Strikes_2013.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bravehearts.org.au/images/pictures/large/Two_Strikes_2013.pdf Shelf Number: 135858 Keywords: Child Sex Offenders Repeat Offenders Sentencing Sex Offenders

Author: United States Sentencing Commission Title: Alternative Sentencing in the Federal Criminal Justice System Summary: January 2009 the United States Sentencing Commission issued a report, Alternative Sentencing in the Federal Criminal Justice System. The report analyzed data from the prior decade concerning the imposition of alternative sentences by federal courts. In particular, that report found "the proportion of federal offenders sentenced to alternatives . . . remained low and decreased slightly" during the prior decade. As a supplement to the 2009 publication, the Commission is releasing this new report, using data from 2005 through 2014, to examine more recent trends in the rates of alternative sentences using a methodology that expands that of the prior report. Notably, this new report updates the previous analysis to include federal sentencing data since the U.S. Supreme Court's December 2007 decision in Gall v. United States, which reinforced sentencing courts' discretion to vary below the sentencing ranges recommended by the Guidelines Manual. This current report examines how sentencing courts use their discretion to impose alternative sentences, specifically combinations of probation and confinement options that substitute for the full prison terms permitted by law. This analysis shows a continued decreasing trend in the imposition of alternative sentences and explores factors associated with the decrease. In examining these trends, this report demonstrates: - Alternative sentences were imposed for a small proportion of federal offenders, in part, as a result of the large number of federal offenders who were ineligible for such sentences due to convictions under certain statutes or their status as deportable aliens. - During the past ten years, rates of alternative sentences declined among U.S. citizen federal offenders who were eligible for such sentences despite 1) a steady overall increase in sentences below the guideline range due to downward departures or variances and 2) overall consistency in offense severity and criminal history among those offenders. - In recent years, the decrease in rates of alternative sentences for eligible offenders, in part, is a reflection of the Commission's 2010 amendment that expanded Zones B and C of the Sentencing Table. The amendment added to Zones B and C offenders whose sentencing ranges previously were in Zones C and D, thereby increasing the proportion of offenders eligible for alternatives. However, as to be expected, courts imposed alternatives for these more serious offenders less frequently than for offenders whose sentencing ranges otherwise were in Zones B and C. This has contributed to the decrease in the rate of alternative sentences for eligible offenders. - Alternative sentences were imposed at notably different rates for offenders in different race categories with White offenders receiving such sentences at higher rates than Black and Hispanic offenders. - During the past ten years, alternative sentences have been imposed at a consistently low rate among U.S. citizen offenders whose sentencing ranges were in Zone D of the Sentencing Table. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Sentencing Commission, 2015. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 9, 2015 at: http://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/research-projects-and-surveys/alternatives/20150617_Alternatives.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/research-projects-and-surveys/alternatives/20150617_Alternatives.pdf Shelf Number: 135975 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration Courts Punishment Sentencing

Author: Amirault, Joanna Elizabeth Title: Criminalizing Terrorism: The Impact of Context and Cohort Effects on the Sentencing Outcomes of Terrorist Offenders Summary: Despite the recent criminalization of terrorism specific offenses little is known about the legal processing of terrorist offenders, and even less is known about how the context that terrorist offenders are adjudicated in impact sentencing outcomes. Collectively, this dissertation explores how changing contextual environments related to legal responses, the timing of an offender' adjudication and perceptions of threat impact the sentencing outcomes of terrorist offenders by utilizing a sample of terrorist offenders convicted both recently, and historically, in Canada (n = 153), and by further employing a sample of terrorist offenders recently adjudicated in the United Kingdom (n = 156). Across studies the context that offenders are sanctioned in impact sentencing outcomes, and cohort effects are uncovered. Terrorism specific offenses are readily utilized, and the criminalization of terrorism offenses appear to have provided law enforcement with legal measures that assist in the proactive prevention of terrorist incidents. However, general criminal provisions still have a significant role to play in the adjudication of terrorist offenders as offenders sanctioned of general criminal provisions only, or both general and terrorism specific offenses, are sentenced more severely than offenders convicted of terrorism specific offenses alone. The timing of an offender's adjudication also impacts sentencing outcomes as offenders sanctioned in the latter stages of a terrorist campaign are generally sentenced more severely than offenders adjudicated at the onset for similar crimes, while variability in the sentence outcomes achieved throughout a terrorist campaign are characterized by cohort effects. Furthermore, being sanctioned in proximity to major terrorist incidents is found to affect sentencing outcomes as offenders sentenced following these events are punished less severely. Finally, offenders who are characterized by factors that are associated with increased perceptions of threat receive harsher punishments; however the impact of perceptions of threat on sentencing outcomes can be limited to specific time periods. Details: Burnaby, BC: Simon Fraser University, 2014. 158p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed July 29, 2015 at: http://summit.sfu.ca/item/14456 Year: 2014 Country: Canada URL: http://summit.sfu.ca/item/14456 Shelf Number: 136226 Keywords: Sentencing Terrorism Terrorists

Author: Victoria (Australia). Sentencing Advisory Council Title: Guilty pleas in the higher courts: rates, timing, and discounts Summary: This report examines the rate and timing of guilty pleas, and their effect on sentence, in the Supreme Court of Victoria and the County Court of Victoria ('the higher courts') from July 2009 to June 2014. The study includes a total of 9,618 cases and 35,902 charges sentenced in the higher courts during the reference period (2009-10 to 2013-14). Since 2008, section 6AAA of the Victorian Sentencing Act 1991 has required sentencing judges (in certain circumstances) to state the sentence that they would have imposed if the offender had not pleaded guilty. Subtracting the actual sentence from this notional undiscounted sentence reveals the stated reduction in sentence, or 'discount' for the guilty plea. As well as making the discounts more transparent to the parties in the case, the very high compliance with section 6AAA in the higher courts has enabled extensive data collection on plea-based sentence discounts for the first time in Victoria. During the reference period (2009-10 to 2013-14), there were over 7,000 higher court cases with sufficient detail in the 6AAA statement to analyse the reductions awarded for guilty pleas. A unique feature of these data is that the information about the plea-based reduction is sourced directly from the sentencing judges. Details: Melbourne: Victorian Sentencing Advisory Council, 2015. 106p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 13, 2015 at: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Guilty%20Pleas%20in%20the%20Higher%20Courts_2.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Australia URL: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Guilty%20Pleas%20in%20the%20Higher%20Courts_2.pdf Shelf Number: 136387 Keywords: Criminal Courts Guilty Pleas Judges Plea Bargaining Sentencing

Author: Oregon. Criminal Justice Commission Title: Justice Reinvestment Implementation in Oregon: August 2013 to April 2015 Summary: In July 2013 the Oregon Legislature passed House Bill 3194, known as the Justice Reinvestment Act1. This report summarizes the implementation of several key areas in the bill, including sentencing reforms and the Justice Reinvestment Grant Program. As stakeholders in Oregon prepare for the 2015-2017 biennium, the Justice Reinvestment Grant Program will substantially change. Counties must apply for the grant funds and meet performance outcomes to show the programs implemented have been successful. Many of the sentencing reforms in the bill have reached the point where the majority of the prison bed savings have already been achieved. In order to continue to see success in terms of the goals of the Justice Reinvestment Grant Program, counties will need to reduce recidivism rates by implementing successful programs. The sentencing reforms will no longer be enough to control Oregon's prison population. The final section in this report displays how prison use by county will be tracked in the 2015-2017 biennium, and proposes a "stop light" display for county level prison use. Details: Salem, OR: Oregon Criminal Justice Commission, 2015. 35p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 14, 2015 at: http://www.oregon.gov/cjc/justicereinvestment/Documents/Justice%20Reinvestment%20Implementation%20in%20Oregon.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.oregon.gov/cjc/justicereinvestment/Documents/Justice%20Reinvestment%20Implementation%20in%20Oregon.pdf Shelf Number: 136416 Keywords: Costs of Corrections Costs of Criminal Justice Criminal Justice Reform Justice Reinvestment Sentencing

Author: Pew Charitable Trusts Title: Federal Drug Sentencing Laws Bring High Cost, Low Return. Penalty increases enacted in 1980s and 1990s have not reduced drug use or recidivism Summary: More than 95,000 federal prisoners are serving time for drug-related offenses - up from fewer than 5,000 in 1980. Changes in drug crime patterns and law enforcement practices played a role in this growth, but federal sentencing laws enacted during the 1980s and 1990s also have required more drug offenders to go to prison- and stay there much longer - than three decades ago. These policies have contributed to ballooning costs: The federal prison system now consumes more than $6.7 billion a year, or roughly 1 in 4 dollars spent by the U.S. Justice Department. Despite substantial expenditures on longer prison terms for drug offenders, taxpayers have not realized a strong public safety return. The self-reported use of illegal drugs has increased over the long term as drug prices have fallen and purity has risen. Federal sentencing laws that were designed with serious traffickers in mind have resulted in lengthy imprisonment of offenders who played relatively minor roles. These laws also have failed to reduce recidivism. Nearly a third of the drug offenders who leave federal prison and are placed on community supervision commit new crimes or violate the conditions of their release - a rate that has not changed substantially in decades. Details: Philadelphia: Pew Charitable Trusts, 2015. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Issue Brief: Accessed September 14, 2015 at: http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/Assets/2015/08/PSPP_FedDrug_brief.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/Assets/2015/08/PSPP_FedDrug_brief.pdf Shelf Number: 136745 Keywords: Costs of Corrections Costs of Criminal Justice Drug Offenders Drug Trafficking Recidivism Sentencing

Author: Poynton, Suzanne Title: Rates of Recidivism among Offenders Referred to Forum Sentencing Summary: Aim: To determine whether the NSW Forum Sentencing program is more effective than the conventional sentencing process in reducing recidivism. Method: Offenders referred to Forum Sentencing in 2011 were matched with offenders who were 'eligible' for Forum Sentencing but who were sentenced in a NSW Local Court where Forum Sentencing was not operating. These two groups were matched on a large number of covariates using propensity score techniques and were then compared on the time to first new proven offence using Cox regression. All offenders in both groups were followed up for a minimum of 6 months after finalisation of their index offence. The analysis was conducted using an intention-to-treat research design. Results: Of the 575 offenders referred to Forum Sentencing, 552 could be matched with an 'equivalent' offender in the control group based on the covariates measured at the index court appearance. Cox regression analyses showed that there was no significant difference between the matched groups in the time to first new offence. This lack of an effect remained even after controlling for other relevant covariates. Conclusion: This study finds no evidence that offenders who are referred to the NSW Forum Sentencing program are less likely to re-offend than similar offenders who are dealt with through the normal sentencing process. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2013. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice, No. 172: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/cjb172.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/cjb172.pdf Shelf Number: 129776 Keywords: Conferencing Forum Sentencing Recidivism Restorative Justice Sentencing

Author: Monahan, John Title: Risk Assessment in Criminal Sentencing Summary: The past several years have seen a surge of interest in using risk assessment in criminal sentencing, both to reduce recidivism by incapacitating or treating high-risk offenders and to reduce prison populations by diverting low-risk offenders from prison. We begin by sketching jurisprudential theories of sentencing, distinguishing those that rely on risk assessment from those that preclude it. We then characterize and illustrate the varying roles that risk assessment may play in the sentencing process. We clarify questions regarding the various meanings of "risk" in sentencing and the appropriate time to assess the risk of convicted offenders. We conclude by addressing four principal problems confronting risk assessment in sentencing: conflating risk and blame, barring individual inferences based on group data, failing adequately to distinguish risk assessment from risk reduction, and ignoring whether, and if so, how, the use of risk assessment in sentencing affects racial and economic disparities in imprisonment. Details: Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia School of Law, 2015. 57p. Source: Internet Resource: Virginia Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper, No. 53 : Accessed September 21, 2015 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2662082 Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2662082 Shelf Number: 136838 Keywords: Mass Incarceration Offender Rehabilitation Risk Assessment Sentencing

Author: Donna, Javier Title: Let the Punishment Fit the Criminal Summary: We investigate the role of punishment progressivity and individual characteristics in the determination of crime. To analyze welfare implications we model individuals' response to judges' optimal punishment in a dynamic setting. We introduce two distinctive features motivated by our empirical setting. First, judges rarely imposes maximum punishment for first time offenders. Instead, we observe low fines (or just a warning) even when crime detection technology is efficient and punishment is not costly. We account for this by allowing an unobservable (to the judge) individual state to be correlated with a public signal (the environment). This generates an optimal punishment that is conditional on individual observables. Second, judges punishments follow a progressive system: conditioning on type, recidivists are punished harsher than first-time offenders for the same crime. We account for these dynamics by introducing a persistent unobservable (to the judge) component. Judges update their beliefs about individuals depending on whether they committed a crime in the previous period; this gives rise to progressivity in the optimal punishment system. For the empirical analysis we examine a novel trial data set from a self-governed community of farmers in Southern Spain. We find that judges vary the degree of imposed punishments based on individual characteristics - such as when victims or accused have a Don honorific title indicating they are wealthy. Recidivists are punished harsher than first time offenders. Details: Working Paper, 2013. 23p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 19, 2015 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2667588 Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2667588 Shelf Number: 137014 Keywords: Fines Punishment Sentencing

Author: Aksenova, Marina Title: Values on the Move: The Colombian Sentencing Practice and the Principle of Complementarity Under the Rome Statute Summary: This paper is about self-identification of the International Criminal Court ('ICC'). As the focus of international criminal justice shifts to national prosecutions, it is unclear to what extent the ICC will act as the enforcer of international norms on the ground. The paper discusses the principle of complementarity using the case study of Colombia. The ICC prosecution team has been conducting preliminary examinations in this country for over ten years and has yet to decide whether to move to the stage of formal investigations. In doing so, it must assess, among other things, whether reduced or suspended sentences rendered to senior perpetrators by the local judiciary are adequate in light of the gravity of the crimes committed during the continuing civil war. The issue of sentencing in Colombia illustrates the difficulties the Court may face in deciding on a state's willingness to undertake genuine prosecutions. The ICC has yet to determine its role in adjusting the values conceived internationally to the domestic terrain. In the case of Colombia, the matter is further complicated by the fact that the ICC's involvement may disturb the ongoing peace negotiations. Details: Copenhagen: University of Copenhagen - iCourts - Centre of Excellence for International Courts, 2015. Source: Internet Resource: iCourts Working Paper Series nr. 24 : Accessed February 1, 2016 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2605362 Year: 2015 Country: Colombia URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2605362 Shelf Number: 137720 Keywords: International Criminal Court Rome Statute Sentencing

Author: Victoria. Sentencing Advisory Council Title: Sentencing for Contravention of Family Violence Intervention Orders and Safety Notices: Second Monitoring Report Summary: intervention order (FVIO) or a family violence safety notice (FVSN) made under the Family Violence Protection Act 2008 (Vic). In particular, this report examines sentencing for the offences of: - contravention of an FVIO; - contravention of an FVSN; - contravention of an FVIO intending to cause harm or fear for safety; - contravention of an FVSN intending to cause harm or fear for safety; and - persistent contravention of notices and orders. This report examines sentencing for contravention of an FVIO and contravention of an FVSN over two three-year periods: 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2012, and 1 July 2012 to 30 June 2015 (the reference periods). In addition, this report examines sentencing for contraventions intending to cause harm or fear for safety and persistent contravention of notices and orders for the period 2012-13 to 2014-15. These aggravated contravention offences were introduced on 17 April 2013 to address particularly serious or repeated instances of contravention. This report is a continuation of the Sentencing Advisory Council's (the Council's) previous work on monitoring sentencing patterns for contravention of FVIOs and FVSNs. Previous reports include: - Sentencing Practices for Breach of Family Violence Intervention Orders: Final Report (2009), which examines sentencing practices for the offence of breaching an FVIO under the Crimes (Family Violence) Act 1987 (Vic) from July 2004 to June 2007 and includes a discussion on guiding principles for sentencing this offence; and - Family Violence Intervention Orders and Safety Notices: Sentencing for Contravention (2013), which examines sentences for contravention of an FVIO over two periods (2004-05 to 2006-07 and 2009-10 to 2011-12) and contravention of an FVSN (from 2009-10 to 2011-12). Details: Melbourne: Sentencing Advisory Council, 2015. 66p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 8, 2016 at: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Sentencing%20for%20Contravention%20of%20Family%20Violence%20Orders.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Australia URL: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Sentencing%20for%20Contravention%20of%20Family%20Violence%20Orders.pdf Shelf Number: 137798 Keywords: Family Violence Interventions Intimate Partner Violence Sentencing

Author: Sentencing Project Title: Juvenile Life Without Parole: An Overview Summary: An overview of developments regarding Juvenile Life without Parole: An Overview encompasses the impact of the Supreme Court's recent decision in Montgomery v. Louisiana, which will sharply curtail the number of people serving life without parole sentences for offenses committed as juveniles. Approximately 2,500 people are currently serving life without parole for offenses committed as juveniles; 16 states and the District of Columbia have banned the use of the sentence for juvenile offenders. The policy brief traces a decade's worth of Supreme Court rulings, legislative responses to those rulings, and current research about teenage development and the juveniles likely impacted by the decision. Details: Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project, 2016. 5p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 17, 2016 at: http://sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/jj_Juvenile_Life_Without_Parole.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/jj_Juvenile_Life_Without_Parole.pdf Shelf Number: 137877 Keywords: Juvenile Offenders Life Imprisonment Life Sentence Life Without Parole Sentencing

Author: Mastrobuoni, Giovanni Title: Criminal Discount Factors and Deterrence Summary: The trade-off between the immediate returns from committing a crime and the future costs of punishment depends on an offender's time discounting. We exploit quasi-experimental variation in sentence length generated by a large collective pardon in Italy and provide non-parametric evidence on the extent of discounting from the raw data on recidivism and sentence length. Using a discrete-choice model of recidivism, we estimate an average annual discount factor of 0.74, although there is heterogeneity based on age, education, crime type, and nationality. Our estimates imply that the majority of deterrence is derived from the first few years in prison. Details: Unpublished paper, 2016. 50p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 24, 2016 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2730969 Year: 2016 Country: Italy URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2730969 Shelf Number: 137946 Keywords: Deterrence Imprisonment Punishment Recidivism Sentencing

Author: Weatherburn, Don Title: Why is the NSW prison population still growing? Another look at prison trends between 2011 and 2015 Summary: Between June 2011 and September 2015, the number of people in prison rose from 10,000 to 11,801, an increase of 18 per cent. The increase since November 2014 has been particularly marked, with an additional 1,421 prisoners added to the population in just ten months. As of September 2015, the remand population stood at 3,597. This is 975 remand prisoners more than were in custody in September 2011. The sentenced prisoner population in September 2015 stood at 8,204. This is 1,023 more sentenced prisoners than were in custody in September 2011. The growth in the number of persons entering remand is due to four factors: (a) more people being proceeded against by police for offences where bail refusal is likely (b) more people being proceeded against for breach of bail (c) longer periods on remand and (d) (possibly), an increase in the likelihood of bail refusal. The increase in the sentenced prisoner population is partly due to an increase in the percentage of convicted offenders given a prison sentence and partly due to the fact that police are more often initiating criminal proceedings against offenders who, if convicted, are likely to be imprisoned. The percentage imprisoned has risen significantly for offenders convicted of stalking/ intimidation, criminal intent, receiving or handling the proceeds of crime, obtaining benefit by deception, dangerous/negligent driving, theft (other than motor vehicles), serious assault resulting in injury, common assault, breach of community service orders, threatening behaviour and sell, possess and/or use prohibited weapons/explosives. The number proceeded against by police has increased significantly for stalking/intimidation, criminal intent, receiving/handling the proceeds of crime, obtaining benefit by deception, dealing/trafficking in drugs (non-commercial quantity) and breach of violence order. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2016. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: Issue Paper no. 113: Accessed March 5, 2016 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/BB/Report-2016-Why-is-the-NSW-prison-population-still-growing-bb113.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/BB/Report-2016-Why-is-the-NSW-prison-population-still-growing-bb113.pdf Shelf Number: 138116 Keywords: Imprisonment Incarceration Inmates Prisoners (Australia) Prisons Sentencing

Author: Selin, Klara Hradilova Title: Longer prison sentences for serious violent crime in Sweden: An evaluation of the 2010 sentencing reform Summary: In 2010, the Swedish Parliament passed a bill focused on increasing the severity of the sentences imposed for serious violent offences. Bra (the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention) has evaluated what effect the sentencing reform had produced. This report presents the results of the evaluation, and is organised on the basis of three central research questions: - Have the sentences imposed for serious violent offences become more severe - Has there been an increase in the degree of variation in the length of the sentences imposed? - Has the clarification of the requirement to consider recidivism produced any measurable effects? Details: Stockholm: Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention, 2014. 9p. Source: Internet Resource: English summary of Bra report No. 2014:6: Accessed March 9, 2016 at: https://www.bra.se/download/18.221265bc145ae05f27a19ec/1401195419581/2014_Longer+prison+sentences+for+serious+violent+crime+in+Sweden.pdf Year: 2014 Country: Sweden URL: https://www.bra.se/download/18.221265bc145ae05f27a19ec/1401195419581/2014_Longer+prison+sentences+for+serious+violent+crime+in+Sweden.pdf Shelf Number: 138141 Keywords: Punishment Sentencing

Author: Mackey, Kelly Title: Analysis of Sentencing for Possession or Importation of Drugs for Sale or Supply Summary: This analysis examines the sentencing practice of the courts in relation to certain drug trafficking offences, specifically the offences of possession or importation of controlled drugs for the purpose of sale or supply. There are four such offences which are detailed herein:  Possession of controlled drugs for unlawful sale or supply (s. 15 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1977, as amended).  Possession of controlled drugs (valued at L13,000 or more) for unlawful sale or supply (s. 15A of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1977, as amended).  Importation of controlled drugs for unlawful sale or supply (several provisions found in the Customs Acts, Misuse of Drugs Acts 1979-1984, as amended, and the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 1988).  Importation of controlled drugs (valued at L13,000 or more) for unlawful sale or supply (s. 15B of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1977, as amended). It is important to note that there is a different sentencing regime for the ordinary possession and importation for sale or supply offences and possession or importation for sale and supply offences where the value of the drug or drugs exceeds L3,000. Convictions under s. 15A or s. 15B automatically attract a "basic presumptive sentence" of 10 years or more. This applies regardless of whether mitigating factors may exist meriting a lower sentence. A sentencing court may however impose a lower sentence where there are mitigating factors that amount to "exceptional and specific circumstances", which would render the imposition of a sentence of 10 years or more "unjust in all the circumstances". "Exceptional and specific circumstances" can be said to set a higher threshold than mitigating factors generally in sentencing law: all "exceptional and specific circumstances" are mitigating factors, but not all mitigating factors constitute "exceptional and specific circumstances". In Part I, the legislative basis for these drug trafficking offences and the reserved judgments of the superior courts are analysed in order to articulate a sentencing framework. Part II examines the application of such sentencing principles to the hybrid sentencing regime for offences of possession or importation for sale or supply where the controlled drugs are above a certain monetary value, i.e. whether the "basic presumptive sentence" should be imposed or whether to do so would be unjust in all the circumstances. Part III contains a pr�cis of all judgments on sentencing - total of 79 reserved and ex tempore decisions involving 81 offenders - the Court of Criminal Appeal from 2009 to 2012. 20 judgments were analysed pertaining to the ordinary offence and 59 relating to the offences carrying the presumptive sentence. Details: Dublin: Irish Sentencing Information System, 2013. 103p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 21, 2016 at: http://www.irishsentencing.ie/en/ISIS/Analysis%20of%20Sentencing%20for%20Drug%20Offences,%20Mar%202014.pdf/Files/Analysis%20of%20Sentencing%20for%20Drug%20Offences,%20Mar%202014.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Ireland URL: http://www.irishsentencing.ie/en/ISIS/Analysis%20of%20Sentencing%20for%20Drug%20Offences,%20Mar%202014.pdf/Files/Analysis%20of%20Sentencing%20for%20Drug%20Offences,%20Mar%202014.pdf Shelf Number: 138347 Keywords: Drug Offenders Drug Possession Drug Trafficking Sentencing

Author: Pew Charitable Trusts Title: The Punishment Rate: New metric evaluates prison use relative to reported crime Summary: Researchers, policymakers, and the public rely on a variety of statistics to measure how society punishes crime. Among the most common is the imprisonment rate - the number of people in prison per 100,000 residents. This metric allows for comparisons of prison use over time and across jurisdictions and is widely seen as a proxy for punishment. States with high imprisonment rates, for example, are considered more punitive than those with low rates. A more nuanced assessment of punishment than the ratio of inmates to residents is that of inmates to crime - what The Pew Charitable Trusts calls the "punishment rate." This new metric gauges the size of the prison population relative to the frequency and severity of crime reported in each jurisdiction, putting the imprisonment rate in a broader context. Using the punishment rate to examine the U.S. criminal justice system, Pew found that all states became more punitive from 1983 to 2013, even though they varied widely in the amount of punishment they imposed. The analysis also shows that the nation as a whole has become more punitive than the imprisonment rate alone indicates. Details: Philadelphia: Pew Charitable Trusts, 2016. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Brief: Accessed March 24, 2016 at: http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/assets/2016/03/the_punishment_rate.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/assets/2016/03/the_punishment_rate.pdf Shelf Number: 138410 Keywords: Inmates Prisoners Punishment Sentencing

Author: Freiberg, Arie Title: Sentencing for Child Sexual Abuse in Institutional Contexts Summary: This report examines sentencing law and practice in Australia in relation to child sexual abuse committed in an institutional context. It covers the principles of sentencing, sentencing standards and the range of non-sentencing statutory measures available to detain offenders in custody, as well as restrictions and monitoring of their movement. It also considers organisational responsibility for CSA and the sanctions that may be imposed upon institutions. Details: Sydney: Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, 2015. 296p. Source: Internet Resource: Monash University Faculty of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2015/10 : Accessed March 26, 2016 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2633223 Year: 2015 Country: Australia URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2633223 Shelf Number: 138427 Keywords: Child Sexual Abuse Corrections-Based Sexual Abuse Institutional Abuse Institutional Care Sentencing Sex Offenders

Author: Johnson, Sarah Title: An Analysis of the Sex Offender Special Sentence in Iowa Summary: An obligation of the Sex Offender Research Council outlined in Iowa Code �216A.139 (4)(B) instructs the board to examine the "the cost and effectiveness of special sentences pursuant to chapter 903B." The special sentence places offenders convicted of offenses in Iowa Code �709 (sex offenses), �726.2 (incest), and �728.12, (1), (2), or (3)(sexual exploitation) on either 10-year or life-time community supervision based solely upon the offense class of conviction. Offenders convicted of A, B, and C felony sex offenses receive life-time community supervision and D felony and misdemeanor offenders receive 10-year supervision sentences (�903B, Code of Iowa). To study the effects of the special sentence, two groups of sex offenders were analyzed: those serving a special sentence and a pre-special sentence cohort of offenders. Recidivism rates were compared between the two groups over a three-year period. For the special sentence group, the recidivism tracking period began at the beginning of an offender's special sentence supervision start date. For the comparison group, the recidivism tracking period was observed following an offender's sentence expiration, meaning that they were not under any type of correctional supervision when examined. Due to the high rate of special sentence revocations, recidivism rates by time-at-risk were also observed. Findings indicate there were no significant differences in new sex offense convictions between the special sentence and comparison group. However, the special sentence group had lower rates of new convictions than the comparison group. The high rate of revocation among the special sentence group, in particular those revocations for inappropriate behaviors specific to sex offenders, may have prevented reoffending and reconviction in some cases; however, it is impossible to estimate the extent to which this occurred. Revocations for technical offenses were higher than revocations for new convictions. While it is difficult to determine if crime is avoided through application of the special sentence, it is noteworthy that baseline sexual reoffending is exceptionally low with or without supervision; however the cost to implement the special sentence supervision is very high. The special sentence currently costs community corrections approximately $5.6 million annually. Additional costs are incurred when offenders are revoked from the special sentence and re-incarcerated. Removal of some offenders from the special sentence has the potential for cost containment, although this figure is difficult to determine given the unknown estimates of potential offenders removed from the special sentence. Details: Des Moines, IA: Iowa Department of Human Rights, Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning, Statistical Analysis Center, 2015. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 29, 2016 at: https://humanrights.iowa.gov/sites/default/files/media/CJJP_2015%20SORC%20Annual%20Report%20-%20An%20Analysis%20of%20the%20Sex%20Offender%20Special%20Sentence%20in%20Iowa.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://humanrights.iowa.gov/sites/default/files/media/CJJP_2015%20SORC%20Annual%20Report%20-%20An%20Analysis%20of%20the%20Sex%20Offender%20Special%20Sentence%20in%20Iowa.pdf Shelf Number: 138457 Keywords: Costs of Criminal Justice Sentencing Sex Offenders

Author: Victoria. Sentencing Advisory Council Title: Parole and Sentencing Research Report Summary: Parole is the conditional release of a prisoner serving a sentence of imprisonment. Parole allows prisoners to serve a portion of their sentence in the community for the period during which they are still under sentence. A court determines the portion of a sentence that an offender may be allowed to serve on parole by fixing a non-parole period. A non-parole period is a component of some imprisonment sentences that represents the minimum term that an offender must serve before becoming eligible for release on parole. An offender's eligibility for a non-parole period is determined by both the length of the sentence imposed on the offender and the discretion of the sentencing court. An offender sentenced to imprisonment for under one year cannot have a non-parole period. An offender sentenced to imprisonment for one year to less than two years may have a non-parole period imposed by the court, at the court's discretion. An offender sentenced to imprisonment for two years or more must have a non-parole period imposed by the court, unless the circumstances of the offender or the case are such that it is inappropriate (for example, when, for the most serious offending, the court imposes a life sentence without fixing a non-parole period). Over the last five years, there has been considerable analysis and review of the parole system in Victoria and the introduction of substantial reforms regarding the way in which the parole system is administered. However, there have been no substantive changes to the law regarding how a court imposes a non-parole period at the time of sentencing. Nevertheless, the reforms to parole administration have taken place during a period of significant changes to the sentencing landscape in Victoria, including the introduction of new sentencing orders such as community correction orders (CCOs), and the abolition of others such as suspended sentences. Further, the length of the imprisonment term that a court may combine with a CCO has been extended, with the maximum term of imprisonment for such an order increasing from three months to two years. In light of these changes, this report seeks to answer the following questions: - How did the courts' use of non-parole periods change between 2010-11 and 2014-15? - What factors influenced the length of non-parole periods imposed by the courts between 2010-11 and 2014-15? Details: Melbourne: Sentencing Advisory Council, 2016. 56p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 23, 2016 at: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Parole%20and%20Sentencing%20Research%20Report.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Parole%20and%20Sentencing%20Research%20Report.pdf Shelf Number: 138795 Keywords: Imprisonment Parole Sentencing

Author: Skardhamar, Torbjorn Title: Straffegjennomforing med elektronisk kontroll i Norge - Execution of sentence with electronic monitoring in Norway Summary: Since September 2008 there has been a pilot project on execution of sentences using electronic monitoring (EM) in six Norwegian counties. This form of execution of sentence is a form of home detention under certain conditions, where a tag is attached to the offender's ankle which reports his or hers geographical position. Execution of a sentence using EM is meant to be an alternative to serving time in prison, and who is found eligible is an administrative decision by the prison authorities. Persons who are sentenced to less than four months in prison can apply for EM. A second group who can apply is those who have served a long sentence and have less than four months left, and these can serve the remaining time with EM. One main purpose of EM in Norway is to avoid that the offenders loose contact with the labour market and the society at large. This report describes some Norwegian experiences with this form of execution of a sentence. The first part of the report describes who get to serve their sentence with EM, compared to those who serve a short sentence in prison. These groups are compared on a number of socioeconomic variables. This part of the analysis shed light on social inequality in execution of sentences. We show that those who serve time with EM is generally better off on a number of characteristics. They have higher educational level, larger proportion was employed before the sentence, lower proportion on social benefits, and they have higher average incomes from work. Nevertheless, those who serve time with EM are not a particularly privileged group, and only about half were employed prior to serving their sentence. The second part of the report describes changes in employment situation on a monthly basis from 24 months before serving their sentence until 24 months after. This analysis focuses only on those who serve their entire sentence with EM, which is the majority. The outcome is compared with a matched comparison group of offenders who serve their time in prison. It is shown that there are very little changes in the employment rate among those who serve time with EM. As a main purpose of EM is to prevent the convicts of dropping out of the labour market, this indicates that this goal is achieved. However, this applies to a large extent to the comparison group as well, although they have a somewhat reduction in employment rates, which is temporary. Neither are there much changes in the proportion receiving social benefits among those who serve time with EM, while there is a somewhat increase after having served their sentence in the comparison group. In conclusion, those who serve time with EM do not seem to get noticeable increased problems on the labour market after execution of the sentence, and it is possible that EK has up to a moderate positive effect compared to a matched comparison group. Details: Oslo: Statistics Norway, 2013. 38p. This publication is in Norwegian Only Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 2, 2016 at: https://www.ssb.no/sosiale-forhold-og-kriminalitet/artikler-og-publikasjoner/_attachment/105969?_ts=13e36fbcdc0 Year: 2013 Country: Norway URL: https://www.ssb.no/sosiale-forhold-og-kriminalitet/artikler-og-publikasjoner/_attachment/105969?_ts=13e36fbcdc0 Shelf Number: 138885 Keywords: Electronic Monitoring Offender Supervision Sentencing

Author: Great Britain. Law Commission Title: A New Sentencing Code for England and Wales Transition - Final Report and Recommendations Summary: 1.1 On 1 July 2015 we published an issues paper seeking consultees' views on an aspect of the Law Commission's project to codify sentencing procedure in a New Sentencing Code. 1.2 This report summarises the responses we received to that consultation, and lists the recommendations we make in light of those responses. We also set out in a little more detail some of the practical implications of the approach that we recommend. Details: London: Law Commission, 2016. 62p. Source: Internet Resource: Law Com. No. 365: Accessed May 20, 2016 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524631/55746_HC_30_Web.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524631/55746_HC_30_Web.pdf Shelf Number: 139117 Keywords: Criminal Law Sentencing

Author: Elderbroom, Brian Title: Assessing the Impact of South Dakota's Sentencing Reforms: Justice Reinvestment Initiative Summary: South Dakota made significant reforms to its justice system with the 2013 enactment of the Public Safety Improvement Act. This brief summarizes findings on the preliminary impact of two of these reforms: presumptive probation and felony reclassifications of drug possession and ingestion. These policies have produced positive results, but new developments threaten that success. While prison admissions and sentence lengths for affected offenses declined, the number of convictions for eligible offenses increased. These increases challenge the state's progress toward its reform goals. This brief offers policy recommendations South Dakota should consider to build on the success of SB 70. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2016. 15p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 18, 2016 at: http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication-pdfs/2000762-Assessing-the-Impact-of-South-Dakota%27s-Sentencing-Reforms-Justice-Reinvestment-Initiative.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication-pdfs/2000762-Assessing-the-Impact-of-South-Dakota%27s-Sentencing-Reforms-Justice-Reinvestment-Initiative.pdf Shelf Number: 139658 Keywords: Criminal Justice Policies Criminal Justice Reform Justice Reinvestment Sentencing Sentencing Reform

Author: Illinois Sentencing Policy Advisory Council Title: Drivers of the Sentenced Population: Length of Time Served in Prison Summary: - Policy changes that increase the amount of time that offenders serve in prison will ultimately increase the size of the prison population, even if the number of admissions does not increase. - Sentence lengths for serious felonies (Class X, Class 1, and Class 2) have increased markedly over the last 20 years. (p.6) Average time served in prison has also increased for inmates convicted of the First Degree Murder, Class X, and Class 1 felonies. (p.2) This increase has had a dramatic impact on the population of the Illinois Department of Corrections. - Increases in the number of prison beds needed per year for Class 1-Class 4 felonies were due entirely to dramatic increases in time served in FY2011. For example, time served for Class 4 felonies increased 50% in a single year, between FY2010 - 2011. This resulted in an increased need of 1,468 prison beds for those exiting in 2011. - Sentence lengths imposed and average time served, for the less serious Class 3 and 4 felonies have remained relatively stable over the past 20 years. - The amount of credit awarded for time spent in jail prior to conviction is significantly higher for those convicted in Cook County than the rest of the state. For example, in FY 2011, Class X felons in Cook County received 65 percent more jail credit time than Class X felons outside of Cook County. - The average amount of earned good time credit days awarded for participation in education, treatment, and prison industries has decreased steadily for all felony classes since the late 1990s, with the exception of Class 1 felonies, primarily due to a decrease in the proportion of inmates eligible for these credits as well as a lack of capacity to offer programming to all eligible inmates. Details: Springfield, IL: The Council, 2013. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Briefing: Accessed July 18, 2016 at: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/spac/pdf/SPAC%20Report%20Time%20Served%209-13.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/spac/pdf/SPAC%20Report%20Time%20Served%209-13.pdf Shelf Number: 139659 Keywords: Sentence Length Sentencing Time Served

Author: Teji, Selena Title: Sentencing in California: Moving Toward a Smarter, More Cost-Effective Approach Summary: Californians have a collective interest in living in a safe and healthy environment. The state's criminal justice system is responsible for reducing crime and intervening when crime occurs, including apprehending and sentencing the perpetrator, in order to promote safe communities. In recent decades, however, harsh, one-size-fits-all sentencing laws contributed to the creation of a bloated and costly correctional system that generally fails to serve the interests of Californians. California has adopted significant criminal justice reforms over the past several years. In 2014, voters approved Proposition 47, which reclassified several drug and property crimes as misdemeanors. In addition, in 2011 state policymakers "realigned" to the state's 58 counties responsibility for supervising many people convicted of non-serious, nonviolent, and nonsexual felonies. Despite these positive steps, California's sentencing laws continue to overly rely on incarceration as the consequence for committing a felony or a misdemeanor, rather than promoting community-based interventions that could provide better avenues for rehabilitation. To be sure, California counties have adopted many alternative sentencing options following the 2011 realignment of responsibility for people convicted of low-level felonies. However, these approaches are not the norm across the state, and state sentencing laws continue to emphasize incarceration. Research casts serious doubt on the effectiveness of mass incarceration as a means of promoting public safety. Given the high social and financial costs of incarceration, California could revise its sentencing laws to more fully embrace alternative interventions intended to hold accountable people who commit a crime, correct problematic behaviors, and help communities and survivors of crime heal. Moreover, while incarceration will continue to be warranted for many offenses - including violent crimes - the question for state policymakers is whether sentence lengths are appropriate and reflect an efficient use of public resources. As one step forward, policymakers could establish a sentencing commission to examine the impact of sentence length on targeted populations, with the goal of ensuring that sentences are proportionate to the seriousness of the crime as well as to the risk that the person will reoffend. Policymakers also could amend the state's sentencing laws to generally scale back sentence lengths. In sum, significantly divesting from incarceration as a sentencing tool - and moving toward alternative sentencing options - could both increase public safety and be more cost-effective, Details: Sacramento: California Budget & Policy Center, 2015. 18p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 25, 2016 at: http://calbudgetcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/Sentencing-in-California-12172015.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://calbudgetcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/Sentencing-in-California-12172015.pdf Shelf Number: 139849 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration Cost-Benefit Analysis Costs of Corrections Costs of Criminal Justice Sentencing

Author: Fair Punishment Project Title: Too Broken to Fix: Part 1. An In-depth Look at America's Outlier Death Penalty Counties Summary: This report offers an in-depth look at how the death penalty is operating in the small handful of counties across the country that are still using it. Of the 3,143 county or county equivalents in the United States, only 16 - or one half of one percent - imposed five or more death sentences between 2010 and 2015. Part I of the report, titled Too Broken to Fix: An In-depth Look at America's Outlier Death Penalty Counties, examined 10 years of court opinions and records from eight of these 16 "outlier counties," including Caddo Parish (LA), Clark (NV), Duval (FL), Harris (TX), Maricopa (AZ), Mobile (AL), Kern (CA) and Riverside (CA). The report also analyzed all of the new death sentences handed down in these counties since 2010. The report notes that these "outlier counties" are plagued by persistent problems of overzealous prosecutors, ineffective defense lawyers, and racial bias. Researchers found that the impact of these systemic problems included the conviction of innocent people, and the excessively harsh punishment of people with significant impairments. The report notes that many of the defendants appear to have one or more impairments that are on par with, or worse than, those that the U.S. Supreme Court has said should categorically exempt individuals from execution due to lessened culpability. The Court previously found that individuals with intellectual disabilities (Atkins v. Virginia, 2002) and juveniles under the age of 18 (Roper v. Simmons, 2005) should not be subject to the death penalty under the Eighth Amendment. In conducting its analysis, the we reviewed more than 200 direct appeals opinions handed down between 2006 and 2015 in these eight counties. We found: - Sixty percent of cases involved defendants with significant mental impairments or other forms of mitigation. - Eighteen percent of cases involved a defendant who was under the age of 21 at the time of the offense. In Riverside County, 16 percent of the defendants were age 18 at the time of the offense. - Forty-four percent of cases involved a defendant who had an intellectual disability, brain damage, or severe mental illness. In four of the counties, half or more of the defendants had mental impairments: Maricopa (62 percent), Mobile (60 percent), Caddo Parish (57 percent), and Kern (50 percent). - Approximately one in seven cases involved a finding of prosecutorial misconduct. Maricopa and Clark counties had misconduct in 21 percent and 47 percent of cases respectively. - Bad lawyering was a persistent problem across all of the counties. In most of the counties, the average mitigation presentation at the penalty phase of the trial, in which the defense lawyer is supposed to present all of the evidence showing that the defendant's life should be spared - including testimony from mental health and other experts, lasted approximately one day. While this is just one data point for determining the quality of legal representation, this finding reveals appalling inadequacies. In Duval County, Florida, the entire penalty phase of the trial and the jury verdict often came in the same day. - A relatively small group of defense lawyers represented a substantial number of the individuals who ended up on death row. In Kern County, one lawyer represented half of the individuals who ended up on death row between 2010 and 2015. Additional findings: - Five of the eight counties had at least one person exonerated from death row since 1976. Harris County has had three death row exonerations, and Maricopa has had five. - Out of all of the death sentences obtained in these counties between 2010 and 2015, 41 percent were given to African-American defendants, and 69 percent were given to people of color. In Duval, 87 percent of defendants were Black in this period. In Harris, 100 percent of the defendants who were newly sentenced to death since November 2004 have been people of color. - The race of the victim is also a significant factor in who is sentenced to death in many of these counties. In Mobile County, 67 percent of the Black defendants, and 88% of all defendants, who were sentenced to death were convicted of killing white victims. In Clark County, 71 percent of all of the victims were white in cases resulting in a death sentence. The report noted just three white defendants sentenced to death for killing Black victims between 2010 and 2015. One of those cases was from Riverside, and in that case the defendant was also convicted of killing two additional white victims. The two other cases were from Duval. - Five of the 16 "outlier counties" are from Florida and Alabama, the only two states that currently allow non-unanimous jury verdicts. In Duval, 88 percent of the decisions in the review period were non-unanimous, and in Mobile the figure was 80 percent. Details: s.l.: Fair Punishment Project, 2016. 55p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 27, 2016 at: http://fairpunishment.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/FPP-TooBroken.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://fairpunishment.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/FPP-TooBroken.pdf Shelf Number: 140054 Keywords: Capital Punishment Death Penalty Prosecutors Racial Disparities Sentencing Wrongful Convictions

Author: Victoria. Sentencing Advisory Council Title: Sentencing of Offenders: Sexual Penetration with a Child under 12 Summary: Sentencing of Offenders: Sexual Penetration with a Child under 12 incorporates both quantitative and qualitative research methods to analyse sentencing data and sentencing remarks for cases of sexual penetration with a child under 12 sentenced in Victoria between 1 July 2009 and 30 June 2014. Details: Melbourne: The Sentencing Advisory Council, 2016. 98p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 2, 2016 at: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Sentencing%20of%20Offenders%20Sexual%20Penetration%20with%20a%20Child%20under%2012_0.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Sentencing%20of%20Offenders%20Sexual%20Penetration%20with%20a%20Child%20under%2012_0.pdf Shelf Number: 140126 Keywords: Child Sexual Abuse Sentencing Sex Offenders

Author: Victoria. Sentencing Advisory Council Title: Sentencing Children in Victoria: Data Update Report Summary: This report updates select data from the Sentencing Advisory Council's 2012 report Sentencing Children and Young People in Victoria. Specifically, it focuses on offenders aged under 18 at the time of offending (and under 19 at the time of commencement of proceedings) who were sentenced in either the Children's Court or the higher courts for the calendar years from 2010 to 2015 (inclusive). This report does not examine young adult offenders sentenced under the 'dual track' system in the higher courts. Details: Melbourne: Sentencing Advisory Council, 2016. 66p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 2, 2016 at: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Sentencing%20Children%20in%20Victoria%20Data%20Update%20Report.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Sentencing%20Children%20in%20Victoria%20Data%20Update%20Report.pdf Shelf Number: 140127 Keywords: Juvenile Offenders Sentencing

Author: Thorburn, Hamish Title: Trends in conditional discharges in NSW Local Courts: 2004-2015 Summary: Courts are increasingly choosing to give offenders a section 10(1)b bond rather than fine them according to new research by the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research (BOCSAR). A 10(1)b bond is one of the least severe penalties a court can impose on an offender. Offenders given a section 10(1)b bond are released without conviction on condition that they enter into a good behaviour bond. Breach of a bond may result in resentencing for the original offence. BOCSAR examined the penalties imposed by the NSW Local Courts between January 2004 and September 2015 for assault, drug, weapons, property damage and traffic offences. These offences account for around 80 per cent of all section 10(1)b bonds. Between January 2004 and September 2015, the percentage of offenders in these categories receiving a section 10(1)b bond rose from 15.2 per cent to 23.6 per cent. Over the same period the proportion of fines being imposed by the Local Court for the same offences fell from 66 per cent to 55.9 per cent; almost perfectly matching the increase in the use of section 10(1)b bonds. The growth in the use of section 10(1)b bonds remained significant even after controlling for changes in offender characteristics such as Indigenous status, gender, level of disadvantage, age, remoteness of residence, number of concurrent offences and prior criminal record. Details: Sydney: New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2016. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice, no. 196: Accessed September 15, 2016 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/Report-2016-Trends-in-conditional-discharges-cjb196.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/Report-2016-Trends-in-conditional-discharges-cjb196.pdf Shelf Number: 147882 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarcerations Conditional Discharge Criminal Courts Drug Offenders Sentencing

Author: Illinois Sentencing Policy Advisory Council Title: Trends Analysis: Unlawful Use of a Weapon Summary: Has increasing the sentencing penalties for unlawful use of a weapon offenses had a positive effect on public safety over the last 10 years? This report uses basic trend analysis to examine whether the increased penalties for unlawful use of a weapon (UUW) offenses preceded any change in measurable public safety outcomes. In this report, measurable public safety outcomes are the number of reported violent gun crime offenses and the rate that UUW offenders are reconvicted of crime within three years of release (i.e., recidivism). If the UUW penalty enhancements were effective deterrents, fewer violent gun crimes would be committed. This analysis finds minimal effects on the public safety outcomes: - The 10-year trends for UUW crimes and overall violent crime, represented by incidents reported in Chicago, matched national downward trends in violent crime - Arrest data indicate that Cook County accounted for 65% of all UUW arrests in 2012 - Recidivism rates for UUW offenders are similar immediately before and after the sentencing enhancements This analysis finds an increase in the number of prisoners held by the state: - The Illinois Department of Corrections (IDOC) prisoner population increased after each penalty enhancement This analysis concludes that the increase in UUW prisoners is likely caused by the cumulative effect of (1) a decrease in the use of probation and (2) an increase in technical violations of UUW offenders on supervised release . Details: Springfield, IL: SPAC, 2014. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 20, 2016 at: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/spac/pdf/SPAC_Trends_Analysis_Report_09_2014.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/spac/pdf/SPAC_Trends_Analysis_Report_09_2014.pdf Shelf Number: 140381 Keywords: Gun Violence Gun-Related Violence Punishment Sentencing Violence Violent Crime

Author: Perrin, Benjamin Title: Punishing the Most Heinous Crimes: Analysis and recommendations related to Bill C-53 (Life Means Life Act) Summary: Life in prison for a first-degree murder in Canada currently doesn't mean exactly that. The longest period of ineligibility for parole is 25 years, outside cases of multiple murders. While all murders are of course deplorable, many would argue that some killings are so heinous, so offensive to the public and damaging to Canadian society, that the killers should be imprisoned for the rest of their natural lives. This would include violent predators who plan and deliberate about not only killing another human being, but do so while committing egregious crimes such as sexual assault, kidnapping, or terrorist activities. Or they involve the planned and deliberate killing of police officers or other officials tasked with keeping Canadians safe. To address this issue, the federal government has introduced Bill C-53, the Life Means Life Act, which would make life imprisonment without parole a mandatory sentence for certain heinous murders and a discretionary sentence in other instances. These lifers could apply after 35 years to the federal Cabinet for "executive release". There are legitimate reasons for adding life without parole to the Criminal Code, but there are also legitimate criticisms of Bill C-53. The legislation requires amendments if it is to achieve its stated goals without being struck down based on a challenge under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The main arguments supporting Bill C-53 are that it: enhances proportionality in murder sentencing; reflects denunciation and retribution in sentencing On the other hand, the main concerns about Bill C-53 are that it: is unnecessary and will not increase public safety; denies a second chance to convicted murderers; increases pressure on the corrections system and risk to staff and fellow inmates; includes "executive release" as an illusory hope and it is unlikely to be used in practice; and infringes the Charter. After canvassing these arguments, this paper concludes that life without parole would be appropriate and just in certain cases, but that Bill C-53 is vulnerable to being struck down for infringing the Charter as presently drafted. The following recommendations should be adopted: 1) Bill C-53 should be amended so that life without parole would be a discretionary - not a mandatory - sentencing option for heinous murders. The judge should also have the option of ordering a fixed-term parole ineligibility period of between 25 and 75 years. A jury recommendation, if it is a jury trial, should be sought in these cases. 2) The situations where Bill C-53 would currently provide for discretionary life without parole should not provide for that penalty but instead give the sentencing judge the option of ordering a fixed-term parole ineligibility period of between 25 and 75 years, with a jury recommendation where there is a jury. 3) All offenders serving life sentences with parole ineligibility periods greater than 35 years should be eligible to apply for executive release (not simply those sentenced to life without parole), up until the time that they become eligible for parole. 4) The Parole Board of Canada should provide an assessment to the Minister of Public Safety of all offenders serving a sentence of life imprisonment without parole when they apply for executive release at least 35 years after beginning to serve their sentence. 5) The purposes of Bill C-53 should be clearly articulated. Heinous murderers are not sentenced as severely as they should be in Canada and there is constitutional room to enhance their penalties. However, Bill C-53 overreaches in this effort and thus risks failing to achieve needed reform.heinous murders, which are very important sentencing principles for serious and violent crime; spares victims the ordeal of frequent and ongoing automatic parole board hearings for murderers after their parole ineligibility periods have expired; ensures the protection of victims and society; and potentially contributes to general deterrence. Details: Ottawa, ONT: Macdonald-Laurier Institute, 2015. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 21, 2016 at: http://www.macdonaldlaurier.ca/files/pdf/MLI-BPerrinPunishingTheMostHeinousCrimes-05-15-WebReady-v2.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Canada URL: http://www.macdonaldlaurier.ca/files/pdf/MLI-BPerrinPunishingTheMostHeinousCrimes-05-15-WebReady-v2.pdf Shelf Number: 145612 Keywords: Life Imprisonment Life Without Parole Murderers Punishment Sentencing Violent Crime

Author: Long, Wei Title: Does Longer Incarceration Deter or Incapacitate Crimes? New Evidence from Truth-in-Sentencing Reform Summary: This paper estimates how violent crimes respond to a policy change which requires violent offenders to serve a substantial propertion of their sentenced terms before being eligible to release to community supervision. Focusing on states with effective TIS laws which meet the federal 85 percent rule, we utilize the differences-in-differences design to investigate both deterrent and incapacitative effect of TIS on crimes. We observe statistically significant -7 percent deterrent effect of TIS on growth of violent crime two years after its passage. A series of placebo tests confirm the robustness of the estimates and inferences. In the long-run, additional incapacitative effect also becomes significant, making the treatment effect of TIS even greater in magnitude. Even though insignificant in the first two years after TIS was passed, growth of non-violent property crime rates decreases by 7 percent in the long-run in TIS states, indicating relative greater importance of incapacitative effect which locks up offenders who commit both types of crimes. A rough approximation shows that TIS is an economically efficient method to decrease crimes. Details: New Orleans, LA: Tulane University, 2016. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Tulane Economics Working Paper Series 1607: Accessed September 23, 2016 at: http://econ.tulane.edu/RePEc/pdf/tul1607.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://econ.tulane.edu/RePEc/pdf/tul1607.pdf Shelf Number: 146112 Keywords: Deterrence Imprisonment Incapacitation Punishment Sentencing Truth-in-Sentencing Violent Crime

Author: Frase, Richard S. Title: Criminal History Enhancements Sourcebook Summary: An offender's criminal history (record of prior convictions) is a major sentencing factor in all American jurisdictions that have implemented sentencing guidelines - offenders in the highest criminal history category often have recommended prison sentences that are many times longer than the recommended sentences for offenders in the lowest category. Criminal history sentence enhancements thus substantially increase the size and expense of prison populations; and since offenders with higher criminal history scores tend to be older, the result is often to fill expensive prison beds with offenders who are past their peak offending years. Such enhancements also have a strong disparate impact on racial and ethnic minorities, and undercut the goal of making sentence severity proportional to offense severity. The Criminal History Project of the Robina Institute of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice surveys the widely varying criminal history formulas found in guidelines systems, and encourages these systems to examine their use of criminal history to determine whether it is operating in a just and cost-effective manner. Details: Minneapolis, MN: Robina Institute of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, University of Minnesota, 2016. 124p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 26, 2016 at: http://robinainstitute.umn.edu/publications/criminal-history-enhancements-sourcebook/ Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://robinainstitute.umn.edu/publications/criminal-history-enhancements-sourcebook/ Shelf Number: 140451 Keywords: Criminal History Criminal Records Sentencing Sentencing Guidelines

Author: Trevena, Judy Title: Does a Prison Sentence Affect Future Domestic Violence Reoffending? Summary: Aim: To examine whether short prison sentences (up to 12 months) exert a deterrent effect for domestic-violence (DV) related offending. Method: Propensity score matching was used to compare time to reoffence among 1,612 matched pairs of offenders, in which one of each pair received a prison sentence of 12 months or less and the other received a suspended sentence of two years or less. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was then used to examine time to the first proven offence committed after the index court appearance. Results: In the matched analysis, DV-related reoffending was not significantly different for people with suspended sentences and prison sentences. After 1 year, 20.3% of people given a suspended sentence and 20.3% of people given prison sentence had at least one new DV-related offence, and after 3 years the proportions were 34.2% and 32.3% respectively. These were not significantly different (HR 0.96, p=0.6). Conclusion: Short prison sentences (up to 12 months) are no more effective in deterring DV-related reoffending than suspended sentences Details: Sydney: New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2016. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice, No. 190: Accessed September 27, 2016 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/Report-2016-Does-a-prison-sentence-affect-future-domestic-violence-reoffending-cjb190.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/Report-2016-Does-a-prison-sentence-affect-future-domestic-violence-reoffending-cjb190.pdf Shelf Number: 140466 Keywords: Deterrence Domestic Violence Recidivism Reoffending Sentencing Violence Against Women

Author: United States Sentencing Commission Title: Report to the Congress: Career Offender Sentencing Enhancements Summary: This report provides a broad overview of several key findings of the United States Sentencing Commission's multi-year study of statutory and guideline definitions relating to the nature of a defendant's prior conviction (e.g., "crime of violence," "violent felony," "drug trafficking offense," and "felony drug offense") and the impact of such definitions on the relevant statutory and guideline provisions (e.g., the career offender guideline and the Armed Career Criminal Act). The report begins by providing background on the career offender directive and the resulting career offender guideline. It also provides sentencing and recidivism data concerning career offenders, including data demonstrating the substantial impact the directive and the career offender guideline have on the resulting sentencing range. The report concludes by recommending statutory changes, including changes that would better tailor the significantly enhanced penalties required for career offenders. A more targeted approach in this area would account for differences among current career offenders and would result in sentences that are more proportional. Details: Washington, DC: The Sentencing Commission, 2016. 103p. Source: http://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/news/congressional-testimony-and-reports/criminal-history/201607_RtC-Career-Offenders.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/news/congressional-testimony-and-reports/criminal-history/201607_RtC-Career-Offenders.pdf Shelf Number: 140476 Keywords: Career Criminals Sentencing Sentencing Guidelines

Author: United States Sentencing Commission Title: Life Sentences in the Federal System Summary: Life imprisonment sentences are rare in the federal criminal justice system. Virtually all offenders convicted of a federal crime are released from prison eventually and return to society or, in the case of illegal aliens, are deported to their country of origin. Yet in fiscal year 2013 federal judges imposed a sentence of life imprisonment without parole on 153 offenders. Another 168 offenders received a sentence of a specific term of years that was so long it had the practical effect of being a life sentence. Although together these offenders represent only 0.4 percent of all offenders sentenced that year, this type of sentence sets them apart from the rest of the offender population. This report examines life sentences in the federal system and the offenders on whom this punishment is imposed. There are numerous federal criminal statutes that authorize a life imprisonment sentence to be imposed as the maximum sentence. The most commonly used of these statutes involve drug trafficking, racketeering, and firearms crimes. Additionally, there are at least 45 statutes that require a life sentence to be imposed as the minimum penalty. These mandatory minimum penalties generally are required in cases involving the killing of a federal official or other government employee, piracy, or repeat offenses involving drug trafficking or weapons. In fiscal year 2013, 69 of the 153 offenders who received a sentence of life imprisonment were subject to a mandatory minimum penalty requiring the court to impose that sentence. Details: Washington, DC: United States Sentencing Commission, 2016. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 7, 2016 at: http://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/research-projects-and-surveys/miscellaneous/20150226_Life_Sentences.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/research-projects-and-surveys/miscellaneous/20150226_Life_Sentences.pdf Shelf Number: 145309 Keywords: Federal Prisoners Life Imprisonment Life Sentences Life Without Parole (U.S.) Punishment Sentencing

Author: Victoria (Australia). Sentencing Advisory Council Title: Victoria's Prison Population 2005-2016 Summary: This report on Victoria’s prison population investigates statistical trends in adults held in Victorian corrective services custody between 2005 and 2016. As with the Council’s previous reports on this topic (released in 2007 and 2013), this report highlights a prison population growing at unprecedented rates, significantly outpacing general population growth. Between 30 June 2006 and 30 June 2016, Victoria’s prison population increased by 67%, from 3,908 to 6,520 prisoners. This report examines a number of aspects of the expanding prison population. First, the broad demographics of the prison population are presented in order to analyse whether overall growth is being driven by particular groups within the prison population. Second, offending in Victoria is investigated in order to determine whether changing offending patterns are influencing prison population growth. Third, the report presents sentencing data in order to explore whether increases in the prison population are a result of changing sentencing practices. Finally, the offences, charges, sentences, and time served on remand of current prisoners are examined in order to measure changes in the composition of the prison population. Details: Melbourne: Sentencing Advisory Council, 2016. 78p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 8, 2016 at: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Victorias_Prison_Population_2005_to_2016.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Victorias_Prison_Population_2005_to_2016.pdf Shelf Number: 141046 Keywords: Prison Population Prisoners Prisons Sentencing

Author: Cohen, Derek Title: Texas' Mandatory Sentencing Enhancements Summary: Key Points - Sentencing enhancements have been part of American jurisprudence for decades. - However, no studies have routinely shown benefit to public safety attributable to these enhancements. - Further, these enhancements have the chance of ensnaring low-level nonviolent felons for sentences that far outweigh the crime Details: Austin: Texas Public Policy Foundation, Center for Effective Justice, 2016. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 12, 2016 at: http://www.texaspolicy.com/library/doclib/Texas-Mandatory-Sentencing-Enhancements.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.texaspolicy.com/library/doclib/Texas-Mandatory-Sentencing-Enhancements.pdf Shelf Number: 146692 Keywords: Mandatory Sentencing Sentencing Sentencing Reform

Author: Butcher, Kristin F. Title: Comparing Apples to Oranges: Differences in Women's and Men's Incarceration and Sentencing Outcomes Summary: Using detailed administrative records, we find that, on average, women receive lighter sentences in comparison with men along both extensive and intensive margins. Using parametric and semi-parametric decomposition methods, roughly 30% of the gender differences in incarceration cannot be explained by the observed criminal characteristics of offense and offender. We also find evidence of considerable heterogeneity across judges in their treatment of female and male offenders. There is little evidence, however, that tastes for gender discrimination are driving the mean gender disparity or the variance in treatment between judges. Details: Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2017. 48p., app. Source: Internet Resource: NBER Working Paper Series, Working Paper 23079: Accessed January 25, 2017 at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w23079 Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w23079 Shelf Number: 146420 Keywords: Female Offenders Gender Disparities Sentencing Sentencing Disparities

Author: Allen, Rob Title: The Sentencing Council of England and Wales: brake or accelerator on the use of prison? Summary: Prisons in England and Wales are facing a major crisis, with serious questions being raised about whether they can accommodate the current population safely, let alone help to reduce re-offending. Ten years ago, the Sentencing Council was conceived as a way of helping to control the growth of prison numbers. But, by the time it started work in 2010, its objectives were limited to making sentencing more effective, predictable and consistent. While prison numbers have been fairly stable over the last six years, this is mainly due to large falls in the numbers appearing in court. Those that do are more likely to go to prison, and to stay there longer. Most of the Council's work has involved the production of guidelines which require courts to take a step by step approach to sentencing, starting at the same point, and taking into account the same kinds of factors in assessing the seriousness of a particular offence. Despite some reluctance on the part of judges and magistrates, guidelines are widely accepted – unsurprisingly given the considerable range of discretion that still exists, and the courts’ ability to sentence outside the guidelines if it is in the interest of justice to do so. Guidelines have sought to reflect the existing practice of the courts, rather than recalibrate sentencing levels based on effectiveness and cost. However, in the case of assaults and burglary (the guidelines whose impact the Council has evaluated), sentence levels have risen more than anticipated. This may not have been solely a result of the guidelines, but concerns have been expressed that the Council has not done enough to challenge increasing sentence lengths, or to give more explicit assistance to courts in determining when offences are so serious that only prison will do. While the Council may have helped to make sentencing more transparent, consistent and proportionate, it has neglected its' potential to curb the ineffective use of imprisonment, adopting a narrow focus to its work. We recommend that both the membership of the Council, and its range of responsibilities, are widened. On the one hand, it could use its current remit to issue guidelines on a wider range of common issues facing sentencers, such as the weight to be attached to previous convictions, and the challenges involved in sentencing women, young adults or people with mental health problems. On the other, its mandate could be extended so that it advises more broadly on sentencing policy, projects prison numbers, and uses its guidelines to keep them in line with available prison places. In the late 2000s the government backtracked on explicitly linking sentencing levels with available resources, but now could be the time to revisit the issue. Prisons are in crisis now as then, and the increasing length of sentences is one of the causes. The Council could play a key role in reducing this population crisis. Details: London: Transform Justice, 2016. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 26, 2017 at: http://www.transformjustice.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/TJ-DEC-8.12.16-1.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.transformjustice.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/TJ-DEC-8.12.16-1.pdf Shelf Number: 145430 Keywords: Sentencing Sentencing Guidelines Sentencing Reform

Author: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) Title: Drug trafficking penalties across the European Union: a survey of expert opinion. Technical report Summary: The results of a study on national drug trafficking laws and their application in the Member States of the European Union are presented in this report. It is based on an analysis of the national laws and on the opinions of legal practitioners — judges, prosecutors and defence lawyers — from 26 countries. The penalties set out in national laws for trafficking cannabis, amphetamine, cocaine and heroin are compared with the sentencing outcomes expected by the legal practitioners, including penalties imposed and the estimated time likely to be spent in prison. Details: Lisbon, Portugal: Praca Europa, 2017. 132p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 1, 2017 at: http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/system/files/publications/3573/Trafficking-penalties.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Europe URL: http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/system/files/publications/3573/Trafficking-penalties.pdf Shelf Number: 140778 Keywords: Drug Enforcement Drug Policy Drug Traffickers Drug Trafficking Punishment Sentencing

Author: Iyengar, Radha Title: I'd Rather be Hanged for a Sheep than a Lamb The Unintended Consequences of 'Three-Strikes' Laws Summary: Strong sentences are common "tough on crime" tool used to reduce the incentives for individuals to participate in criminal activity. However, the design of such policies often ignores other margins along which individuals interested in participating in crime may adjust. I use California's Three Strikes law to identify several effects of a large increase in the penalty for a broad set of crimes. Using criminal records data, I estimate that Three Strikes reduced participation in criminal activity by 20 percent for second-strike eligible offenders and a 28 percent decline for third-strike eligible offenders. However, I find two unintended consequences of the law. First, because Three Strikes flattened the penalty gradient with respect to severity, criminals were more likely to commit more violent crimes. Among third strike eligible offenders, the probability of committing violent crimes increased by 9 percentage points. Second, because California's law was more harsh than the laws of other nearby states, Three Strikes had a "beggar-thy-neighbor" effect increasing the migration of criminals with second and third-strike eligibility to commit crimes in neighboring states. The high cost of incarceration combined with the high cost of violent crime relative to non-violent crime implies that Three Strikes may not be a cost-effective means of reducing crime. Details: London: London School of Economics and Political Science, Centre for Economic Performance, 2010. 42p. Source: Internet Resource: CEP Discussion Paper No 1017: Accessed February 13, 2017 at: http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/dp1017.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/dp1017.pdf Shelf Number: 145122 Keywords: Deterrence Punishment Sentencing Three Strikes Laws

Author: Klein, Andrew Title: Impact of Differential Sentencing Severity for Domestic Violence Offenses and All Other Offenses Over Abusers' Life Spans Summary: The criminal justice response to domestic violence (DV) has been transformed since the 1980s, beginning with greatly increased numbers of arrests. Although prosecution initially lagged, recent research challenges the widespread belief that few DV arrests are prosecuted (Garner & Maxwell, 2009). However, the effectiveness of DV prosecution remains at issue. Maxwell and Garner's review of more than 30 DV prosecution studies, for example, found no deterrent effect of prosecution and sentencing beyond that obtained by the abuser’s initial arrest (2012). The goal of this research is to revisit the question of the effectiveness of DV prosecution. But unlike studies heretofore, we employ a wider lens, examining the relative effect of differential prosecutions of DV offenses over time and compared to all prosecutions experienced by the abuser, including those for offenses unrelated to DV (i.e., non-DV offenses). This wider examination is essential to determine the effectiveness of DV prosecution/sentencing because, as well established in the literature (Klein, 2009), the majority of abusers brought to court do not limit their criminal activities to DV alone. It was our hypothesis that the effectiveness of DV prosecution was significantly associated with the differential prosecution and sentencing severity between DV and non-DV crimes; namely, if DV offenses were treated more severely than nonDV offenses, reabuse would be significantly reduced compared to cases in which DV was prosecuted and sentenced less severely than in non-DV offenses. To study the effectiveness of DV prosecutions, we identified from a larger sample almost 500 abusers who were on probation for DV in Rhode Island in 2002 who had both DV and nonDV cases during the first six years of their criminal careers (and for whom at least one non-DV case preceded a DV case). We then looked at their every adult criminal prosecution, for DV and for non-DV offenses, since age 18 through April 2012. The majority had active criminal careers (as measured from first to last arrest) of at least eight years, with 44% having them for at least 10 years. We then looked at the number of DV cases charged against each abuser after the first six years to determine whether the prosecution/sentencing patterns of domestic and non-DV cases established in the first six years of their criminal careers were associated with subsequent re-abuse arrests. We controlled for the most common independent variables associated with risk of reabuse, including number of prior offenses, gender, and age at first offense (Klein, 2009). More than half (57%) of the abusers were sentenced more severely for DV than for nonDV offenses. Although the 38 different prosecutors' offices across Rhode Island were significantly less likely to prosecute DV offenses than the non-DV offenses (18.8% vs.15.4%, p < .001), those prosecuted for DV were significantly more likely to be incarcerated, mostly for one to 30 days (8.5% vs. 4.0%, p < .001). In comparing the impact of differential prosecution/sentencing severity, we looked at both whether the abusers committed any new DV offense and also the number of new DV offenses, controlling for common risk factors in both analyses. In both analyses, we found that abusers who were prosecuted and sentenced more severely for DV compared to non-DV crimes during the first years of their adult criminal careers were less likely to be arrested for subsequent new DV offenses. They had significantly fewer new DV offenses. Among the subset of abusers who were prosecuted for their DV offense(s) but were not prosecuted for their non-DV offense(s) (N=32), they were significantly less likely to commit new DV offenses. The research suggests that prosecutors and courts have the means to significantly deter reabuse, especially in the majority of states that provide by statute enhanced sentences for repeat DV cases if these increased sanctions are not routinely plea bargained away. Details: Sudbury, MA: Advocates for Human Potential, Inc., 2014. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 23, 2017 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/244757.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/244757.pdf Shelf Number: 141205 Keywords: Domestic Violence Prosecution Repeat Victimization Sentencing

Author: Tasmania. Department of Justice, Sentencing Advisory Council. Title: Sentencing of Adult Family Violence Offenders Summary: This Report provides advice on the sentencing of adult family violence offenders in Tasmania and includes consideration of the range and adequacy of sentencing options and support programs available and the role of specialist family violence lists or courts in dealing with family violence matters. The request to the Sentencing Advisory Council was made by the then Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, the Hon Brian Wightman MP in October 2013. The Council was not required to provide recommendations but instead the Report offers a number of observations about current sentencing practices for family violence offences. Details: Hobart: Sentencing Advisory Council, 2015. 68p. Source: Internet Resource: Final Report no. 5: Accessed March 3, 2017 at: http://www.sentencingcouncil.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/333324/SAC_-_family_violence_report_-_corrected_accessible_version_for_web.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Australia URL: http://www.sentencingcouncil.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/333324/SAC_-_family_violence_report_-_corrected_accessible_version_for_web.pdf Shelf Number: 141304 Keywords: Family Violence Intimate Partner Violence Sentencing Violence Against Women Violent Offenders

Author: Tasmania. Department of Justice, Sentencing Advisory Council. Title: Phasing out Suspended Sentences Summary: The paper examines Tasmania's current use of suspended sentences. It then examines how to phase out suspended sentences in Tasmania and makes 55 recommendations concerning the approach to phasing out suspended sentences. Details: Hobart: The Sentencing Advisory Council, 2015. 168p. Source: Internet Resource: Consultation Paper: Accessed March 3, 2017 at: http://www.sentencingcouncil.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/342321/Phasing_out_Suspended_Sentences_report_final_for_Web2.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Australia URL: http://www.sentencingcouncil.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/342321/Phasing_out_Suspended_Sentences_report_final_for_Web2.pdf Shelf Number: 141305 Keywords: Sentencing Sentencing Reform Suspended Sentences

Author: Victoria. Auditor General Title: Managing Community Correction Orders Summary: A community correction order (CCO) is a sentence imposed by a court that allows offenders to complete their sentences in a community setting. Offenders on CCOs may have to comply with specific conditions imposed by the courts, such as mandatory drug or alcohol treatment, and significant restrictions such as curfews and judicial monitoring. In this audit, we examined how effectively Corrections Victoria (CV) manages CCOs. We also looked at: the Department of Health and Human Services to assess how well it coordinates court-ordered programs with CV Victoria Police, to examine how well it exchanges information with CV about offenders on CCOs. Twelve recommendations are made in this report for CV, and one each for Victoria Police and the Department of Health and Human Services. Details: Melbourne: Auditor-General, 2017. 70p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 4, 2017 at: http://www.audit.vic.gov.au/publications/20170208-Community-Corrections/20170208-Community-Corrections.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Australia URL: http://www.audit.vic.gov.au/publications/20170208-Community-Corrections/20170208-Community-Corrections.pdf Shelf Number: 141340 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration Community Based Corrections Community Corrections Sentencing

Author: Tasmania. Department of Justice, Sentencing Advisory Council. Title: Sex Offence Sentencing Final Report Summary: The Sentencing Advisory Council's Final Report on Sex Offence Sentencing has been prepared by the Council following the raising of concerns that sentencing for sexual offences in Tasmania was out of step with sentencing for comparable offences in other Australian jurisdictions and/or community standards and expectations. The terms of reference asked the Council to report on existing sentencing practices in the Tasmanian Supreme Court regarding sex offences and to provide advice on how to address any inadequacies. The Council was also asked to gauge public opinion on this matter. The research and public responses have been incorporated into this final report which makes 15 recommendations Details: Hobart: Sentencing Advisory Council, 2015. 128p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 9, 2017 at: http://www.sentencingcouncil.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/325054/1832_SAC_sex_offenders_report_Access2.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Australia URL: http://www.sentencingcouncil.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/325054/1832_SAC_sex_offenders_report_Access2.pdf Shelf Number: 144432 Keywords: Sentencing Sex Offenders Sex Offenses

Author: Nellis, Ashley Title: Still Life: America's Increasing Use of Life and Long-Term Sentences Summary: The number of people serving life sentences in U.S. prisons is at an all-time high. Nearly 162,000 people are serving a life sentence - one of every nine people in prison. An additional 44,311 individuals are serving "virtual life" sentences of 50 years or more. Incorporating this category of life sentence, the total population serving a life or virtual life sentence reached 206,268 in 2016. This represents 13.9 percent of the prison population, or one of every seven people behind bars. A mix of factors has led to the broad use of life sentences in the United States, placing it in stark contrast to practices in other nations. Every state and the federal government allow prison sentences that are so long that death in prison is presumed. This report provides a comprehensive profile of those living in this deep end of the justice system. Our analysis provides current figures on people serving life with parole (LWP) and life without parole (LWOP) as well as a category of long-term prisoner that has not previously been quantified: those serving "virtual" or de facto life sentences. Even though virtual life sentences can extend beyond the typical lifespan, because the sentences are not legally considered life sentences, traditional counts of life-sentenced prisoners have excluded them until now KEY FINDINGS - As of 2016, there were 161,957 people serving life sentences, or one of every nine people in prison. - An additional 44,311 individuals are serving "virtual life" sentences, yielding a total population of life and virtual life sentences at 206,268 - or one of every seven people in prison. - The pool of people serving life sentences has more than quadrupled since 1984.The increase in the LWOP population has far outpaced the changes in the LWP population. - There are 44,311 people serving prison sentences that are 50 years or longer. In Indiana, Louisiana, and Montana, more than 11 percent of the prison population is serving a de facto life sentence. - Nearly half (48.3%) of life and virtual life-sentenced individuals are African American, equal to one in five black prisoners overall. - Nearly 12,000 people have been sentenced to life or virtual life for crimes committed as juveniles; of these over 2,300 were sentenced to life without parole. - More than 17,000 individuals with an LWP, LWOP, or virtual life sentence have been convicted of nonviolent crimes. - The United States incarcerates people for life at a rate of 50 per 100,000, roughly equivalent to the entire incarceration rates of the Scandinavian nations of Denmark, Finland, and Sweden. Details: Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project, 2017. 37p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 6, 2017 at: http://www.sentencingproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Still-Life.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.sentencingproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Still-Life.pdf Shelf Number: 145329 Keywords: Life Sentences Life without Parole Punishment Sentencing

Author: Victoria. Sentencing Advisory Council Title: Family Violence Intervention Orders and Safety Notices: Sentencing for Contravention Monitoring Report Summary: Family Violence Intervention Orders and Safety Notices examines sentences for contravention of family violence intervention orders over two periods: 2004-05 to 2006-07 and 2009-10 to 2011-12. It also considers sentences for contravention of family violence safety notices, which became available in December 2008. Details: Melbourne: The Council, 2013. 56p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 10, 2017 at: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/publications/family-violence-intervention-orders-and-safety-notices Year: 2013 Country: Australia URL: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/publications/family-violence-intervention-orders-and-safety-notices Shelf Number: 131181 Keywords: Family Violence Interventions Intimate Partner Violence Sentencing

Author: Poynton, Suzanne Title: Bonds, suspended sentences and re-offending: Does the length of the order matter? Summary: Aim: To examine the effectiveness of good behaviour bonds and suspended sentences in reducing re-offending. Method: Propensity score matching was used to match offenders who received a court imposed bond of less than 24 months with offenders who received a court imposed bond of 24 months or more. These two matched groups were then compared on two re-offending outcomes; the likelihood of reoffending within three years of the index offence and the time to first new conviction. Propensity score matching was also used to match offenders who received a court imposed suspended sentence of less than 12 months with offenders who received a court imposed suspended sentence of 12 months or more. Again, the likelihood of reoffending and the time to first reconviction were compared for these matched groups. Reoffending comparisons between long and short bonds, and long and short suspended sentences were repeated separately for supervised and unsupervised orders. Results: After adjusting for other factors, the probability of reconviction and the time to reconviction were lower for offenders placed on bonds 24 months or longer compared with offenders placed on shorter bonds. A significant effect of bond length on reoffending was apparent for both supervised and unsupervised orders. After adjusting for other factors, the probability of reconviction and the time to reconviction were also lower for offenders given long (12 month plus) suspended sentences compared with offenders given short suspended sentences. However, no significant effect of suspended sentence length was found when supervised and unsupervised suspended sentences were analysed separately. Conclusion: This evidence suggests long bonds and long suspended sentences are more effective in reducing re-offending than short bonds and short suspended sentences. Details: Canberra: Criminology Research Advisory Council, 2012. 38p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 17, 2017 at: http://crg.aic.gov.au/reports/1314/02-1112-FinalReport.pdf Year: 2012 Country: Australia URL: http://crg.aic.gov.au/reports/1314/02-1112-FinalReport.pdf Shelf Number: 131264 Keywords: Recidivism Reoffending Sentencing Suspended Sentences

Author: Monahan, John Title: Risk Redux: The Resurgence of Risk Assessment in Criminal Sanctioning Summary: After almost four decades of 'just deserts,' the past several years have seen a remarkable resurgence of risk assessment as an essential component of criminal sanctioning. In this article, we review current practice in the incorporation of risk assessment into the sanctioning systems of several illustrative states, and describe the major dimensions on which state practices differ. We then elaborate the various meanings ascribed to the foundational concept of "risk" in criminal sanctioning, and contrast "risk" with what are now often called "criminogenic needs," the fulfillment of which ostensibly reduce an offender's level of "risk." Finally, we address the choice of an approach to risk assessment in sentencing, particularly in the resource-starved state of current correctional practice. Details: Charlottesville: University of Virginia School of Law, 2013. 25p. Source: Internet Resource: Virginia Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper No. 2013-36; Accessed May 17, 2017 at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2332165 Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2332165 Shelf Number: 131247 Keywords: Prediction Risk Assessment Sentencing

Author: Polinsky, A. Mitchell Title: Deterrence and the Optimal Use of Prison, Parole, and Probation Summary: In this article we derive the sentence - choosing among the sanctions of prison, parole, and probation - that achieves a target level of deterrence at least cost. Potential offenders discount the future disutility of sanctions and the state discounts the future costs of sanctions. Prison has higher disutility and higher cost per unit time than parole and probation, but the cost of prison per unit of disutility can be lower or higher than the cost of parole and probation per unit of disutility. The optimal order of sanctions depends on the relative discount rates of potential offenders and the state, and the optimal duration of sanctions depends on the relative costs per unit of disutility among the sanctions and on the target level of deterrence. We focus on the case in which potential offenders discount the disutility of sanctions at a higher rate than the state discounts the costs of sanctions. In this case, if prison is more cost-effective than parole and probation - that is, has a lower cost per unit of disutility - prison should be used exclusively. If prison is less cost-effective than parole and probation, probation should be used if the deterrence target is low enough, and prison followed by parole should be used if the deterrence target is relatively high. Notably, it may be optimal to employ a prison term even if prison is less cost-effective than parole and probation and even if prison is not needed to achieve the target level of deterrence, because of what we refer to as the front-loading advantage of imprisonment. Details: Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2017. 50p. Source: Internet Resource: NBER Working paper No. 23436: Stanford Law and Economics Olin Working Paper No. 507: Accessed May 22, 2017 at: Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 145662 Keywords: Costs of Corrections Deterrence Imprisonment Parole Prison Probation Punishment Sentencing

Author: Amnesty International Title: Death Sentences and Executions 2016 Summary: Amnesty International recorded more than 1,000 executions around the world in 2016. While this figure represented a reduction from 2015 - a year in which the organization logged a historical spike - more than 3,000 death sentences were imposed in 2016, an increase on the figure recorded for the previous year. Two countries - Benin and Nauru - abolished the death penalty for all crimes, while Guinea abolished it for ordinary crimes. In the Middle East and North Africa, the number of executions recorded decreased by 28%, but Iran and Saudi Arabia remained among the world's top executioners. In Asia-Pacific, the number of known executions decreased, mostly due to a significant reduction in Pakistan. China was once again the world's lead executioner but figures remained classified as a state secret. The number of recorded death sentences in the Asia-Pacific region rose significantly, while new information which came to light in China, Malaysia and Viet Nam painted an alarming picture of the extensive resort to the death penalty in these countries. In Sub-Saharan Africa, there were fewer executions recorded; however the number of death sentences logged rose by 145%, largely due to a steep rise in Nigeria. The USA remained the only country to carry out executions in the Americas region, for the 8th consecutive year. However, the number of executions and death sentences continued to decrease. Two Caribbean countries - Antigua and Barbuda and Bahamas - commuted their last remaining death sentences. In Europe and Central Asia, Belarus resumed executions after a 17-month hiatus. Belarus and Kazakhstan were the only two countries in the region to use the death penalty. Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases without exception, regardless of the nature or the circumstances of the crime; guilt, innocence or other characteristics of the individual; or the method used by the state to carry out the execution. Details: London: AE, 2017. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 17, 2017 at: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/research/2016/04/death-sentences-executions-2015/ Year: 2017 Country: International URL: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/research/2016/04/death-sentences-executions-2015/ Shelf Number: 146241 Keywords: Capital Punishment Death Penalty Executions Sentencing

Author: Great Britain. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Probation Title: The work of probation services in courts Summary: Probation services have for many years provided advice and information to courts to help judges and magistrates decide on the right sentence. Under the government's Transforming Rehabilitation programme, probation services changed. In June 2014, they were divided into a new public sector National Probation Service (NPS) and 21 new privately owned Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs). The NPS assumed responsibility for all advice and information provided to courts. Alongside Transforming Rehabilitation, the Ministry of Justice is modernising the criminal justice system. Historically, courts adjourned for three weeks or more so that pre-sentence advice could be assembled. New expectations are that most advice to court can be given on the day in cases where a defendant pleads guilty, to allow for an immediate sentence decision. In response, the NPS implemented nationwide arrangements for a speedier approach. Court Workload The inspection report sets out the volume of work undertaken by the NPS in court: 158,305 Pre-sentence reports prepared for magistrates' and Crown Courts (July 2015 to June 2016) 100% - The percentage of pre-sentence reports completed by the NPS within the timescales set by the court, including remands in custody (April to September 2016) 31,342 (29%) Community sentences enforced in court due to failure to comply, further offences or other reasons (October 2015 to September 2016) 71% Of community sentences ran their full course successfully or were finished early for good progress (October 2015 to September 2016) 48% Decline in commencements of accredited programmes (2009/2010 to 2015/2016) 44% Percentage increase in the use of rehabilitation activity requirements for community orders during the period of April-June 2015 to April-June 2016 Findings Inspectors found strong arrangements between the NPS and the courts, though working arrangements with CRCs were less well developed. Pre-sentence oral reports delivered on the day were well regarded by sentencers. Inspectors found satisfactory (or better) arrangements to obtain information regarding child protection and domestic abuse. Worryingly, accredited programmes to prevent reoffending were recommended by the NPS relatively infrequently, despite clear evidence to support their use. Short written reports were not always sufficiently thorough in their assessments of the risks an individual could pose. NPS enforcement work was of a high quality, but many sentencers expressed concern about cases where CRCs allowed an individual too many absences before breaching them and taking them back before the court. NPS hardware and software were dated, making staff less efficient, but inspectors did see the effective use of video link in some courts. Details: Manchester: HM Inspectorate of Probation, 2017. 45p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 23, 2017 at: http://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2017/06/The-work-of-probation-services-in-courts-report.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2017/06/The-work-of-probation-services-in-courts-report.pdf Shelf Number: 146351 Keywords: Community Sentences Criminal Justice Reform Probation Probationers Sentencing

Author: Queensland Sentencing Advisory Council Title: Classification of child exploitation material for sentencing purposes: final report Summary: The Attorney-General and Minister for Justice Yvette D'Ath asked the Queensland Sentencing Advisory Council (the council) to review the classification of child exploitation material (CEM) for sentencing purposes and determine whether any improvements can be made. The review comprised significant consultation across Queensland's criminal justice system involved with detecting, prosecuting and sentencing CEM offences. In addition, the council consulted with key agencies from Queensland's legal community and victim advocates, as well as community members, content experts and relevant agencies in other Australian and international jurisdictions. This broad consultation revealed Queensland is well respected for its professionalism in CEM investigation at national and international levels. Consequently, the council was determined to ensure any system used for classification of CEM in Queensland supports and builds on this reputation. Administrative data collected by criminal justice agencies was analysed to gain an appreciation of the Queensland context of CEM offending and offenders. This report provides the outcomes of this analysis. The report is structured in six chapters, initially introducing the current approach to classifying CEM in Queensland, outlining what is known about CEM offending and CEM offenders, and comparing Queensland's approach to other jurisdictions. The review culminates by proposing a new approach for classifying CEM for sentencing purposes, referred to as the Q-CEM Package. Mechanisms designed to support and evaluate the Q-CEM Package, and Queensland's readiness to continue to meet the many challenges associated with this evolving crime type, are also proposed. Key findings CEM is not a victimless crime. These offences harm real children and the repeated circulation of CEM depicting this abuse continues their victimisation. Victims of CEM report lifelong impacts as a result of the abuse and re-victimisation via sharing of the material. It is difficult to permanently or fully remove images from circulation. Delays are associated with CEM cases. The council's research confirmed anecdotal evidence that delays were associated with the criminal justice response to CEM. The delays are most prevalent between charging an offender and proceeding to a committal hearing. During this period, police undertake typically complex forensic processes and classify detected CEM. CEM is an international crime with a local footprint. CEM is a technology-enabled crime and, as such, will continue to evolve and expand in line with the exponential growth and global interconnectivity of technology. Queensland child victims and Queensland offenders require a suitable response from state and Commonwealth criminal justice agencies. National and international cooperation is essential. All Australian state and territory jurisdictions are seeking a platform to support cooperation at national and international levels. A common platform promotes harmonised classification language to respond to the international dimension of these crimes. Common platforms are designed to address time and welfare burdens on criminal justice agencies by sharing data about CEM encountered in other jurisdictions. They enhance victim identification efforts by enabling a stronger focus on new material. Data analysis, research and a commitment to practice evaluation are important. Identifying how this crime type is shifting remains a critical issue for Queensland. Keeping pace will build on the state's reputation for innovation, and reflects the commitment this state has to protecting Queensland children and families. Queensland needs a system that balances the requirements of all criminal justice agencies. Classification for sentencing must balance the demands on law enforcement to identify victims and offenders with the mechanisms required to prosecute and sentence offenders. The QCEM Package is specifically designed to address these critical functions of a system responsible for removing children from harm and bringing offenders to account. Queensland needs to adopt an enhanced approach to sexting and promoting prevention of CEM offending. Establishing mechanisms to provide support to families, schools and other organisations that can raise awareness among young people about how to remain safe online is essential. There is also a role to encourage offenders and potential offenders into treatment for their sexual interest in children. Details: Brisbane: The Council, 2017. 150p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 31, 2017 at: http://www.sentencingcouncil.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/531503/cem-final-report-july-2017.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Australia URL: http://www.sentencingcouncil.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/531503/cem-final-report-july-2017.pdf Shelf Number: 146623 Keywords: Child Pornography Child Protection Child Sexual Abuse Online Victimization Sentencing Sex Offenders

Author: Ketelaar-Jones, Taya Title: A Comparative Review of National Legislation for the Indefinite Detention of 'Dangerous Criminals' Summary: Courts in Tasmania have long had the power to detain prisoners indefinitely. The Tasmanian dangerous prisoner regime, contained in the Sentencing Act 1997 (Tas), has never been reviewed. This is despite it receiving criticism from various quarters, including the Supreme Court bench. There are several differences between the Tasmanian indefinite detention provisions and those of other Australian jurisdictions. The implications of these legislative anomalies have not been explored. This paper examines the operation of the Tasmanian scheme by undertaking a cross-jurisdictional analysis of dangerous prisoner legislation in Australia. Problematic aspects of the current provisions are examined, and potential areas for reform are identified. This is done so with a view to the modernisation of the law and a shift towards uniformity with other Australian jurisdictions. This paper first provides a brief history of indefinite detention regimes and outlines the nature of the exercise of the discretion to impose an indefinite sentence. The paper proceeds with an assessment of the various problematic aspects of the Tasmanian indefinite detention regime contained in the Sentencing Act 1997 (Tas). The first section considers the issues associated with the making of a dangerous criminal declaration, including the test and standard of proof for imposition of a declaration and whether separate indefinite detention provisions applying specifically to sex offenders should be introduced. The paper recommends that the test for the imposition of a declaration in the Sentencing Act 1997 (Tas) be amended to reflect the common law test. In addition, it recommends that the Act should explicitly provide for the standard of proof and provide a comprehensive and mandatory list of factors to be considered when determining whether to make a dangerous criminal declaration. Further, the Act should be amended to clarify that it is intended to operate as a post-sentence preventative detention regime, as well as an indefinite (at the time of sentencing) regime. Finally, the introduction of separate indefinite detention provisions for sex offenders is not recommended. The second section considers the issues associated with the discharge of a dangerous criminal declaration. Key issues discussed in this section are the test for the discharge of a dangerous criminal declaration, the inability of the court to impose conditions upon discharge, and the absence of provisions for periodic review of a declaration. The key recommendations are that the Sentencing Act 1997 (Tas) be amended to mandate a system of periodic review of a dangerous criminal declaration. On a review of a declaration, or on an application for discharge of a declaration, the prosecution (rather than the offender) should retain the onus of proof. The assessment should be guided by the same principles applicable to the exercise of the discretion to impose the declaration at first instance. Finally, the court should be empowered to impose conditions upon the discharge of a dangerous criminal declaration. Details: Hobart: Tasmania Law Reform Institute, 2017. 53p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Paper No. 4: Accessed September 7, 2017 at: http://apo.org.au/system/files/97951/apo-nid97951-353691.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Australia URL: http://apo.org.au/system/files/97951/apo-nid97951-353691.pdf Shelf Number: 147144 Keywords: Dangerous Persons Imprisonment Punishment Sentencing

Author: Aitken, Jonathan Title: What Happened to the Rehabilitation Revolution? How sentencers can revive it How it can be helped by a hung Parliament Summary: The Rehabilitation Revolution has been championed in one form or another by at least two former Home Secretaries, five past Secretaries of States for Justice and a previous Prime Minister. Yet for all the ministerial support for the basic thesis of offender rehabilitation the reality of this so-called revolution has been a disappointment. For more than a decade, informed opinion has broadly agreed that the rehabilitation of offenders needs to be at the heart of an effective criminal justice system. Embedding rehabilitation across the criminal justice system can provide the basis on which the root causes of offending can be tackled, helping to reduce the volume and severity of offending and ultimately improving lives and enabling a reduction in the size of the prison population. The paradox of this consensus is that successive governments have failed to live up to the bold policy statements which so many have promised in the area of rehabilitative criminal justice reform. There has been no shortage of fine words: from the Labour Government's White Paper A Five Year Strategy for Protecting the Public and Reducing Reoffending1 introduced in 2006 by Home Secretary Charles Clarke; through a compendium of speeches advocating offender rehabilitation from successive Conservative Justice Secretaries Kenneth Clarke (2010-12); Chris Grayling (2012-15); Michael Gove (2015-16) and Liz Truss (2016-17), to the speech given by David Cameron in February 2016. That was the first speech from a Prime Minister on prison and rehabilitative reform for some 20 years and yet there has been depressingly little in the way of tangible progress. Both the national reoffending rate and the size of the prison population have remained stubbornly high. While it is true that in recent years the custodial population has remained stable at just under 86,000, in April 2006 it was 77,000, and given recent increases it now approaches 90,000.2 This 12 percent rise has been accompanied by year-on-year falls in recorded crime. The prison estate itself has been changing - though arguably neither fast enough nor necessarily for the best. Her Majesty's 136 prisons have now fallen to 117:3 cutting costs, but at the risk of exacerbating overcrowding. The recently opened HMP Berwyn, near Wrexham in North Wales, will offer modern facilities for more than 2,100 prisoners when completed - but the location and larger size of the prison means prisoners will be more distant from their families. For many this will make them inaccessible to their families and prove detrimental to effective rehabilitation, as highlighted in Lord Farmer's recent and important review. In the prisons dangerous episodes have been getting worse. The latest statistics show that in the past year all records were broken in English and Welsh prisons by 40,161 selfharming incidents, 120 suicides, 224 other deaths in custody and 26,022 assaults of which 6,844 were on staff - 650 of them serious. So why have successive governments failed so consistently? Why has an apparent consensus stalled? It is worth recalling David Cameron's speech in 2016 on prison and criminal justice reform, with the major commitments made in that address having mostly already been trailed in the speeches of the then Justice Secretary Michael Gove and some of his predecessors: 1. Making sure that prisons are places of positivity and reform designed to maximise the chances of people going straight when they come out. 2. Addressing prisoners' illiteracy, addiction and mental health problems. 3. Revolutionising the prison education system. 4. Measuring the performance of individual prisons. 5. Giving prison governors new powers to set up therapeutic communities, drug free wings and abstinence-based treatment programmes that prisoners need. 6. Delivering Problem Solving Courts in England and Wales. 7. Helping prisoners to find work on release. 8. Delivering lower re-offending rates. Details: London: Centre for Social Justice, 2017. 38p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 16, 2017 at: http://www.centreforsocialjustice.org.uk/core/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/CSJJ5667-Rehab-Revolution-WEB.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.centreforsocialjustice.org.uk/core/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/CSJJ5667-Rehab-Revolution-WEB.pdf Shelf Number: 147360 Keywords: Correctional Programs Criminal Justice Reform Offender Rehabilitation Prison Reform Prisons Sentencing Treatment Programs

Author: Fair Punishment Project Title: Juvenile Life without Parole in Wayne County: Time to Join the Growing National Consensus? Summary: A new report released today highlights Wayne County's frequent use of juvenile life without parole (JLWOP) sentences, calling the county an "extreme outlier" in its use of the punishment. The report also criticizes D.A. Worthy's decision, which was announced Friday, to again seek life sentences for at least one out of three individuals currently serving this sentence. The report urges District Attorney Kym Worthy to adopt a new approach to dealing with juveniles in response to the U.S. Supreme Court's recent ruling in Montgomery v. Louisiana, which determined that the court's prior decision barring mandatory life without parole sentences for youth must be applied retroactively, and that the punishment is only appropriate in the rarest of cases where a juvenile is determined to be "irreparably corrupt." The report, Juvenile Life Without Parole in Wayne County: Time to Join the Growing National Consensus?, notes that Wayne County is responsible for the highest number of juvenile life without parole sentences in the country now that Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams has recently announced that he will not be seeking LWOP sentences for any of the individuals previously sentenced to JLWOP there. Currently there are more than 150 individuals serving JLWOP in Wayne County. While Wayne County has just 18% of the statewide population, it has at least 40% of the JLWOP sentences in the state of Michigan. Most incredibly, African-Americans are 39% of Wayne County's population, but more than 90% of the individuals serving juvenile life with parole sentences from the county are Black. D.A. Worthy's office obtained 27 JLWOP sentences during her tenure. "There is growing national consensus that life without parole is an inappropriate sentence for kids," said Rob Smith of the Fair Punishment Project. "D.A. Worthy's decision to again seek life without parole for one out of three individuals who were convicted as juveniles is completely out of line with the Supreme Court's ruling, mounting scientific research, the practices of prosecutors across the country, and years of experience that have shown us that youth are capable of change and deserve an opportunity to earn their release." The report notes that the Supreme Court has set a high bar to justify a life without parole sentence for juveniles. Given that adolescent brains are not fully developed and the capacity that children have to change, the Court rightfully assumes that it will be rare for an individual to meet the standard required for a JLWOP sentence. The report notes that D.A. Worthy's decision doesn't go nearly far enough in limiting the use of JLWOP, as it ignores mounting scientific evidence and a growing national consensus against the punishment. Details: Cambridge, MA: Fair Punishment Project, 2016. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 18, 2017 at: http://fairpunishment.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/FPP-WayneCountyReport-Final.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://fairpunishment.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/FPP-WayneCountyReport-Final.pdf Shelf Number: 147383 Keywords: Juvenile Offenders Life Imprisonment Life Sentence Life Without Parole Sentencing

Author: Leibovitch, Adi Title: Punishing on a Curve Summary: Does the punishment of one defendant change because of how she fares in comparison to the other defendants on the judge's docket? This article demonstrates that the troubling answer is yes. Judges sentence the same case more harshly when their caseloads contain relatively milder offenses, and more leniently when their caseloads contain more serious crimes. I call this problem "punishing on a curve." Consequently, the article shows how such relative sentencing patterns put into question the prevailing practice of establishing specialized courts or courts of limited jurisdiction. Because judges are punishing on a curve, the court's jurisdiction systematically shapes sentencing outcomes. Courts of limited jurisdiction usually specialize in relatively less serious crimes (such as misdemeanors, drug offenses, or juvenile cases). They treat the mild offenses on their docket more harshly than generalist courts, that also see severe crimes, would have treated them. This leads to the disturbing effect of increasing punitive outcomes vis-aa-vis these offenses, wholly contradictory to the missions of these courts. Such sentencing patterns undermine notions of justice and equitable treatment. They also undermine retributive principles and marginal deterrence across crimes of increasing severity. In light of the profound normative and practical implications, the article offers a remedy to standardize sentences through "statistical curving." In addition to consulting the sentencing range recommended by the sentencing guidelines for a particular offense, a judge should see the distribution of sentences for the same offense across different courts. The article illustrates the feasibility of the proposal empirically using sentencing data from neighboring judicial districts in Pennsylvania. It also explains how this proposal fits within the Supreme Court's jurisprudence following United States v. Booker, which rendered the sentencing guidelines advisory, and its potential advantage in improving appellate review. Details: Northwestern University Law Review, Vol. 111, 2017, Forthcoming. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2820197 Source: Internet Resource: Accessed Oct. 6, 2017 at: Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2820197 Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2820197 Shelf Number: 147593 Keywords: Criminal Courts Judicial Decision-Making Punishment Sentencing Sentencing Bias

Author: Victoria. Sentencing Advisory Council Title: Swift, Certain and Fair Approaches to Sentencing Family Violence Offenders: Discussion Paper Summary: In this discussion paper, the Council examines the effectiveness of 'swift, certain and fair' approaches to sentencing. The paper describes the current framework in Victoria for managing family violence offenders and discusses possible options for introducing a 'swift, certain and fair' approach to sentencing family violence offenders in Victoria. Details: Melbourne: The Sentencing Advisory Council, 2017. 132p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 2, 2017 at: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/SwiftCertainAndFairApproachesToSentencing.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Australia URL: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/SwiftCertainAndFairApproachesToSentencing.pdf Shelf Number: 147964 Keywords: Family Violence Intimate Partner Violence Sentencing

Author: Luna, Erik, ed. Title: Reforming Criminal Justice. Volume 4: Punishment, Incarceration, and Release Summary: The present volume of Reforming Criminal Justice examines the rationales for punishment, the types of penalties and sentencing schemes, the current state of incarceration and conditions of confinement, and the prospects for inmate release and reintegration. For the most part, the chapters are as advertised (so to speak) - their titles accurately and succinctly convey the topic at hand. The goal of each chapter is to increase both professional and public understanding of the subject matter, to facilitate an appreciation of the relevant scholarly literature and the need for reform, and to offer potential solutions to the problems raised by the underlying topic. This approach is taken in the report's other volumes, which address additional areas of criminal justice that are worthy of attention and even reconsideration. Volume 4 Table of Contents - Retribution - Jeffrie G. Murphy, Regents' Professor of Law, Philosophy, and Religious Studies, Arizona State University - Deterrence - Daniel S. Nagin, Teresa & H. John Heinz III University Professor of Public Policy and Statistics, Carnegie Mellon University - Incapacitation - Shawn D. Bushway, Professor of Public Administration & Policy and Professor of Criminal Justice, University at Albany, State University of New York - Mass Incarceration - Todd R. Clear, University Professor of Criminal Justice, Rutgers University and James Austin, President, JFA Institute - Risk Assessment in Sentencing - John Monahan, John S. Shannon Distinguished Professor of Law, Joel B. Piassick Research Professor of Law, Professor of Psychology, and Professor of Psychiatry and Neurobehavioral Sciences, University of Virginia - Sentencing Guidelines - Douglas A. Berman, Robert J. Watkins/Procter & Gamble Professor of Law, The Ohio State University Mandatory Minimums - Erik Luna, Amelia D. Lewis Professor of Constitutional & Criminal Law, Arizona State University - Capital Punishment - Carol S. Steiker, Henry J. Friendly Professor of Law and Faculty Co-Director of the Criminal Justice Policy Program, Harvard University and Jordan M. Steiker, Judge Robert M. Parker Endowed Chair in Law and Director of the Texas Capital Punishment Center, University of Texas Race and Sentencing Disparity - Cassia Spohn, Foundation Professor of Criminology and Director of the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Arizona State University - Community Punishments - Michael Tonry, McKnight Presidential Professor in Criminal Law and Policy, University of Minnesota - Fines, Fees, and Forfeitures - Beth A. Colgan, Assistant Professor of Law, University of California, Los Angeles - Correctional Rehabilitation - Francis T. Cullen, Distinguished Research Professor Emeritus of Criminal Justice and Senior Research Associate, University of Cincinnati - Prison Conditions - Sharon Dolovich, Professor of Law and Director of the UCLA Prison Law and Policy Program, University of California, Los Angeles - Prisoners with Disabilities - Margo Schlanger, Wade H. and Dores M. McCree Collegiate Professor of Law, University of Michigan - Releasing Older Prisoners - Michael Millemann, Professor of Law, University of Maryland and Rebecca Bowman-Rivas, Law and Social Work Services Program Manager, University of Maryland Elizabeth Smith, Forensic Social Work Fellow, University of Maryland - Reentry - Susan Turner, Professor of Criminology, Law, and Society and Director of the Center for Evidence-Based Corrections, University of California, Irvine - Collateral Consequences - Gabriel J. Chin, Edward L. Barrett Chair in Law and Martin Luther King, Jr. Professor of Law, University of California, Davis - Sex Offender Registration and Notification - Wayne A. Logan, Gary & Sallyn Pajcic Professor of Law, Florida State University - Clemency - Mark Osler, Robert & Marion Short Distinguished Chair in Law, University of St. Thomas Details: Phoenix: Arizona State University, 2017. 460p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 18, 2017 at: http://academyforjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Reforming-Criminal-Justice_Vol_4.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://academyforjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Reforming-Criminal-Justice_Vol_4.pdf Shelf Number: 148253 Keywords: Criminal Justice Policy Criminal Justice Reform Criminal Justice System Imprisonment Incarceration Punishment Sentencing

Author: United States Sentencing Commission Title: An Overview of Mandatory Minimum Penalties in the Federal Criminal Justice System Summary: This publication assesses the impact of mandatory minimum penalties on federal sentencing. It continues the Commission's work in this area by highlighting recent developments regarding the charging of offenses carrying a mandatory minimum penalty, and providing updated sentencing data regarding the use and impact of mandatory minimum penalties. This publication builds on the Commission's previous reports and publications-particularly, its 2011 Report to the Congress: Mandatory Minimum Penalties in the Federal Criminal Justice System-and is intended to contribute to the continued examination of federal mandatory minimum penalties. It is the first in a series, with future publications focusing on mandatory minimum penalties for specific offense types. Details: Washington, DC: The Commission, 2017. 89p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 31, 2018 at: https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/research-publications/2017/20170711_Mand-Min.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/research-publications/2017/20170711_Mand-Min.pdf Shelf Number: 148949 Keywords: Federal Criminal Justice System Federal Sentencing Guidelines Mandatory Minimum Penalties Sentencing

Author: Queensland Sentencing Advisory Council Title: Sentencing Spotlight on trafficking in dangerous drugs Summary: This Sentencing Spotlight examines sentencing outcomes for trafficking in dangerous drugs offences finalised in Queensland courts between 1 July 2005 and 30 June 2016. The Drugs Misuse Act 1986 (Qld) (DMA) refers to 'a person who carries on the business of unlawfully trafficking' as being guilty of a crime. The term 'trafficking' is not defined in legislation under the DMA, but rather by case law. If dealing with dangerous drugs does not meet the case law definition of trafficking, it will usually constitute the separate offence of supplying dangerous drugs. While trafficking typically involves selling, it has a wider meaning of 'knowingly engaging in the movement of drugs from source to ultimate user'. A single sale made as part of carrying on a business could be trafficking, if it was the first sale of expected continuing activity. Occasional sales across limited isolated transactions are not sufficient. The prosecution is required to demonstrate several transactions were conducted for gain over more than a brief interval. However, the trade does not have to last indefinitely, generate profit, service more than one customer, or include payment in money (for instance, someone addicted to drugs could traffic to obtain drugs for personal consumption). Carrying on the business of unlawfully trafficking goes beyond sales and usually involves other activities including product advertising or promotion, negotiating prices and terms, taking orders and arranging delivery. Different drug traffickers receive different sentences because factors vary across individual cases. These include the application of general sentencing principles in section of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld) and other considerations such as the type, quantity and value of drugs supplied, the nature of the trafficking, and whether the offender's motivation was financial profit or to feed their drug habit. Analysis or comments about the type and quantity of dangerous drugs associated with these offenders' cases are excluded as these are not reported in the administrative data. Details: Melbourne: The Commission, 2018. 18p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 20, 2018 at: http://www.sentencingcouncil.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/555320/sentencing-spotllight-on-trafficking-in-dangerous-drugs-february-2018.pdf Year: 2018 Country: Australia URL: http://www.sentencingcouncil.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/555320/sentencing-spotllight-on-trafficking-in-dangerous-drugs-february-2018.pdf Shelf Number: 149532 Keywords: Drug Offenders Drug Trafficking Sentencing

Author: Thomas, Holly A. Title: No Chance to Make it Right: Life Without Parole for Juvenile Offenders in Mississippi Summary: Since 1994, the State of Mississippi has allowed juvenile offenders to be sentenced to life without parole. In Mississippi, children as young as thirteen may receive such a sentence. The NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF) has identified 25 young men serving a sentence of life without parole in Mississippi. In preparing this report, LDF reviewed their court files and interviewed two-thirds of the young men, attorneys, family members, relatives, community members, judges, and prosecutors. The young people in Mississippi who are sentenced to life without parole are struggling in many different ways to cope with the finality of their sentence. Some remain hopeful that one day someone will examine their case and give them a chance. Others struggle with the finality of the sentence they have received. Details: New York: The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF), 2008. 29p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 17, 2018 at: http://www.naacpldf.org/files/publications/No_Chance_to_Make_it_Right.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: http://www.naacpldf.org/files/publications/No_Chance_to_Make_it_Right.pdf Shelf Number: 150246 Keywords: Juvenile Offenders Life Imprisonment Life Sentence Life Without Parole Sentencing

Author: Hillier, Joseph Title: Do offender characteristics affect the impact of short custodial sentences and court orders on reoffending? Summary: Custodial sentences of under 12 months without supervision on release are associated with higher levels of reoffending than sentences served in the community via 'court orders' (community orders and suspended sentence orders). This report examines whether this impact differs according to offenders' age, ethnicity, gender, and mental health. It also provides further analysis on the reoffending impact of suspended sentence orders compared with similar cases where community orders were given, whether the impacts vary according to the number of previous offences, and the impacts of mental health and alcohol treatment requirements. Key findings - Reductions in re-offending were associated with the use of court orders as compared with short-term custody. These effects: - Were greater for people with larger numbers of previous offenses. For people with no previous offenses, there was no statistically significant difference between the re-offending associated with short-term custody and that associated with court orders. - Differed according to an offender's age group, after controlling for the number of previous offenses. The use of court orders was associated with relatively more benefit for those aged 18-20 and those over 50, and less benefit for those aged 21-29. - Differed according to identification of mental health issues, after controlling for the number of previous offenses. The use of court orders was associated with more benefit for offenders with 'significant' psychiatric problems and those with current or pending psychiatric treatment. - Were similar across ethnic groups and for both males and females, after controlling for the number of previous offences. - For those with identified mental health issues, mental health treatment requirements attached to court orders were associated with significant reductions in re-offending where they were used, compared with similar cases where they were not. The re-offending rate was around 3.5 percentage points lower over a one-year follow-up period. - For those with identified alcohol use issues, alcohol treatment requirements were associated with similar or slightly lower re-offending where they were used compared with similar cases where they were not. - Suspended sentence orders were associated with a reduced rate of re-offending (over a one year follow-up period) of around 4 percentage points compared with similar cases where community orders were given, with a smaller impact over longer follow-up periods. Suspended sentence orders were associated with more benefit in reducing re-offending as age increased and less benefit as the number of previous offenses increased. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2018. 22p. Source: Internet Resource: Analytical Summary 2018 : Accessed May 23, 2018 at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/706597/do-offender-characteristics-affect-the-impact-of-short-custodial-sentences.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/706597/do-offender-characteristics-affect-the-impact-of-short-custodial-sentences.pdf Shelf Number: 150334 Keywords: Custodial Sentences Recidivism Reoffending Sentencing Short Sentences

Author: Gruber, Aya Title: Equal Protection Under the Carceral State Summary: McCleskey v. Kemp, the case that upheld the death penalty despite undeniable evidence of its racially disparate impact, is indelibly marked by Justice William Brennan's phrase, "a fear of too much justice." The popular interpretation of this phrase is that the Supreme Court harbored what I call a "disparity-claim fear," dreading a future docket of racial discrimination claims and erecting an impossibly high bar for proving an equal protection violation. A related interpretation is that the majority had a "color-consciousness fear" of remedying discrimination through raceremedial policies. This Essay argues that the primary anxiety exhibited by the McCleskey majority was a "leniency fear" of death penalty abolition. Opinion author Justice Lewis Powell made clear his view that execution was the appropriate punishment for McCleskey's crime and expressed worry that McCleskey's victory would open the door to challenges of criminal sentences more generally. Understanding that the Court's primary political sensitivity was to state penal authority, not racial hierarchy, complicates the progressive sentiment that McCleskey's call-to-action is securing equality of punishment. Derrick Bell's "interest convergence" theory predicts that even conservatives with an aversion to robust equal protection law will accept racial-disparity evidence when in the service of crime-control values. Indeed, Justice Powell may have been more sanguine about McCleskey's discrimination claim had mandatory capital punishment been an option. This Essay cautions that, outside of the death penalty context, courts and lawmakers can address perceived punishment disparities through "level-up" remedies, such as mandatory minimum sentences or abolishing diversion (which is said to favor white defendants). It analyzes examples of convergence between antidiscrimination and prosecutorial interests, including mandatory sentencing guidelines, aggressive domestic violence policing and prosecution, and the movement to abolish Stand-Your-Ground laws. Details: Boulder, CO: University of Colorado Law School, 2018. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 30, 2018 at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3179707 Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3179707 Shelf Number: 150388 Keywords: Capital Punishment Death Penalty Domestic Violence Racial Disparities Sentencing Sentencing Guidelines Stand Your Ground Laws

Author: Victoria. Sentencing Advisory Council Title: Serious Offending by People Serving a Community Correction Order: 2016-17 Summary: This report addresses a requirement in the Corrections Act 1986 (Vic) that: [f]or each financial year commencing on or after 1 July 2016, the Sentencing Advisory Council must report for that year the number of persons convicted during that year of a serious offence committed while subject to a community correction order. Specifically, this report identifies the number of people sentenced in 2016-17 for a serious offence that was committed while the person was serving a community correction order (CCO). This report also examines some important issues relating to people sentenced for a serious offence while serving a CCO, including: - the time people took to commit a serious offence; - the prevalence of different types of offences committed on a CCO; and - the total number of people sentenced in 2016-17 for committing a serious offence. Details: Melbourne: The Council, 2018. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 5, 2018 at: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Serious_Offending_by_People_Serving_a_CCO_2016-17_1.pdf Year: 2018 Country: Australia URL: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Serious_Offending_by_People_Serving_a_CCO_2016-17_1.pdf Shelf Number: 150468 Keywords: Community Corrections Sentencing Serious Offences

Author: Didwania, Stephanie Holmes Title: The Immediate Consequences of Pretrial Detention: Evidence from Federal Criminal Cases Summary: This paper presents evidence of the effects of pretrial detention status on criminal case outcomes in federal criminal cases. Using data spanning 71 federal district courts, I find that pretrial release reduces a defendant's sentence length by around 67 percent and increases the probability that a defendant will receive a sentence below the recommended sentencing range. Pretrial release also reduces the probability that a defendant will receive at least the mandatory minimum sentence-when one is charged-but does not affect the probability that the defendant will face a mandatory minimum sentence. To address the identification problem inherent in using pretrial detention status as an explanatory variable, I exploit variation in magistrate judges' propensities to release defendants pending trial. This setting allows magistrate judge leniency to serve as an instrumental variable for pretrial release. This paper also presents suggestive evidence that pretrial release affects case outcomes through two channels: first, by giving defendants the opportunity to present mitigating evidence at sentencing and, second, by making it easier for defendants to earn a sentencing reduction by providing assistance to the government. Details: Chicago: American Bar Association, 2018. 61p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 14, 2018 at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2809818. Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2809818. Shelf Number: 150536 Keywords: Bail Pretrial Detention Pretrial Justice Pretrial Release Sentencing

Author: Feigenberg, Benjamin Title: Racial Divisions and Criminal Justice: Evidence from Southern State Courts Summary: The US criminal justice system is exceptionally punitive. We test whether racial heterogeneity is one cause, exploiting cross-jurisdiction variation in criminal justice practices in four Southern states. We estimate the causal effect of jurisdiction on initial charge outcome, validating our estimates using a quasi-experimental research design based on defendants that are charged in multiple jurisdictions. Consistent with a simple model of ingroup bias in electorate preferences, the relationship between local punitiveness and the black share of defendants follows an inverted U-shape. Heterogeneous jurisdictions are more punitive for both black and white defendants. By contrast, punishment norms are unrelated to local crime rates. Simulation results suggest that adopting the punishment norms of homogeneous jurisdictions would decrease the share of charges leading to an incarceration sentence and the black-white gap in this share by 16-19% Details: Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2018. 49p. Source: Internet Resource: NBER Working Paper 24726: Accessed June 18, 2018 at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w24726.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w24726.pdf Shelf Number: 150564 Keywords: Bias Punishment Racial Disparities Racism Sentencing

Author: Howard League for Penal Reform Title: Sentencing Young Adults: Making the case for sentencing principles for young adults Summary: A substantial and growing evidence base has found that young adults aged 18 to 25 are a distinct group, largely because they are still maturing. Young adults face an increased risk of exposure to the criminal justice system compared to older adults and are not afforded the protections given to children, despite their distinctive needs. Contact with the criminal justice system raises the risk of adverse outcomes for young people and increases their risk of reoffending. However, current sentencing practice provides very limited scope for treating young adults differently from older adults. Sentencing is a pivotal criminal justice event that is currently failing to adequately recognise the particular needs of this age group. As a result, young adults are being sent deeper into the penal system than necessary, often increasing their risk of reoffending and harming them in the process. Building on the progress that has been made by the Sentencing Council's guideline outlining overarching principles for children, the Howard League considers there should be a similar guideline for young adults. Such a guideline could provide a legal framework to enable courts to achieve better outcomes when sentencing young adults, and make a real difference to young adults' lives. Details: London: The League, 2018. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 3, 2018 at: https://howardleague.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Sentencing-Young-Adults_final.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://howardleague.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Sentencing-Young-Adults_final.pdf Shelf Number: 151777 Keywords: Sentencing Young Adult Offenders Youthful Offenders

Author: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General, Evaluation and Inspections Division Title: Review of the Department's Clemency Initiative Summary: Department of Justice (DOJ) Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz announced today the release of a report assessing the DOJ's clemency process and handling of pardons since fiscal year 2014, with a focus on the implementation and management of the Clemency Initiative (Initiative). The Initiative, which operated from April 2014 to January 20, 2017, encouraged federal inmates who would not pose a threat to public safety to petition to have their sentences commuted, or reduced, by the President. This report from the DOJ Office of the Inspector General (OIG) concludes that although the DOJ did not effectively plan, implement, or manage the Initiative at the outset, subsequent actions by DOJ leadership enabled the DOJ to substantially fulfill the mandate of the Initiative in making over 13,000 recommendations on commutation petitions by the end of President Obama's Administration. As described in today's report, the shortcomings we identified in the initial planning and early implementation of the Initiative hindered the processing of clemency petitions. These shortcomings included: - DOJ leadership did not sufficiently involve the DOJ Office of the Pardon Attorney (OPA), which was responsible for the day-to-day management of the Initiative, in planning the Initiative, and it did not provide the necessary resources to that office once the Initiative began. - DOJ did not effectively implement a survey of federal inmates that was intended to help identify potentially meritorious clemency petitioners. As a result, attorneys working on the Initiative received numerous survey responses and petitions from inmates who clearly did not meet the Initiative's criteria, which delayed the consideration of potentially meritorious petitions. - DOJ experienced challenges working with external stakeholders, particularly volunteer attorneys who were to provide assistance in identifying appropriate clemency petitions for the Initiative. For example, these attorneys were unable to obtain pre-sentence investigation reports from the U.S. Courts for almost a year, which hampered their work. Details: Washington, DC: OIG, 2018. 69p. Source: Internet Resource: Evaluation and Inspections Division 18-04 : Accessed October 5, 2018 at: https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2018/e1804.pdf#page=1 Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2018/e1804.pdf#page=1 Shelf Number: 152845 Keywords: Clemency Pardons Sentence Commutation Sentencing

Author: Queensland Sentencing Advisory Council Title: Sentencing for criminal offences arising from the death of a child: Final report Summary: This report presents the advice of the Queensland Sentencing Advisory Council (Council) following its review of penalties imposed on sentence for criminal offences arising from the death of a child, referred to the Council by the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, the Honourable Yvette D'Ath MP on 26 October 2017. In developing its final report and recommendations, the Council was asked to: - consider and analyse penalties imposed on sentence for offences arising from the death of a child and report on current sentencing practices; - determine whether the penalties currently imposed for these offences adequately reflect the particular vulnerabilities of these victims; - identify any trends or anomalies that occur in such sentencing - for example, the nature of the criminal culpability forming the basis of a manslaughter charge, which may affect any sentence imposed; - assess whether existing sentencing considerations are adequate for the purposes of sentencing these offenders and identify if specific additional legislative guidance is required; - examine the approach in other Australian jurisdictions; - identify and report on any legislative or other changes required to ensure the imposition of an appropriate sentence for these offences; - identify ways to enhance community knowledge and understanding of the penalties imposed for these offences; - consult with the community and other key stakeholders; and - advise on any other matters relevant to this reference. The focus of the review was on sentencing for the offences of murder and manslaughter (referred to throughout this report as 'child homicide offences'). These offences capture offences highlighted in submissions and consultation as being of most concern to the community with respect to current sentencing practices - that is, deaths caused as a result of child abuse and neglect. Details: Brisbane: The Sentencing Advisory Council, 2018. 299p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed Dec. 6, 2018 at: http://apo.org.au/system/files/205141/apo-nid205141-1053826.pdf Year: 2018 Country: Australia URL: http://apo.org.au/system/files/205141/apo-nid205141-1053826.pdf Shelf Number: 153918 Keywords: Child Abuse and Neglect Child Homicides Child Protection Homicides Manslaughter Sentencing

Author: Eren, Ozkan Title: Juvenile Punishment, High School Graduation and Adult Crime: Evidence from Idiosyncratic Judge Harshness Summary: This paper contributes to the debate on the impact of juvenile punishment on adult criminal recidivism and high school completion. We link the universe of case files of those who were convicted of a crime as a juvenile between 1996 and 2012 in a southern U.S. state to the public school administrative records and to adult criminal records. The detail of the data allows us to utilize information on the exact types of crimes committed, as well as the type and duration of punishment imposed, both as a juvenile and as an adult. We exploit random assignment of cases to judges and use idiosyncratic judge stringency in imprisonment to estimate the causal effect of incarceration on adult crime and on high school completion. Incarceration has a detrimental impact on high school completion for earlier cohorts, but it has no impact on later cohorts, arguably because of the school reform implemented in the state in the late 1990s. We find that incarceration as a juvenile has no impact on future violent crime, but it lowers the propensity to commit property crime. Juvenile incarceration increases the propensity of being convicted for a drug offense in adulthood, but this effect is largely driven by time spent in prison as a juvenile. Specifically, juvenile incarceration has no statistically significant impact on adult drug offenses if time spent in prison is less than the median, but longer incarceration increases adult drug conviction, arguably because longer prison stays intensify emotional stress, leading to drug use. Details: Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2017. 47p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 18, 2019 at: https://www.nber.org/papers/w23573 Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://www.nber.org/papers/w23573.pdf Shelf Number: 154232 Keywords: Drug Conviction Drug Use High School Completion High School Graduation Judge Harshness Judicial Discretion Juvenile Incaceration Juvenile Justice Juvenile Punishment Recidivism Sentencing

Author: Hewson, Alex Title: Bromley Briefings Prison Factfile: Autumn 2018 Summary: Over the past few years the Bromley Briefings have charted a depressing decline in standards of safety and decency in our prisons. This year's edition draws heavily on the shocking evidence of both the government's own data on safety - or the lack of it - and on the Chief Inspector's increasingly strident denunciation of the conditions in which many prisoners are required to live. Everyone who cares about prisons - whether they live or work in them, or are close to someone who does - wants to believe that they are close to turning a corner. Anecdotally, both staff and prisoners welcome the introduction of key working in around half of prisons in England and Wales so far. Essentially, that means some protected time for staff to do what most of them joined for - helping prisoners cope with imprisonment and prepare for a better life when they leave. But it is too soon to make the call that the system as a whole is on the path to recovery - the damage done by the savage cuts of recent years is profound, and none of the key indicators are showing improvement as yet. In innovations this year, this edition of the Bromley Briefings includes a short section about what prisoners say. In line with PRT-s core aim to give prisoners greater influence in strategic policy making about prisons, we intend to develop this aspect in future, reflecting both the insight of prisoners and their ability to provide solutions. There is also a section setting out the current and historic performance of the "ten prisons" selected by the Prisons Minister for investment and a time limited drive to show tangible improvements, especially in safety. As last year, however, we begin with a slightly longer analysis of a particular issue, drawing on evidence from a longer period, and this year from a broad geographical perspective. Professors Dirk van Zyl Smit and Catherine Appleton from the University of Nottingham will shortly publish a seminal book on life imprisonment worldwide, and we are delighted that they have authored "The long view" for us, comparing the use of indeterminate sentences in this country with jurisdictions overseas. What their analysis demonstrates is that the UK's use of indeterminate sentences is out of kilter with the majority of international comparators. But it is also at odds with our own domestic historical approach to sentencing. Draconian legislation passed by Parliament in 2003 inflated the punishment tariffs for formal life sentences and created the catastrophic growth in informal life sentences - the IPP - which was only partially reversed by legislation in 2012. The inevitable consequence of decisions made on the sentencing and release framework for indeterminate sentences is a very long-term impact on the lives of the individuals affected and the make-up of the prison population as a whole. A substantial minority of that population is serving sentences characterised by an absence of hope and in many cases a sense that punishment, though deserved, has ceased to be proportionate or just in its administration. This has profound implications for the way of life prisons provide, if the treatment of those serving the longest sentences is to be both humane and purposeful. There is an urgent need for Parliament to revisit the framework it has created for our response as a society to the most serious crime, and our treatment of those who commit it. Decisions made in the aftermath of particularly shocking individual cases have created a system which, on the long view, looks more like a cause of national shame than pride. Details: London, UK: Prison Reform Trust, 2018. 64p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 18, 2019 at: http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/publications/factfile Year: 2018 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/Portals/0/Documents/Bromley%20Briefings/Autumn%202018%20Factfile.pdf Shelf Number: 154266 Keywords: Imprisonment Incarceration Indeterminate Sentencing Long-Term Sentencing Prison Reform Prisoners Prisons Safety Sentencing

Author: Whitehead, Stephen Title: The Changing Use of Pre-Sentence Reports Summary: Summary As part of our work to understand why the number of community sentences - community orders, suspended sentence orders and other similar disposals - has fallen by 24% over the past ten years in England and Wales, we are examining the relationship between the courts and probationary services, with a particular focus on the National Probation Service's work in courts. In this interim analysis, we present emerging findings from the national data on the use of pre-sentence reports (PSRs) to see whether changes in their use have impacted on the use of community sentences. Sentencers are expected to obtain a PSR before passing any community sentence (other than a stand-alone unpaid work requirement) or any custodial sentence (except one where custody is the only option). We have found that between 2012-13 and 2016-17: - There has been a 22% fall in the number of new PSRs produced. This fall means that there has been an increase in the number of sentences passed (both community sentences and custody) where no new PSR has informed sentencing; - There has been a significant change in how PSRs are delivered to court, with an increasing proportion of PSRs delivered orally rather than in writing; - While the number of PSRs has fallen, where they are used, the likelihood that sentencers follow the recommendations in the report has increased slightly (by 4% since 2012/13); - Because cases with PSRs are more than ten times more likely to receive a community sentence, falling numbers of PSRs is strongly linked to the decline in community sentences; - Our modelling suggests that if the number of PSRs had remained stable that there could have been 33,000 more community sentences a year. These emerging findings open up a range of further questions-- What is driving the fall in new PSRs? How is advice being provided in cases which don't have them? And ultimately, what is making sentencers less likely to use community sentences when they don't have pre-sentence advice? We are exploring these issues with practitioners, in advance of our final report, due in the September 2018, but we invite practitioners and experts to get in touch and help us explore these questions. Details: London, UK: Centre for Justice Innovation, 2018. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 21, 2019 at: http://justiceinnovation.org/portfolio/changing-use-pre-sentence-reports/ Year: 2018 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://justiceinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/CJI-CHANGING-USE-PSR-BRIEFING_WIP-1.pdf Shelf Number: 154330 Keywords: Community Orders Community Sentences Judges Judicial Practices National Probation Service Pre-Sentence Reports (PSR) Sentencing

Author: Annison, Harry Title: The Pains of Indeterminate Imprisonment for Families of IPP Prisoners: Findings and Recommendations: Extended Summary: The indeterminate IPP sentence has rightly been described as one of the "least carefully planned and implemented pieces of legislation in the history of British sentencing." Our research project "Exploring the Secondary Pains of Indeterminate Imprisonment: The case of Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) families" provides the first empirical exploration of this important issue. It comprised in-depth interviews with family members; an online survey of families; and interviews with policy participants. The findings make clear that a pervasive sense of injustice and uncertainty underpins and permeates more specific concerns relating to efforts to progress towards release, and managing the stresses of life beyond release. Families report significant material effects, which appear to be heavily gendered in their distribution. Family relationships - both with the prisoner and more widely - are often heavily disrupted. Respondents reported significant negative health effects caused by the stress and anxiety. All of this is likely to undermine efforts to rehabilitate individuals who have served an IPP sentence. The recommendations set out in this policy briefing point to practical ways in which the issues highlighted by the research findings can be addressed or ameliorated. Details: Southampton, UK: University of Southampton, 2018. 17p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 14, 2019 at: https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/423560/ Year: 2018 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/423560/ Shelf Number: 154345 Keywords: Families of Inmates Indeterminate Sentences Sentencing

Author: Skeem, Jennifer L. Title: Impact of Risk Assessment on Judges' Fairness in Sentencing Relatively Poor Defendants Summary: The increasing use of risk assessment algorithms in the criminal justice system has generated enormous controversy. Advocates emphasize that algorithms are more transparent, consistent, and accurate in predicting re-offending than judges' unaided intuition, while skeptics worry that algorithms will increase racial and socioeconomic disparities in incarceration. Ultimately, however, judges make decisions - not algorithms. In the present study, real judges (n=340) with criminal sentencing experience participated in a controlled experiment to test whether the provision of risk assessment information interacts with a defendant's socioeconomic class to influence sentencing decisions. Results revealed that risk assessment information reduced the likelihood of incarceration for relatively affluent defendants, but the same risk assessment information increased the likelihood of incarceration for relatively poor defendants. This finding held after controlling for the sex, race, political orientation, and jurisdiction of the judge. It appears that under some circumstances, risk assessment information can increase sentencing disparities. Details: Richmond: University of Virginia School of Law, 2019. 17p. Source: Internet Resource: Virginia Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper No. 2019-02: Accessed April 18, 2019 at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3316266 Year: 2019 Country: United States URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3316266 Shelf Number: 155461 Keywords: Judicial Discretion Risk Assessment Sentencing

Author: Partnership on AI Title: Report on Algorithmic Risk Assessment Tools in the U.S. Criminal Justice System Summary: This report documents the serious shortcomings of risk assessment tools in the U.S. criminal justice system, most particularly in the context of pretrial detentions, though many of our observations also apply to their uses for other purposes such as probation and sentencing. Several jurisdictions have already passed legislation mandating the use of these tools, despite numerous deeply concerning problems and limitations. Gathering the views of the artificial intelligence and machine learning research community, PAI has outlined ten largely unfulfilled requirements that jurisdictions should weigh heavily and address before further use of risk assessment tools in the criminal justice system. Using risk assessment tools to make fair decisions about human liberty would require solving deep ethical, technical, and statistical challenges, including ensuring that the tools are designed and built to mitigate bias at both the model and data layers, and that proper protocols are in place to promote transparency and accountability. The tools currently available and under consideration for widespread use suffer from several of these failures, as outlined within this document. We identified these shortcomings through consultations with our expert members, as well as reviewing the literature on risk assessment tools and publicly available resources regarding tools currently in use. Our research was limited in some cases by the fact that most tools do not provide sufficiently detailed information about their current usage to evaluate them on all of the requirements in this report. Jurisdictions and companies developing these tools should implement Requirement 8, which calls for greater transparency around the data and algorithms used, to address this issue for future research projects. That said, many of the concerns outlined in this report apply to any attempt to use existing criminal justice data to train statistical models or to create heuristics to make decisions about the liberty of individuals. Challenges in using these tools effectively fall broadly into three categories, each of which corresponds to a section of our report: Concerns about the validity, accuracy, and bias in the tools themselves; Issues with the interface between the tools and the humans who interact with them; and Questions of governance, transparency, and accountability. Although the use of these tools is in part motivated by the desire to mitigate existing human fallibility in the criminal justice system, it is a serious misunderstanding to view tools as objective or neutral simply because they are based on data. While formulas and statistical models provide some degree of consistency and replicability, they still share or amplify many weaknesses of human decision-making. Decisions regarding what data to use, how to handle missing data, what objectives to optimize, and what thresholds to set all have significant implications on the accuracy, validity, and bias of these tools, and ultimately on the lives and liberty of the individuals they assess. In addition to technical concerns, there are human-computer interface issues to consider with the implementation of such tools. Human-computer interface in this case refers to how humans collect and feed information into the tools and how humans interpret and evaluate the information that the tools generate. These tools must be held to high standards of interpretability and explainability to ensure that users (including judges, lawyers, and clerks, among others) can understand how the tools' predictions are reached and make reasonable decisions based on these predictions. To improve interpretability, such predictions should explicitly include information such as error bands to express the uncertainty behind their predictions. In addition, users must attend trainings that teach how and when to use these tools appropriately, and how to understand the uncertainty of their results. Moreover, to the extent that such systems are adopted to make life-changing decisions, tools and those who operate them must meet high standards of transparency and accountability. The data used to train the tools and the tools themselves must be subject to independent review by third-party researchers, advocates, and other relevant stakeholders. The tools also must receive ongoing evaluation, monitoring, and audits to ensure that they are performing as expected, and aligned with well-founded policy objectives. In light of these issues, as a general principle, these tools should not be used alone to make decisions to detain or to continue detention. Given the pressing issue of mass incarceration, it might be reasonable to use these tools to facilitate the automatic pretrial release of more individuals, but they should not be used to detain individuals automatically without additional (and timely) individualized hearings. Moreover, any use of these tools should address the bias, human-computer interface, transparency, and accountability concerns outlined in this report. This report highlights some of the key problems encountered using risk assessment tools for criminal justice applications. Many important questions remain open, however, and unknown issues may yet emerge in this space. Surfacing and answering those concerns will require ongoing research and collaboration between policymakers, the AI research community, and civil society groups. It is PAI's mission to spur and facilitate these conversations and to produce research to bridge these gaps. Details: San Francisco, California: Partnership on AI, 2019. 35p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 23, 2019 at: https://www.partnershiponai.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Report-on-Algorithmic-Risk-Assessment-Tools.pdf Year: 2019 Country: United States URL: https://www.partnershiponai.org/report-on-machine-learning-in-risk-assessment-tools-in-the-u-s-criminal-justice-system/ Shelf Number: 156012 Keywords: Algorithm Artificial Intelligence Machine Learning Probation Risk Assessment Tools Sentencing

Author: Great Britain. Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government Title: National Evaluation of the Troubled Families Programme 2015-2020: Findings Summary: The Troubled Families Programme 2015-20 aims to: 1. improve outcomes for families, 2. transform local services, 3. provide savings for the taxpayer. The national evaluation of the programme looks at how well the programme is achieving those aims. This is the fourth evaluation update and it brings together findings from the latest analysis of national and local datasets, a cost benefit analysis, case study research, staff survey research and follow up family survey. Details: London: Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government, 2019. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 28, 2019 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-evaluation-of-the-troubled-families-programme-2015-to-2020-findings Year: 2019 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/786889/National_evaluation_of_the_Troubled_Families_Programme_2015_to_2020_evaluation_overview_policy_report.pdf Shelf Number: 156077 Keywords: Early Intervention Employment Family and Crime Great Britain Impact Evaluation Sentencing

Author: Ash, Elliott Title: Conservative News Media and Criminal Justice: Evidence from Exposure to Fox News Channel Summary: Exposure to conservative news causes judges to impose harsher criminal sentences. Our evidence comes from an instrumental variables analysis, where randomness in television channel positioning across localities induces exogenous variation in exposure to Fox News Channel. These treatment data on news viewership are taken to outcomes data on almost 7 million criminal sentencing decisions in the United States for the years 2005-2017. Higher Fox News viewership increases incarceration length, and the effect is stronger for black defendants and for drug-related crimes. The effect is observed for elected, and not appointed, judges, consistent with voter attitudes as a potential mechanism. The effect becomes weaker as judges get closer to election, suggesting a diminishing marginal effect for judges who are already politically engaged. Details: S.L., 2019. 27p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 31, 2019 at: http://elliottash.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/AP_Fox_with_stars.pdf Year: 2019 Country: United States URL: http://www.poykerm.com/uploads/9/2/4/6/92466562/fox-news-judges.pdf Shelf Number: 156130 Keywords: Defendants Judges Judicial Discretion Judicial Elections Partisan Media Racial Bias Sentencing

Author: Amnesty International Title: Death Sentences and Executions 2018 Summary: This report covers the judicial use of the death penalty for the period January to December 2018. Amnesty International reports only on executions, death sentences and other aspects of the use of the death penalty, such as commutations and exonerations, where there is reasonable confirmation. In many countries governments do not publish information on their use of the death penalty. Details: London: Author, 2019. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 6, 2019 at: https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/ACT5098702019ENGLISH.PDF Year: 2019 Country: International URL: https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/ACT5098702019ENGLISH.PDF Shelf Number: 156235 Keywords: Capital Punishment Death Penalty Executions Sentencing

Author: Lyons, Tom Title: Community Supervision in Wisconsin Summary: Key Points: -Length of time on parole adds costs to our criminal justice system with no benefit to safety. -Conditions of release include standard rules that often are not related to the underlying offense. -Revocation of extended supervision results in a total sentence longer than ordered by the court. -Probation holds are disruptive and are not independently reviewed by anyone outside of the Department of Corrections. -An absence of a clear policy related to crimeless violations of conditions can create uneven results. Details: Austin, Texas: Texas Public Policy Foundation, Center for Effective Justice, 2019. 4p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 17, 2019 at: https://files.texaspolicy.com/uploads/2019/05/30125851/Lyons-CEJ-Community-Supervision-WI.pdf Year: 2019 Country: United States URL: https://www.texaspolicy.com/community-supervision-in-wisconsin/?utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=73205264&_hsenc=p2ANqtz--PRBxIVslMjNWLYwbUXiQueFIE6SVb0Zz66vZUvuWiAfLT4_0v-PXpFpmXP2v6LZWl4nBEh1o0RyCwms8xJnuhRG Shelf Number: 156373 Keywords: Community Supervision Corrections Probation Sentencing

Author: Butcher, Frederick Title: Impact of House Bill 86 and Sentencing-Related Legislation on the Incarcerated Population in Ohio Summary: Reducing the incarcerated population in both the juvenile- and adult-justice systems has been an area of focus for many states nationwide. The Justice Reinvestment Initiative (JRI) focused on data and evidence-driven approaches to address the problem at the front end and the back end. This report describes the impact of Ohio's House Bill 86 (HB 86), a codification of the JRI efforts in Ohio, and several other related pieces of legislation on the population of incarcerated youth and adults. Generally, HB 86 aimed to reduce the incarcerated population by utilizing community alternatives to incarceration particularly among low-level offenders, increasing the use of judicial release, and mandating risk assessments to better understand the needs of offenders and reduce recidivism. Data available from the Ohio Department of Youth Services (ODYS) and the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections (ODRC) between 2011 and 2016 were used to examine the impact of HB 86 and related legislation on the incarcerated population. Data from the ODYS revealed three key findings: -The Ohio Youth Assessment System (OYAS), an actuarial tool measuring criminogenic risk, has been widely used across the state to inform a number of decisions at different points in the juvenile-justice system; -New commitments made up more than 75 percent of all commitments to ODYS with youth who were at high risk to recidivate constituting nearly half of these cases; -African-American and Hispanic youth had greater odds of being classified as high-criminogenic risk for counties outside of the six largest counties in Ohio. While data from the juvenile-justice system pointed to clear outcomes, results of HB 86 on the adult-prison population were mixed. -The majority of new commitments to ODRC facilities were male and white, more than a quarter of these cases involved a fifth-degree felony, and less than half of new commitments were for a violent offense. -The percentage of cases with one-year sentences or less that resulted in judicial release increased slightly between 2011 and 2016. -New commitments to ODRC facilities decreased for fourth-degree felony offenses, but did not decrease for fifth-degree-felony offenses. Based on these findings, we recommend that the Ohio Criminal Sentencing Commission continue to collect data in a number of areas. For the juvenile-justice system, continuing to collect detailed data on the OYAS-risk assessment may provide insight into county-specific differences on its implementation. For the adult-criminal-justice system, further data collection is necessary to link arrest data, court records, and ODRC data. These data linkages can help us to further understand the impact that legislation has had on sentencing for specific types of crimes and offenders. Further, data on the community-sanctions population should be linked to court records and ODRC data to understand what programs work and for whom. Details: Cleveland, Ohio: Case Western Reserve University, Begun Center for Violence Prevention and Research, 2018. 52p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 18, 2019 at: https://case.edu/socialwork/begun/sites/case.edu.begun/files/2018-09/OCSC-Impact-of-House-Bill-86-7-2018_0.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://case.edu/socialwork/begun/sites/case.edu.begun/files/2018-09/OCSC-Impact-of-House-Bill-86-7-2018_0.pdf Shelf Number: 156483 Keywords: Community Alternatives Community Corrections Incarcerated Adults Incarcerated Youths Incarceration Low-Level Offenders Policy Change Prison Population Recidivism Risk Assessments Sentencing

Author: Colgan, Beth Title: Wealth-Based Penal Disenfranchisement Summary: This Article offers the first comprehensive examination of the way in which the inability to pay economic sanctions-fines, fees, surcharges, and restitution�may prevent people of limited means from voting. The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of penal disenfranchisement upon conviction, and all but two states revoke the right to vote for at least some offenses. The remaining jurisdictions allow for re-enfranchisement for most or all offenses under certain conditions. One often overlooked condition is payment of economic sanctions regardless of whether the would-be voter has the ability to pay before an election registration deadline. The scope of wealth-based penal disenfranchisement is grossly underestimated, with commentators typically stating that nine states sanction such practices. Through an in-depth examination of a tangle of statutes, administrative rules, and policies related to elections, clemency, parole, and probation, as well as responses from public disclosure requests and discussions with elections and corrections officials and other relevant actors, this Article reveals that wealth-based penal disenfranchisement is authorized in forty-eight states and the District of Columbia. After describing the mechanisms for wealth-based penal disenfranchisement, this Article offers a doctrinal intervention for dismantling them. There has been limited, and to date unsuccessful, litigation challenging these practices as violative of the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection and due process clauses. Because voting eligibility is stripped of its fundamental nature for those convicted of a crime, wealth-based penal disenfranchisement has been subject to the lowest level of scrutiny, rational basis review, leading lower courts to uphold the practice. This Article posits that these courts have approached the validity of wealth-based penal disenfranchisement through the wrong frame - the right to vote - when the proper frame is through the lens of punishment. This Article examines a line of cases in which the Court restricted governmental action that would result in disparate treatment between rich and poor in criminal justice practices, juxtaposing the cases against the Court's treatment of wealth-based discrimination in the Fourteenth Amendment doctrine and the constitutional relevance of indigency in the criminal justice system broadly. Doing so supports the conclusion that the Court has departed from the traditional tiers of scrutiny. The resulting test operates as a flat prohibition against the use of the government's prosecutorial power in ways that effectively punish one's financial circumstances unless no other alternative response could satisfy the government's interest in punishing the disenfranchising offense. Because such alternatives are available, wealth-based penal disenfranchisement would violate the Fourteenth Amendment under this approach. Details: Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) - School of Law, 2019. 75p. Source: Internet Resource: UCLA School of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 19-10: 72 Vand. L. Rev. 55 (2019): Accessed July 2, 2019 at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3312439 Year: 2019 Country: United States URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3312439 Shelf Number: 156823 Keywords: Disenfranchisement Due Process Economic Sanctions Equal Protection Fines and Fees Fourteenth Amendment Poverty Sentencing Voting Rights

Author: Crewe, Ben Title: Experiencing Long Term Imprisonment from Young Adulthood: Identity, Adaptation and Penal Legitimacy Summary: This report summarises the findings from a study of prisoners serving long sentences (tariffs of 15 years or more) who were sentenced when aged 25 or under. It describes the main experiences and problems reported by study participants, and the ways in which they coped with and adapted to their sentences. A survey (313 respondents, 294 male, 19 female with an overall response rate of 69%) and 147 qualitative interviews (126 male and 21 female) were conducted, with fieldwork undertaken during 2013-2015. As with all studies there are some limitations to the methodological approach, and it should be noted that findings may not be representative of the views of all prisoners serving long sentences. Details: London: HM Prison and Probation Service, 2019. 13p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 18, 2019 at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/819752/experiencing-long-term-imprisonment-from-young-adulthood.pdf Year: 2019 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.prc.crim.cam.ac.uk/directory/research-themes/ltp Shelf Number: 157018 Keywords: Incarceration Life Sentences Prisoners Prisons Sentencing

Author: KPMG Title: Prison: The Facts Summary: Facts and figures provide a better basis than opinion for policy and practice change. Drawn largely from government sources, these facts chart the extraordinary rise in prison numbers over the last twenty years, inflation in sentencing and the social and economic consequences of overuse of custody. They reveal the state of our overcrowded prisons and the state of people in them, the impact of deep budget cuts, the pace and scale of change in the justice system and the scope for community solutions to crime. Details: London: Prison Reform Trust, 2019. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 25, 2019 at: http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/Portals/0/Documents/Bromley%20Briefings/Prison%20the%20facts%20Summer%202019.pdf Year: 2019 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/Portals/0/Documents/Bromley%20Briefings/Prison%20the%20facts%20Summer%202019.pdf Shelf Number: 156974 Keywords: Mass Incarceration Prison Population Prison Reform Sentencing

Author: Prison Reform Trust Title: Prison: The Facts Summary: Facts and figures provide a better basis than opinion for policy and practice change. Drawn largely from government sources, these facts chart the extraordinary rise in prison numbers over the last twenty years, inflation in sentencing and the social and economic consequences of overuse of custody. They reveal the state of our overcrowded prisons and the state of people in them, the impact of deep budget cuts, the pace and scale of change in the justice system and the scope for community solutions to crime. Details: London: Prison Reform Trust, 2019. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 25, 2019 at: http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/Portals/0/Documents/Bromley%20Briefings/Prison%20the%20facts%20Summer%202019.pdf Year: 2019 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/Portals/0/Documents/Bromley%20Briefings/Prison%20the%20facts%20Summer%202019.pdf Shelf Number: 156974 Keywords: Mass Incarceration Prison Population Prison Reform Sentencing

Author: Rhine, Edward E. Title: Levers of Change in Parole Release and Revocation Summary: Overview: Paroling authorities play an important, if often unrecognized role, in American prison policies. Discretionary parole processes decide the actual release dates for most individuals subject to confinement in 34 states. Additional leverage over time served is exercised through parole boards' revocation and re-release authority. The degree of discretion these back-end officials exert over the dosage of incarceration is vast, sometimes more than that held by sentencing courts. Any comprehensive program to change American prison policy must focus to a significant degree on prison-release discretion, where it exists, and its relationship to time served. During the buildup to mass incarceration, many parole boards became increasingly reluctant to grant release to eligible prisoners. Today, if it were possible to reverse this upward driver of prison populations, parole boards could be important contributors to a new evidence-based status quo of lower prison rates in many states. Reasonable objectives of reform include policy-driven increases in the likelihood of parole release, and more rational decision making overall about time served. This report describes twelve "levers of change," each associated with potential reforms in the realm of discretionary parole release. The reforms are called "change levers" because, once a lever is pulled, it is designed to impact prison populations by altering parole grant rates and durations of time served. The report identifies 12 areas of innovation that, to some degree, have already been tried by a number of states. In most cases, from a distance, it is impossible to evaluate the quality of each state's implementation of one or more change levers, or the results that have been achieved. But the fact that states have begun to experiment in specific areas shows that there is an appetite for reform. In addition, actual experimentation indicates that some of the groundwork has been laid for evaluation, improvement, and dissemination of promising ideas to many additional states. Some levers have become embedded in the decision protocols of parole boards over the past 20 years and more, while others have emerged only recently. One of the goals of this report is to demonstrate how combining the levers is key to reform. This report maps the terrain of the 12 identified change levers, to the degree permitted by available information. The map shows a huge amount of state-by-state variation, even without hands-on study of each system. The report further classifies individual levers based on the number of jurisdictions in which they have been identified, and their potential impact on states' prison populations. Details: Minneapolis, Minnesota: University of Minnesota, Robina Institute of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, 2018. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 25, 2019 at: https://robinainstitute.umn.edu/publications/levers-change-parole-release-and-revocation Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://robinainstitute.umn.edu/sites/robinainstitute.umn.edu/files/parole_landscape_report.pdf Shelf Number: 157068 Keywords: Corrections Mass Incarceration Parole Boards Prison Policy Sentencing

Author: Polinsky, A. Mitchell Title: Deterrence and the Adjustment of Sentences During Imprisonment Summary: The prison time actually served by a convicted criminal depends to a significant degree on decisions made by the state during the course of imprisonment - on whether to grant parole or other forms of sentence reduction. In this article we study a model of the adjustment of sentences assuming that the state's objective is the optimal deterrence of crime. In the model, the state can lower or raise the sentence based on deterrence - relevant information that it obtains about a criminal during imprisonment. Our focus on sentence adjustment as a means of promoting deterrence stands in contrast to the usual emphasis in sentence adjustment policy on reducing recidivism. Details: Cambridge, Massachusetts: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2019. 25p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 3, 2019 at: https://www.nber.org/papers/w26083.pdf Year: 2019 Country: United States URL: https://www.nber.org/papers/w26083 Shelf Number: 158121 Keywords: Convicted Criminal Deterrence Imprisonment Recidivism Sentencing