Probation and parole unit 3

1,442 views

Published on

0 Comments
3 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,442
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
5
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
33
Comments
0
Likes
3
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/play;_ylt=A2KLqIHlxThRKwcAYuX7w8QF;_ylu=X3oDMTBrc3VyamVwBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDdmlkBHZ0aWQD?p=intensive+supervision+probation&vid=c85322797f8203c68a353d3eabe081e7&l=10%3A32&turl=http%3A%2F%2Fts4.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DV.4606306112700611%26pid%3D15.1&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3Dnbwnp81Pt88&tit=Community+Intensive+Supervision+Program%3A+Finalist+Presentation&c=0&sigr=11aiq1e5a&fr=yfp-t-900-s&tt=b
  • http://www.nationalgangcenter.gov/SPT/Programs/82
  • http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/ppus10.pdf
  • http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=1972879408US471_1868.xml&docbase=CSLWAR1-1950-1985Original sentence was for issuing false checks. 7 years confinement, paroled after 1 year, re-arrested for falsifying a credit application to buy a car, other charges. Probation officer wrote a report to have re-arrested.
  • Scarpelli serving 15year sentence for armed robbery suspended to 7 years probation. While on probation re-arrested for burglary. http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/411/778/
  • http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/442/1/case.html
  • http://www.pap.state.ga.us/opencms/opencms/
  • http://bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/tsp00.pdf
  • http://www.ct.gov/doc/lib/doc/pdf/RevalidationStudy2007.pdf
  • http://www.appa-net.org/eweb/http://www.appa-net.org/eweb/DynamicPage.aspx?WebCode=IA_CodeEthics
  • http://calgrip.ca.gov/documents/Re_Entry_Meares_Report.pdfhttp://www.psnchicago.org/PDFs/2009-PSN-Research-Brief_v2.pdf
  • http://www.eisenhowerfoundation.org/docs/Ex-Offender%20Best%20Practices.pdf
  • http://www.ct.gov/doc/lib/doc/pdf/RevalidationStudy2007.pdf
  • http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=juvenile+boot+camps&view=detail&mid=F28211749709FE5B99F7F28211749709FE5B99F7&first=0&FORM=NVPFVRhttp://www.ojjdp.gov/pubs/reform/ch2_g.htmlhttp://www.livestrong.com/article/222298-what-is-the-success-rate-of-juvenile-boot-camps/
  • http://www.byparents-forparents.com/aboutjuveniledelinquents/AJD/a-history-of-juvenile-boot-camps-for-troubled-teens.htm
  • https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/197018.pdf
  • http://www.urban.org/projects/reentry-roundtable/upload/Gaes.pdf
  • http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=probation+day+reporting&view=detail&mid=E2415210FADC6F608DBAE2415210FADC6F608DBA&first=0&FORM=NVPFVR
  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwING7ak7n0http://www.bop.gov/locations/cc/index.jsp
  • http://www.findahalfwayhouse.com/index.php/halfway-houses-in-georgia/
  • http://americancityandcounty.com/mag/government_day_reporting_easeshttp://americancityandcounty.com/pubsafe/day-reporting-jail-20100830
  • http://www.dcor.state.ga.us/Divisions/Corrections/ProbationSupervision/DayReporting.htmlFacts sheet: http://www.dcor.state.ga.us/Research/Fact_Sheets/Info_Sheets_DRC_2013.pdf
  • http://www.doc.sc.gov/pubweb/programs/substance.jsphttp://www.lawserver.com/law/state/south-carolina/sc-code/south_carolina_code_24-21-1330
  • http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=drug+courts&view=detail&mid=A34C493209A4C8993955A34C493209A4C8993955&first=61&FORM=NVPFVR
  • http://nij.gov/topics/courts/drug-courts/welcome.htm
  • Probation and parole unit 3

    1. 1. Probation and Parole Unit 3 CJ 307 Bob Jones University Dr. Mike Wilkie
    2. 2. Chapter 7Intensive Supervised Probation (ISP)
    3. 3. Probation and ISP• Probation-court ordered program for supervising offenders outside of incarceration• ISP is a restrictive program for higher-risk offenders• ISP may be for adults or juveniles• Two related findings – Increased surveillance may not reduce offender’s criminal activity – Technical violations, revocation rates higher
    4. 4. Juvenile Offenders• Allegheny County
    5. 5. ISP• Washington State program• 21.9% reduction in recidivism
    6. 6. Probation• Most frequently used alternative sentencing• 2009 statistics – 7.3 million people on some form of probation – Most community supervision – 1 of every 47 adults• Class Exercise – Find current probation rates for adults in US, for adults in your home state
    7. 7. Findings• 2010 statistics – 4,055,500 adults on probation – 4.4 million moved in and out of probation – USDOJ• SC – 32,000 on probation in SC 2012 – SC Dept of Probation, Parole, Pardons
    8. 8. Conditions for Probation• No new offenses (minor traffic violations excepted)• No illicit drug use• Restrictions on alcohol use/abuse• Reporting to probation officer as required• Paying required fees and fines• Avoid contact with other offenders• Follow all court orders
    9. 9. High Risk Offenders• Home confinement• Fines and Restitution• Treatment programs designed to intervene reoffending• Electronic Monitoring
    10. 10. Remote Location Monitoring• Expanding program, – 12,000 in 1994 – 130-150,000+ today• Improvements in GPS technology• Major benefit is reduced cost, less than incarceration – Offender pays toward costs
    11. 11. Three Values of EM• Restrict offender movements (incapacitation)• Punitive• Contributes to rehabilitation in community context – Allows work, education, vocational training
    12. 12. OJJDP Strategic Planning Tool• Evaluate Risk Factors• Evaluate Family• School• Community• Peers and Associations
    13. 13. OJJDP (cont)• Phase 1 (3 to 4 months)• Probation agreement (behavior contract).• Three contacts at random by surveillance officer per week.• Biweekly counseling sessions by probation counselor.• Team assessment—probation officer, probation counselor, surveillance officer—using risk and needs assessment.• Service delivery that addresses treatment needs
    14. 14. OJJDP• Phase 2 (2 to 3 months)• Two contacts at random by surveillance officer per week.• Service delivery that addresses treatment needs; also increased parental responsibility.
    15. 15. OJJDP• Phase 3 (1 to 2 months)• One contact at random by surveillance officer per week.• Complete formation of support group (parents and significant others).• Discharge.• “Most IPSs are designed to accomplish only one thing: an increase in public safety through the close surveillance of offenders.”
    16. 16. House Arrest• Home confinement• Usually part of ISP• May be employed pre-trial or post-conviction• Confines person to home during non-working hours
    17. 17. Probation Then and Now• Pp.192-193 review• Rate of people on Probation – USDOJ
    18. 18. Questions?
    19. 19. Program Evaluation• Source: Probation, Parole, and Community Corrections, 5th ed. , D. Champion
    20. 20. Introduction• How do we evaluate a program?• How do we know if it is working?• How do we choose a program for an offender?
    21. 21. Program Evaluation• American Probation and Parole Association (APPA) – Longitudinal study information
    22. 22. Measurements• Recidivism rates• Revocation rates• Technical violations• New arrests• Public perceptions• Cost v Efficiency• Number of clients• Client evaluation
    23. 23. Balancing Objectives and Needs• Facilitate offender reintegration• Continuing offender punishment• Heighten offender accountability• Ensuring community protection, safety• Promote offender rehabilitation• Improve offender life skills• Resolving offender social and psychological problems
    24. 24. Balancing Objectives and Needs (cont)• Alleviate jails, overcrowding• Monitoring offender behaviors• Reducing chemical dependency, substance abuse• Collecting of fines, fees, restitution• Enforcing law, community service orders• Employment• Lower rates of recidivism• Budgetary justification
    25. 25. Factors Associated with Lower Recidivism Rates• Treatment strategy is empirically valid• Treatment delivered in offender’s natural environment• Varied intervention strategies employed• Intensive nature of program – Best in few months• Match client needs to learning style, ability• Aftercare and follow up
    26. 26. Characteristics of Recidivists (BJS)• Male• Younger than 30• Education level below high school• Lengthy arrest records• No correctional supervision on new offenses• Past juvenile offenses• Similar crime pattern choices• Drug, Alcohol dependency• Unmarried, divorced, or widowed• Employed at time of new offense
    27. 27. Curbing Recidivism• National Council on Crime and Delinquency (NCCD) findings• Declining levels of financial assistance and narcotic treatment sources• Increased parole supervision caseloads• Jail overcrowding• More efficient parole systems needed
    28. 28. Questions?
    29. 29. Chapter 8The Crucial Phase of Reentry
    30. 30. Introduction• Story of Mike Danton, Canadian citizen, p. 219
    31. 31. Scenario• Consider a female who, at 19, in a jealous rage, killed her boyfriend whom she found with another woman. She attempted to kill the other woman who was wounded but escaped.• Court sentenced thirty years to life in plea arrangement. After twenty-two year, eligible for parole, “model prisoner”• Still has living family-mother, sister, religious family, nieces and nephews.• Consider your recommendations for parole.
    32. 32. Types of Parole• Discretionary-Parole board decision• Mandatory-Sentence statutes, emergency releases,
    33. 33. Irish System• 1854 Sir Walter Crofton• Six requirements – Weekly reporting to constabulary – Abstain from additional violations – Abstain from bad people – Refrain from “idle and dissolute life” – Keep documentation of leave – Stay in jurisdiction, report if leaving (p. 220)
    34. 34. Significant Case Law• Morrissey v. Brewer - 408 U.S. 471 (1972) First significant SCOTUS ruling on parole• “Though parole revocation does not call for the full panoply of rights due a defendant in a criminal proceeding, a parolees liberty involves significant values within the protection of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment”• Revocation of parole requires hearing under 14th Amendment Due Process clause• Can occur with defendant in or out of custody
    35. 35. Significant Case Law (cont)• Gagnon v. Scarpelli, 411 U.S. 778 (1973) second parole ruling by SCOTUS• Defendants not necessarily entitled to right of counsel at parole revocation hearings• Defendants are entitled to preliminary and final revocation hearings (Cagnon 1 and 2 hearings) – Cagnon 1 hearing on hold or release – Cagnon 2 hearing on revocation
    36. 36. Significant Case Law (concl)• Greenholtz v. Inmates of the Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex, 442 U.S. 1 (1979)• If state law requires that prisoners be considered for parole upon meeting certain conditions, 14th due process right to present evidence for their parole hearing and receive written notice of why if denied.• Due process claim must "legitimate claim of entitlement".
    37. 37. Due Process Requirements in Greenholtz• 1.Provide a full formal hearing for each inmate eligible for parole;• 2.Notify the prisoner in advance of the hearing and notify him of the factors that the Board may use to reach its decision;• 3.Allow the prisoner to appear in person before the Board and present evidence;• 4.Maintain a record of the proceedings that is "capable of being reduced to writing";• 5.Furnish the prisoner with a full written explanation of the facts on which the Board relied and the reasons for the Boards decision to deny parole
    38. 38. Use of Parole Today• 1500-2000 inmates release on parole every day• Over 800,000 on parole nationwide• Most states have increased use of parole. Why?• Using classroom resources, how many people are on parole in your home state?
    39. 39. Will Parole Continue or be Abolished?• Not politically popular to expand parole• Consequences of “prisonization” or institutionalizing inmates• Some states have abolished discretionary parole (list p. 225)• BJA Report• Discussion-should the states abolish discretionary parole? (board decision)• Note the map 8.3 p. 226
    40. 40. Parole Boards• Authority for granting parole to inmates• Varying composition from state to state• Varying authority from state to state
    41. 41. Parole Board Decision Process• Primary factors• Criminal History• Institutional Behavior• Type and severity of crime• Political considerations (Sirhan Sirhan)
    42. 42. Salient Factor Score (SFS) p. 229• Age at first conviction• Prior incarcerations• Number of previous arrests/convictions• Severity of previous arrests/convictions• Supervision failures• Connecticut System
    43. 43. Chapter 8The Crucial Phase of Reentry
    44. 44. Classroom Exercise• Using classroom resources, research the parole board in your home state. Determine who comprises the board, its authority, how frequently it meets, what number of people are on parole in that state, any criteria the board uses to grant or deny parole, any comments on the board’s commitment to use parole.
    45. 45. Findings• Minnesota-None• South Carolina-7 members, Governor appoints, grant/deny/parole• New York-14 members, 1930 organized for parole decisions, 37,000 on parole• Illinois-none
    46. 46. Parole Hearings• Outlined in state law for procedures• Should assess risk factors• Objective and Subjective Assessment• Technology for “remote” hearings• Eligibility guidelines followed• May involve interview of prospective parolee• Victim Notification
    47. 47. Conditions of Parole• P. 235• Meet conditions• Reports• Compliance• Behavioral modification• Supervised
    48. 48. Parole Revocation• Termination hearing• Review violation involved• What hearing rights exist if any? – Discussion
    49. 49. Revocation Considerations• Offender’s loss of freedom in community• Cost to state involved• Increased costs of re-incarceration• If offender is employed, economic impact on family• Effect on prison population
    50. 50. Parole and Cognitive Transformation• Behavioral change• Consider Biblical characters – Jacob – David – Woman at the well – Mary Magdaline (Mary of Magdala) – Peter• Cognitive change is individual perception change. Requirements – Cognitive transformation – Support group – Volitional change (my addition)
    51. 51. Parole Profession• P. 239• American Probation and Parole Association – Code of Ethics
    52. 52. Effects of Incarceration• Offender re-entry into society• Transition – Why difficult? – What obligations does the state have? – What actions should the state take?
    53. 53. Effects of Re-Entry• High school drop outs• Illiteracy• Mental health problems• Family issues (dysfunctional v nuclear)• Victims
    54. 54. Offender Notification Forums• DOJ funded project• Chicago project• Goals of ONF – Options and consequences, service options – Perceptions of LE – Reduction in crime rates – P. 244• More Chicago project
    55. 55. Re-entry Courts• Working with offender in home community• Use of graduated sanctions, enforcement, re- enforcement• Similar to drug courts• Best practices
    56. 56. Best Practices• 􀂃 Focus on motivation, envisioning new roles and self-concepts, and nurturing the• commitment to change.• 􀂃 Provide for a gradual transition from the institution structure of prison to an open schedule.• 􀂃 Offer support and immediate access to income in the days following release.
    57. 57. Best Practices (cont)• 􀂃 Look for compatibilities between individuals’ temperaments and available jobs.• 􀂃 Provide non-punitive, problem-solving assistance.• 􀂃 Develop resources or provide access to concrete supports like transportation, interview and• work clothes, child care, housing and food.• 􀂃 Create a well-developed network of potential employers.• 􀂃 Cultivate employer satisfaction through frequent contact and willingness to mediate• conflicts.• 􀂃 Coordinate employment and criminal justice commitments to provide as little disruption to• job responsibilities as possible.• 􀂃 Focus on job retention.
    58. 58. Female Re-entry• P. 246
    59. 59. Policy Implications• P. 247
    60. 60. Key Terms• Review p. 249
    61. 61. Conclusions• 2/3 of parolees rearrested w/in 3 years• 25% reincarcerated within 3 years• What policies can parole system develop to turn the tide? (discussion)
    62. 62. Sources• http://www.ct.gov/doc/lib/doc/pdf/Revalidati onStudy2007.pdf
    63. 63. Questions?
    64. 64. Chapter 9Boot Camps and Jail-Based Supervision
    65. 65. Objectives• Identify features of correctional boot camps• Effective characteristics• Benefits of jail-based community service• Basic elements of jail reentry programs
    66. 66. History• Video – Discussion• Nature of Correctional boot camps – Youthful offenders – Usually non-violent offenses – 90-180 days – Cost effective alternative (but there are costs) – Failure rate • Recidivism • Live Strong success in first time offenders, less in repeat, follow up critical to success
    67. 67. History• First boot camps in Georgia, Oklahoma, Louisiana• Military style• Emphasis on discipline, order, obedience• Physical conditioning, physical labor• Intense period• Usually alternative sentencing• “shock incarceration” philosophy
    68. 68. Influencing Factors for Boot Camps• “Get Tough” attitude• Mandatory sentencing, 3-Strikes Laws• Overcrowding• Directed effort at behavioral modification
    69. 69. Criticisms of Boot Camps• Recidivism correlated to follow up• Lack of emphasis on re-entry skills• “Low dosage” of time at boot camp-need longer tours
    70. 70. Policy• Adequate empirical evidence on hand (20 years)• Military-style training does not bring about change in thinking, problem-solving• Aftercare and follow up crucial to reducing recidivism• Mixed results, cost-benefit analysis• Does it reduce overcrowding?
    71. 71. Class Exercise• Using classroom resources, research whether or not juvenile boot camps are operated in your home state• Are there any for adult offenders?
    72. 72. Supervising Jail Offenders in Community• Most frequent contact of individuals with CJ system (pass through)• Jails making more frequent use of managing inmates outside of jail facility – Work release programs – Community service programs
    73. 73. Work Release Programs• Maintain employment during confinement• Economically attractive to state• Facilitates Re-entry and reintegration – Financial safety net for offender• Effectiveness – Lower recidivism
    74. 74. Re-entry Program Policy Recommendations• Begins prior to release, continues• Comprehensive, realistic• Keep same oversight person responsible• Use of community resources• Long-term health care concerns• Recidivism does not preclude another attempt
    75. 75. Re-Entry Plans• Counseling• Education support• Health counseling• Living Assistance• Faith-based Initiatives• Substance Abuse
    76. 76. Program Treatment• Pp.268ff
    77. 77. Questions?
    78. 78. Chapter 10Residential, Day Reporting, Drug Courts
    79. 79. Objectives• Review half-way houses• Discuss residential community programs• Discuss day reporting centers• Goals of drug courts, effectiveness
    80. 80. Residential Community-Based Corrections• Day Reporting Center story
    81. 81. Cont• Half-Way Houses – Purpose of reintegration, reentry – Structured living environment – Life skills, counseling services, – Substance abuse treatment
    82. 82. Half-Way Houses• History – Massachusetts, 1800s – Massachusetts prison commission recommended• Public Perception• Federal Prisoner Rehabilitation Act (HR 6964)• Federal Reentry program
    83. 83. International Community Corrections Association• ICCA website Agenda items – Improve capacity of CC – Funding for programs – Grants – Legislation to strengthen pre-release transition – Improve CC effectiveness • Statutes, accreditation, etc
    84. 84. Reintegration• Shared responsibility between offender, community• Social transition
    85. 85. Special Needs in CBC• Developmentally disabled• Mental illness• Elderly• Physically handicapped• Substance abuse• Juveniles
    86. 86. Program Characteristics-2 Categories• Transitional Control Program – Close monitor offender’s adjustment – Small group housing – Use of surveillance, monitors, – Strict rules (alcohol, departure, return, etc) – Court ordered or administrative action – Variable length of stay – Support and resident accountability
    87. 87. Transitional Control• Sex offenders, other higher risk, ineligible• Mental health problems ineligible• May incorporate volunteer support• May incorporate faith-based volunteers
    88. 88. Benefits of CBC programs• Frees bed space for more serious offenders• Monitors referrals• Restricts offender’s freedom for public safety interest• Self help, workshops,• Positive change
    89. 89. Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy• Pp.287-289
    90. 90. Program Results• Developed from a transitional phase into a type of intermediate sanction
    91. 91. Exercise• Using classroom resources, research your home state’s use of – Half way houses – Day reporting centers
    92. 92. Findings• Georgia Find A Halfway House• New Jersey Half-way house – Men only – Sober living environment – Multiple phases, different purposes, 12-step – “Granite House”• Minnesota – Many religious half-way houses, faith-based – Optional – Self admission
    93. 93. • New York State – 132 different locations – 5 in Brooklyn, deteriorated areas – Sober or alcohol living, Faith-based – Rehab centers – Come co-ed• South Carolina – Columbia, Charleston many – Some drug treatment in upstate
    94. 94. • Illinois – Alcohol and prescription drug treatment – Heroin – Family therapy
    95. 95. Day Reporting Centers• Day Reporting Centers (DRC) – Non residential – Non violent offenders – Goal of rehabilitation• Origins in the UK, 1970s – Prison overcrowding reduction• First in US in 1986 – Massachusetts
    96. 96. Growth of DRCs• 1995 – 114 centers – 22 states• 2005 – 4750 centers – Nation wide (BJS)• Sedgwick County, Kansas – Read and discuss in class
    97. 97. DRCs• Georgia DRCs – 16 locations in the state – Intensive support on substance abuse – Approx 100 offenders per center – Failure of testing , revocation hearing – Adult education – 6 month after care follow up• DRC Facts Sheet
    98. 98. South Carolina• DOC – No specific mention of DRCs – DOC has substance abuse programs (link) – DRC termination unless legislature extends
    99. 99. DRC program components• Educational opportunities• Employments skills• Psycho-educational programs• Substance abuse treatment• Mental health therapy• Increased contact with offender, staff• Regular reporting
    100. 100. Goals of DRC• Cost effective• Reduce recidivism• Behavior modification• Offender responsibility, accountability
    101. 101. Drug Courts• First est in Dade County, FL (Miami) 1989• Reduction in substance abuse• Reduce court backlog• Only jurisdiction is drug-related cases, substance abuse (not trafficking)• Story
    102. 102. US Map
    103. 103. Cost SavingsKalamazoo, MI
    104. 104. National Institute of Justice• NIJ Link• Click on tab “Do Drug Courts Work?”
    105. 105. Key Components (p. 299)• Integrate alcohol/substance abuse treatments with case processing• Non adversarial (no prosecution), maintains due process rights• Monitored for “being clean”• Coordinated strategy• Ongoing interaction (six-twelve months usual)
    106. 106. Summary• Growing evidence that CBC approaches successful – Primarily measure in reduced recidivism – Diminished costs• Not for all offenders• Increases chances of rehabilitation, reintegration
    107. 107. Questions?

    ×