ReferencesBarrenger, S., Draine, J., Angell, B., & Herman, D. (2.docx

References
Barrenger, S., Draine, J., Angell, B., & Herman, D. (2017).
Reincarceration Risk Among Men with Mental Illnesses Leaving
Prison: A Risk Environment Analysis. Community Mental
Health Journal, 53(8), 883–892. https://doi-
org.ezproxy.fiu.edu/10.1007/s10597-017-0113-z
Garot, R. (2019). Rehabilitation Is Reentry. Prisoner Reentry in
the 21st Century: Critical Perspectives of Returning Home.
Hlavka, H., Wheelock, D., & Jones, R. (2015). Exoffender
Accounts of Successful Reentry from Prison. Journal of
Offender Rehabilitation, 54(6), 406–428. https://doi-
org.ezproxy.fiu.edu/10.1080/10509674.2015.1057630
Ho, D. (2011). Intervention-A New Way-Out to Solve the
Chronic Offenders. International Journal of Interdisciplinary
Social Sciences, 6(2), 167–172.
Mobley, A. (2014). Prison reentry as a rite of passage for the
formerly incarcerated. Contemporary Justice Review, 17(4),
465–477. https://doi-
Reisdorf, B. C., & Rikard, R. V. (2018). Digital Rehabilitation:
A Model of Reentry Into the Digital Age. American Behavioral
Scientist, 62(9), 1273–1290. https://doi-
org.ezproxy.fiu.edu/10.1177/0002764218773817
Serowik, K. L., & Yanos, P. (2013). The relationship between
services and outcomes for a prison reentry population of those
with severe mental illness. Mental Health & Substance Use:
Dual Diagnosis, 6(1), 4–14. https://doi-
SHUFORD, J. A. (2018). The missing link in reentry: Changing
prison culture. Corrections Today, 80(2), 42–102.
Thompkins, D. E., Curtis, R., & Wendel, T. (2010). Forum: the
prison reentry industry. Dialectical Anthropology, 34(4), 427–
429. https://doi-org.ezproxy.fiu.edu/10.1007/s10624-010-9164-z
Woods, L. N., Lanza, A. S., Dyson, W., & Gordon, D. M.

(2013). The Role of Prevention in Promoting Continuity of
Health Care in Prisoner Reentry Initiatives. American Journal of
Public Health, 103(5), 830–838. https://doi-
org.ezproxy.fiu.edu/10.2105/AJPH.2012.300961
Prison Reentry and Rehabilitation
Recommendations
Evidence based developed systems; since at the moment there is
adequate research in this area it is important that systems that
will be developed in future should look at previous research and
how it was successful or not.
Secondly Re-entry should be digitized, every aspect in our
society therefore it makes sense where by re-entry programs are
also digitized it will help to make the policy much more
effective.
Thirdly religion implementation in the re-entry programs should
be intensified, as through evidence; religion has proven to be
effective, rehabilitation and re-entry of the clients back to the
society (Morag & Teman, 2018).
Conclusion
Re-entry has not been digitized whereby in this day an era every
functioning aspect of our lives/society is on the internet.
The re-entry programs seem to be a product of financial
implications of the states rather than the greater good of
reducing the incarceration numbers.
One aspect that affect the effectiveness of the re-entry programs
is generalization.

Residorf & Rikard 2018, on the other hand has explored a
different point on the aspect of reentry.
Morag & Teman (2018), looks at how religion can help the
reentry and rehabilitation program to be more effective.
Nhan et al. 2017, looks at reentry programs and their
effectiveness.
Review of Previous Research
The policy provides safe streets in the sense that prisoners who
find effective re-entry programs do not resort to crime after re-
entry.
Second chance initiative is important as it changes the attitude
of the clients/ or the re-entry individuals.
Re-entry helps the public system to achieve public safety.
Policy Effectiveness
Reassessment of Frameworks, that involves in changing how
probation and post-incarceration is monitored.
Re-entry and rehabilitation designed to address individuals and
not one size fits all.
Starting early, currently all re-entry programs start when an
inmate is incarcerated, this makes preparation easier.
Introduction
Redefining Three Strikes
Introduction:
What might have appeared as a rite of passage for most young
girls, turned anything, but typical on the night of October 1st,
1993 at a residence in Petaluma, California. Imagine the scene,

12-year old Polly Klaas along with her two friends having the
time of their lives playing dress up and board games while
Klaas’ mother is fast asleep in the next room. Out of nowhere,
the girls glance up in terror as a bearded man holding a knife
ushers them to remain quiet. Richard Allen Davis, a two-time
convicted violent felon ties the two girls up and kidnaps Klaas
at knifepoint right in her own living room with her mother a few
feet away. Unbeknownst to authorities, Davis is seen wandering
around a wooded property after his car accidentally crashes into
a ditch. The police arrive to assist and notice clothes strewn
around the woods, but take no further action and let Davis leave
while Polly was hidden nearby in the darkness. Two months
later, despite a nationwide manhunt for Polly, she is discovered
with her nightgown shoved up to her waist strangled to death
(Fagan, 2013). A public outcry for justice after Polly’s
horrifying murder ignited Californians to vote in favor for what
is now known as the three strike law enacted on March 4th,
1994 in the hopes of permanently reducing recidivism rates
especially among violent offenders (Helland & Tabarrok, 2007).
The legislation, just as the name implies in baseball, sentences a
criminal to a minimum 25-year sentence to life after their third
offense, or strike. California, being the most aggressive state to
adhere to the legislation opted to define a strike to include
felonies and misdemeanors while other states differ on their
definition of what constitutes a strike (Eaton, 2003). Critics
claim that the three strike law is undefined which leads to a
violation of a criminal’s eighth amendment right against cruel
and unusual punishment coupled with a fiscal cost too high, that
is overcrowding prisons and the legal system. Another cause
for concern with the policy is the lack of conclusive wide-
spread data proving that recidivism rates among convicted
felons is reduced by three strikes (Eaton, 2003). The three strike
law was intended to keep violent reoffenders behind bars and
maintain public safety; however, what defines a strike and the
variety in which each state adopts the law has spread obscurity
among the legal system and challenged the law’s effectiveness.

A comprehensive wide-spread look will be taken to evaluate the
policy’s intended target and goal, its consequences, and chance
for long-term universal success to reduce recidivism among a
certain typology of offenders.
II. Review of Previous Research
a. Three schools of thought: There are the governmental
advocates who believe the law will help fight crime and reduce
costs associated with public safety, the second school involves
critics who believe the law will create injustices for those tried
under it, overcrowding in jails and increased government costs
to uphold it. The third school is one of neutrality as the law is
viewed as a “symbolic accomplishment” in the fight towards
crime, but neither wreaks havoc on the criminal justice system
nor makes advancements in reduced recidivism rates (Sutton,
2013).
b. Mixed Data Results
i. Findings showed in some states that criminals with two
strikes against them had an increased chance of a new felony
conviction (Helland & Tabarrok, 2007).
ii. In California, the three strike legislation has reduced "felony
arrest rates among the class of criminals with two strikes by 17
to 20 percent" (Helland & Tabarrok, 2007). California is one of
the most well-known states to enact the law with, “36,043
‘second strike’ and 4,468 ‘third strike’ convictions in
California” (Eaton, 2003).
iii. Homicide rates increased short-term (and also long-term)
averaging "60 additional homicides occurred" short-term. “The
difference between three-strikes states and other states is
roughly 10 percentage points, which translates to some 1,400
extra murders per year in the three-strikes states” (Marvell &
Moody, 2001).
Counter argument: A shortcoming of the study indicated that
perhaps the increase in homicides for violent crimes is because
of an overall trend and not necessarily connected with the law.

Also noteworthy, states with the most severe three strike law,
had the least increase in homicide rates (Marvell & Moody,
2001).
III. Policy Effectiveness
a. Original Intention: The intended criminal is the violent anti-
social offender and states modified the law in their own way.
i. Strike Definition varies by state: The varied definitions
include: different sentencings lengths, parole eligibility, the
number of strikes required to trigger a mandatory sentence, the
nature of crimes that qualify as strikes, the time elapsed
between strikes, the type of felony that triggers the sentencing
enhancement, and the degree of discretion permitted in invoking
and applying the law (Eaton, 2003).
ii. No long-term studies showing effectiveness: Some studies
suggest recidivism has reduced while others studies suggest that
criminals with two strikes are more apt to kill their victims
knowing if caught and convicted, they would be sentenced to a
minimum of 25 years (Marvell & Moody, 2001).
Sutton (2013) found that the law was more punitive and
increased the defendant’s sentencing length and increased the
likelihood they would go to prison once tried.
b. Counterarguments:
i. Opponents view the law as a violation of the 8th amendment
considering some defendants are serving a life-sentence for a
non-violent offense (Eaton, 2003). Example of Norman
Williams stealing two hand drills for third strike offense
(Bazelon, 2010).
ii. Bias is possible because there are so many separate stages a
defendant has to go through in the criminal justice process
(Sutton, 2013).
iii. Studies do not account for incapacitation versus true
deterrence (Marvell and Moody, 2001).
iv. Unfair legal factors: For example, pretrial detention for
those who cannot afford bail may be viewed by officials as
defendants who need to stay in jail because they are more

dangerous, when in fact they don’t have the means to leave
(Sutton, 2013).
v. “The biggest category of crimes three strikers are convicted
for is simple drug possession. Most of the people convicted
under Three Strikes have not committed heinous crimes, just
crimes of poverty” (Kheel, 2012).
IV. Alternative
Solution
s:
a. Create a cohesive universal definition of the law applying
only to violent criminals who's strikes relate solely to causing
serious or potential injury or death to another person.
i. Strengths: amend the law so that someone with two strikes
who commits a nonserious or nonviolent felony would only be
sentenced to twice the usual length for that crime (Kheel, 2010)
Prosecutors use their discretion to get rid of strikes or not
prosecute a case as a strike to lessen eighth amendment
violation (Kheel, 2010).
ii. Weaknesses: Definition of violent criminal still vague and on
a case by case basis in court. “The justices said that fleeing
police custody in a vehicle could be a ‘violent felony’ under the
law’s definitions” (Barnes, 2011) .
b. Make the Three Strikes law inactive and create a focused
deterrence strategy for offenders (Braga & Weisburd, 2015).

i. Strength: “Focused deterrence strategies seek to change
offender behavior by understanding underlying violence-
producing dynamics and conditions that sustain recurring
violent gun injury problems and by implementing a blended
strategy of law enforcement, community mobilization, and
social service actions” (Braga & Weisburd, 2015).
ii. Weakness: “Criminal justice agencies, unfortunately, work
largely independent of each other, often at cross-purposes, often
without coordination, and often in an atmosphere of distrust and
dislike” effectively creating an unfocused deterrence strategy
that could lead to the same problems as three strikes (Braga &
Weisburd, 2015).
V. Policy Recommendations:
a. Make three strikes universal for each state that adopts the
law only pertaining to violent offenders who meet a certain
psychological classification for propensity of violence and who
cause (remove potential) serious or potential injury or death to
another person.
b. Cohesive definition of violent felony:
i. “Psychopathy as measured with the PCL-R was found to be a
strong risk factor for violent reconviction, with twice the risk
relative to that of nonpsychopaths” (Grann et al., 1999).
ii. In California, proposition 36 ended “life sentences for
criminals whose third strikes were not violent or serious. A
Standard University study released last month showed that the

1,000 inmates released under the measure are reoffending at a
lower rate than that of other newly freed prisoners in
California” (Fagan, 2013).
iii. Create a commission to keep defendants’ rights in check
constitutionally. “Adopt sweeping sentencing reform, including
the adoption of a sentencing commission” (Vitiello, 2004).
c. Criticism
i. “High-rate offenders slow down as they age; for example,
violent offenders’ criminal careers wane beginning at around 28
years of age (Vitiello, 2004).
ii. Fiscal cost is too high to house inmates. Overcrowding in
prisons is creating a higher financial cost, meanwhile recidivism
rates are not declining (Marvell and Moody, 2001).
iii. Studies are inconclusive as to how to measure three strike’s
effectiveness. it is much more difficult to quantify an individual
offender into separate variables and the likelihood that they
would be sentenced more severely depends on the cluster of
attributes they have as a whole (Sutton, 2013).
VI. Conclusions
a. The three strike law needs to be redefined as to what a strike
is so people convicted of petty crimes are not serving
disproportionate sentences (Bazelon, 2010).
b. It’s original intention of preventing repeat felons from
committing more violent acts can help save lives. Reforming
the third strike as a violent felony offense will keep the right

criminals in jail and those undeserving of a life sentence with
more appropriate punishment. "They were still able to benefit
from the appeals process, judicial discretion and diversion
programs. So if someone found themselves in for life, they
deserved it" (Fagan, 2013).
c. Criminals with psychopathic tendencies are more than likely
going to reoffend and the offense will be violent in nature
(Grann et al., 1999). Richard Allen Davis had just been
released from prison for kidnapping when he spotted Polly
Klaas (Fagan, 2013). “‘Most untreated sex offenders released
from prison go on to commit more offenses — indeed, as many
as 80 percent do’” (Yoder, 2016).
d. Long term studies need to evaluate true deterrence after
felons receive a strike and make sure that incapacitation is not
included as a result in order to make advancements in
recidivism (Marvell and Moody, 2001).
By creating a clear-cut definition of a strike applied only to
violent offenses that cause serious harm or bodily injury or
death, the eighth amendment will be upheld while placing
criminals who truly deserve a minimum 25 years to life where
they belong in prison. The hope of the three strike law looking
forward, is to prevent another two-time violent felon like
Richard Allen Davis from terrorizing and murdering an innocent
child like Polly Klaas. Her memory should serve as a reminder
that for some violent criminals, the likelihood to reoffend is

significant and a policy like three strikes could save lives if the
law was fine tuned to apply to a certain typology of offenders.
References
Barnes, R. (2011, June 09). Supreme Court continues to define
what constitutes a 'violent felony'.
Retrieved February 25, 2018, from
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-
continues-to-define-what-constitutes-a-violent-
felony/2011/06/09/AG9O3oNH_story.html?utm_term=.dd33cf3c
bea3
Bazelon, E. (2010, May 21). Arguing Three Strikes. Retrieved
February 25, 2018, from
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/23/magazine/23strikes-t.html
Braga, A. A., & Weisburd, D. L. (2012). The Effects of Focused
Deterrence Strategies on Crime:
A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Empirical
Evidence. Journal Of

Research In Crime & Delinquency, 49(3), 323-358.
doi:10.1177/0022427811419368
Eaton, L. (2003). Three Strikes and You're Out: Enhanced
Sentences for Repeat Offenders
Research Pathfinder. Legal Reference Services Quarterly, 22(4),
55-85. doi:10.1300/j113v22n04_04
Fagan, K. (2013, October 02). 20 years after Polly Klaas killing,
attitudes change. Retrieved
February 24, 2018, from
https://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/20-years-after-Polly-
Klaas-killing-attitudes-4861976.php
Grann, M., Långström, N., Tengström, A., & Kullgren, G.
(1999). Psychopathy (PCL-R) predicts
violent recidivism among criminal offenders with personality
disorders in Sweden. Law and Human Behavior,23(2), 205-217.
doi:10.1023/a:1022372902241
Helland, E., & Tabarrok, A. (2007). Does Three Strikes
Deter? Journal of Human
Resources,XLII(2), 309-330. doi:10.3368/jhr.xlii.2.309
Johnson, J. L., & Saint-Germain, M. A. (2005). Officer Down:
Implications of Three Strikes for
Public Safety. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 16(4), 443-460.
doi:10.1177/0887403405277001
Kheel, R. (2012). Three Strikes debate weighs effectiveness of
law against need for change. The

Bakersfield Californian. Retrieved February 25, 2018, from
EBSCOhost .
Marvell, Thomas B., & Moody, Carlisle E, a. (2001). The Lethal
Effects of Three‐Strikes
Laws. The Journal Of Legal Studies, (1), 89.
doi:10.1086/468112
Sutton, John R., (2013). Symbol and Substance: Effects of
California's Three Strikes Law on
Felony Sentencing. Law & Society Review, (1), 37.
doi:10.1111/lasr.12001
Vitiello, M. (2004). Reforming Three Strikes'
Excesses. Washington University Law
Review,82(1). Retrieved February 24, 2018, from
https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1
360&context=law_lawreview.
Yoder, S. (2016, May 27). What's the Real Rate of Sex-Crime
Recidivism? Retrieved February
25, 2018, from https://psmag.com/news/whats-the-real-rate-of-
sex-crime-recidivism
Redefining Three Strikes
Introduction:

What might have appeared as a rite of passage for most young
girls, turned anything, but typical on the night of October 1st,
1993 at a residence in Petaluma, California. Imagine the scene,
12-year old Polly Klaas along with her two friends having the
time of their lives playing dress up and board games while
Klaas’ mother is fast asleep in the next room. Out of nowhere,
the girls glance up in terror as a bearded man holding a knife
ushers them to remain quiet. Richard Allen Davis, a two-time
convicted violent felon ties the two girls up and kidnaps Klaas
at knifepoint right in her own living room with her mother a few
feet away. Unbeknownst to authorities, Davis is seen wandering
around a wooded property after his car accidentally crashes into
a ditch. The police arrive to assist and notice clothes strewn
around the woods, but take no further action and let Davis leave
while Polly was hidden nearby in the darkness. Two months
later, despite a nationwide manhunt for Polly, she is discovered
with her nightgown shoved up to her waist strangled to death
(Fagan, 2013). A public outcry for justice after Polly’s
horrifying murder ignited Californians to vote in favor for what
is now known as the three strike law enacted on March 4th,
1994 in the hopes of permanently reducing recidivism rates
especially among violent offenders (Helland & Tabarrok, 2007).
The legislation, just as the name implies in baseball, sentences a
criminal to a minimum 25-year sentence to life after their third
offense, or strike. California, being the most aggressive state to

adhere to the legislation opted to define a strike to include
felonies and misdemeanors while other states differ on their
definition of what constitutes a strike (Eaton, 2003). Critics
claim that the three strike law is undefined which leads to a
violation of a criminal’s eighth amendment right against cruel
and unusual punishment coupled with a fiscal cost too high, that
is overcrowding prisons and the legal system. Another cause
for concern with the policy is the lack of conclusive wide-
spread data proving that recidivism rates among convicted
felons is reduced by three strikes (Eaton, 2003). The three strike
law was intended to keep violent reoffenders behind bars and
maintain public safety; however, what defines a strike and the
variety in which each state adopts the law has spread obscurity
among the legal system and challenged the law’s effectiveness.
A comprehensive wide-spread look will be taken to evaluate the
policy’s intended target and goal, its consequences, and chance
for long-term universal success to reduce recidivism among a
certain typology of offenders.
II. Review of Previous Research
a. Three schools of thought: There are the governmental
advocates who believe the law will help fight crime and reduce
costs associated with public safety, the second school involves
critics who believe the law will create injustices for those tried
under it, overcrowding in jails and increased government costs

to uphold it. The third school is one of neutrality as the law is
viewed as a “symbolic accomplishment” in the fight towards
crime, but neither wreaks havoc on the criminal justice system
nor makes advancements in reduced recidivism rates (Sutton,
2013).
b. Mixed Data Results
i. Findings showed in some states that criminals with two
strikes against them had an increased chance of a new felony
conviction (Helland & Tabarrok, 2007).
ii. In California, the three strike legislation has reduced "felony
arrest rates among the class of criminals with two strikes by 17
to 20 percent" (Helland & Tabarrok, 2007). California is one of
the most well-known states to enact the law with, “36,043
‘second strike’ and 4,468 ‘third strike’ convictions in
California” (Eaton, 2003).
iii. Homicide rates increased short-term (and also long-term)
averaging "60 additional homicides occurred" short-term. “The
difference between three-strikes states and other states is
roughly 10 percentage points, which translates to some 1,400
extra murders per year in the three-strikes states” (Marvell &
Moody, 2001).
Counter argument: A shortcoming of the study indicated that
perhaps the increase in homicides for violent crimes is because
of an overall trend and not necessarily connected with the law.

Also noteworthy, states with the most severe three strike law,
had the least increase in homicide rates (Marvell & Moody,
2001).
III. Policy Effectiveness
a. Original Intention: The intended criminal is the violent anti-
social offender and states modified the law in their own way.
i. Strike Definition varies by state: The varied definitions
include: different sentencings lengths, parole eligibility, the
number of strikes required to trigger a mandatory sentence, the
nature of crimes that qualify as strikes, the time elapsed
between strikes, the type of felony that triggers the sentencing
enhancement, and the degree of discretion permitted in invoking
and applying the law (Eaton, 2003).
ii. No long-term studies showing effectiveness: Some studies
suggest recidivism has reduced while others studies suggest that
criminals with two strikes are more apt to kill their victims
knowing if caught and convicted, they would be sentenced to a
minimum of 25 years (Marvell & Moody, 2001).
Sutton (2013) found that the law was more punitive and
increased the defendant’s sentencing length and increased the
likelihood they would go to prison once tried.
b. Counterarguments:
i. Opponents view the law as a violation of the 8th amendment
considering some defendants are serving a life-sentence for a

non-violent offense (Eaton, 2003). Example of Norman
Williams stealing two hand drills for third strike offense
(Bazelon, 2010).
ii. Bias is possible because there are so many separate stages a
defendant has to go through in the criminal justice process
(Sutton, 2013).
iii. Studies do not account for incapacitation versus true
deterrence (Marvell and Moody, 2001).
iv. Unfair legal factors: For example, pretrial detention for
those who cannot afford bail may be viewed by officials as
defendants who need to stay in jail because they are more
dangerous, when in fact they don’t have the means to leave
(Sutton, 2013).
v. “The biggest category of crimes three strikers are convicted
for is simple drug possession. Most of the people convicted
under Three Strikes have not committed heinous crimes, just
crimes of poverty” (Kheel, 2012).
IV. Alternative

ReferencesBarrenger, S., Draine, J., Angell, B., & Herman, D. (2.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to ReferencesBarrenger, S., Draine, J., Angell, B., & Herman, D. (2.docx

Similar to ReferencesBarrenger, S., Draine, J., Angell, B., & Herman, D. (2.docx (13)

More from lorent8

More from lorent8 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

ReferencesBarrenger, S., Draine, J., Angell, B., & Herman, D. (2.docx