crju

CHAPTER 10

10 Probation, Parole, and Intermediate Sanctions LEARNING OBJECTIVES After studying this chapter, you will be able to... 10-1 Explain the justifications for community based corrections programs 10-2 Describe the three general categories of conditions placed on a probationer.10-3 Identify the main differences between probation and parole 10-4 Explain which factors influence the decision to grant parole. 10List the three levels of home monitoring After you finish this chapter, go to PAGES 225-226 for STUDY TOOLS Family Ties Reun ng tirar enda minas twenty etuming home from a barbecue at four-year-old Katie Daly skidded on wet gravel and lost control of the all-terrain vehide she was driving Hernineteenyear-old cousin, Annie Daly, was thrown from the passenger seat and died in a hospital four hours lates. At the time of the accident, Katies blood alcohol level was well over the states legal limit, and she was charged with felony aggravated driving under the influence (DUI. Given her family connection to the victim, local prosecutors agreed to a plea deal in which Katie would be spared prison, instead receiving a punishment of probation for her crim eChampaign County judge Richard Kaus had other ideas Despite impassioned pleas for leniency from Annie's parents and brother, Klaus rejected the plea bargain and sentenced Katie to three and a half years in prison for reckless homicide. Under the law. It is not a mitigating factor that a family member 10-1 WHY DO WE NEEDCOMMUNITY CORRECTIONS? died. The loss to society is the same whether Annie was killed by a family member or a stranger, Kaus explained This is absolutely a deterrable crime andIt must be deterred. It is the duty of the court to see that it is det erredProsecutors and Katie's defense attomeys joined forces to appeal Klaus's decision Noting Katie's youth, her lack of a criminal record, and the effect of the incarceration on her family, including her Infant son, the appeals brief stated, "A prison sentence in this case would not be Katie Daly was eventually sentenced to probation for killing her cousin Annie in an alcohol-related accident involving an all-terrain vehicle such as the one shown here. What is your opinion of Judge Richard Klaus's justification for initially sistencing Daly to a prison term> In overturning Judge Richard Klaus's sentence of Katie Daly, the Fourth District Appellate Court of Illinois scolded the judge for focusing on incarceration and ignoring the range of sentencing possibilities called for by the facts of the case. As this chapter will make clear, the range of sentencing possibilities for American judges includes numerous options that keep offenders out of prison and jail. For instance, about 3.9 million offend. ers such as Daly are presently serving their sentences in the community on probation rather than behind bars. In addition, approdimately 650,000 convicts in the United of any benefit to society, the defendant, or to our system of justice in December 2014. an linois appellate court agreed, nuing that Klaus had abused his discretion by putting the defendant behind bars. After six months in prison Katie was freed and resentenced to thirty months of probation. According to state's attorney Julia Reitz, the intent of the appellate court was not to minimize the seriousness of the Dul aspect but more to focus on Katie's rehabilitative potential States have been paroled, meaning that they are finishing their prison sentences on the outside under the supervision of correctional officers."America, says University of Minnesota law professor Michael Tonry, is preoccupied with the absolute severity of punishment and the widespread view that only imprisonment counts. ** Consequently, community corrections such as probation and parole are often considered a less severe, and therefore a less worthy, alternative to imprisonment. In reality, community con rections are crucial to our criminal justice system. One in fifty adults in this country is living under community Community Corrections The correctional supervision of offenders in the community as an alternative to prison orales CHAPTER 10 Probation and med Sanctions 207 tha ar the mule meo in pa orja fully offend mem Reintegral focuses on pre community Diversion tovert those prison and Intermediate 208 PART 4 supervision, and few criminal Justice matters are more pressing than the need to successfully reintegrate these offenders into society. 10-1a Reintegration LO10-1A very small percentage of all convicted offenders have committed crimes that warrant life imprisonment or capital punishment. Most, at some point, will return to the community. Consequently, according to one group of experts, the task of the corrections systemincludes building or rebuilding solid ties between the offender and the community, Integrating or reintegrating the offender into community life-restoring family ties, obtaining employment and an education, securing in the larger sense a place for the offender in the routinefunctioning of society." Considering that some studies have shown higher recidivism rates for offenders who are subjected to prison culture, a frequent justification of community-based corrections is that they help to reintegrate the offender into society. Reintegration has a strong theoretical basis in rehabilitative theories of punishment. An offender is generally considered to be rehabilitated when he or she no longer represents a threat to other members of the community and therefore is believed to be fit to live in that community. In the context of this chapter and the two that follow, it will also be helpful to see reintegration as a process through which criminal justice officials such as probation and parole officers provide the offender with incentives to follow the rules of s ociet yThese incentives can be positive, such as enrolling the offender in a drug treatment program. They can also be negative in particular, the threat of return to prison or jail for failure to comply. In all instances, criminal justice professionals must carefully balance the needs of the individual offender against the rights of law-abiding members of the community Reintegration A goal of corrections that focuses on preparing the offender for a return to the community unmarred by further criminal behavior. Diversion in the context of corrections, a strategy to divert those offenders who qualify away from prison and jail and toward community-based and Intermediate sanctions. 10-16 Diversion Another justification for community-based corrections, based on practical considerations, is diversion. As you kre already aware, many criminal offenses fall into the category of "petty," and it is well-nigh impossible, as wellunnecessary, to Imprison every offender for every offense. Community-based corrections are an impor tant means of diverting criminals to alternative modes of punishment so that scarce Incarceration resources are consumed by only the most dangerous criminals. In his "strainer analogy, corrections expert Paul H. Hahn likens this process to the workings of a kitchen strainer. With each "shake" of the corrections "strainer," the less serious offenders are diverted from Incarcerstion. At the end, only the most serious convicts remain i n pri sonThe diversionary role of community-based punishments has become more pronounced as prisons and fails have filled up over the past three decades. In fact, probationers and parolees now account for about 70 percent of all adults in the American corrections systems. CAREER TIP In Nevada, judges can sentence problem gamblers to treatment rather than prison for gambling related wrongdoing. This option has created a statewide demand for pathological gambling therapists, who help problem gamblers overcome their addictions. Unalas street posures tchats the two shown here are often Greated activities ind offered access to treatment and rehabilitation og alle might society benefit iftuch ofenders ale topics fogsor through these tice os diversion program? 10-1c The "Low-Cost Alternative" Not all of the recent expansion of community corrections can be attributed to acceptance of its theoretical underpinnings. Many politicians and criminal justice officials who do not look favorably on ideas such as reintegration and diversion have embraced programs to keep nonvio lent offenders out of prison. The reason is simple: economics. The cost of constructing and maintaining prisons and jails, as well as housing and caring for inmates, has placed a great deal of pressure on corrections budgets across the country. States spend an estimated $52 billion a year on their corrections systems, most of which goes to prison operating costs. Community corrections offer an enticing financial alternative to imprisonment. The Bureau of Prisons estimates that the federal government saves about $25,600 annually by shifting a nonviolent offender from Incarceration to supervised release." The average yearly cost of housing an inmate in Nebraska is $35,169, compared with $3,760 for community corrections." Prison admissions in North Carolina declined by 21 percent from 2011 to 2014, as state corrections officials moved nonviolent offenders to probation and parole. In the process, the state's annual corrections budget shrank by $50 million." 10-2 HOW DOESPROBATION WORK! As Figure 10.1 shows, probation is the most common form of punishment in the United States. Although it is administer differently in various jurisdictions, probation can be generally defined asthe legal status of an offender who, after being con Victed of a crime, has been directed by the sentencing court to remain in the community under the supervision of a probation service for a designated period of time and subject to certain conditions imposed by the court or by law. The theory behind probation is that certain offenders can be treated more economically and humanely by putting them under controls while still allowing them to live in the community. One of the advantages of probation has been that it provides for the rehabilitation of the offender while saving society the costs of incarceration. Despite probation's widespread use, certain participants in the criminal Justice system question its ability to reach its rehabilitative goals. Crities point to the immense FIGURE 10.1 PROBATION IN AMERICANCORRECTIONS Jail 10% Prison 22% Parole 12% Probation 56% As you can see, the majority of convicts under the control of the American corrections system are on probation. Sovet buen distanta Corection Populemon the Sites 2013 sington, DC: US Departmestic December 2016 Legea number of probationers and the fact that many of them are violent felons as evidence that the system is out of control." Supporters contend that nothing is wrong with probation in principle, but admit that its execution must be adjusted to meet the goals of modern corrections." 10-2a Sentencing and Probation Probation is basically an arrangement between sentencing authorities and the offender. In traditional proba tion, the offender agrees to comply with certain terms for a specified amount of time in return for serving the sentence in the community. One of the primary benefits for the offender, besides not being sent to a correctional facility, is that the length of the probationary period is usually considerably shorter than the length of a prison term (see Figure 10.2). ALTERNATIVE SENTENCING ARRANGEMENTS The traditional form of probation is not the only arrangement that can be made. A judge can hand down a suspended sentence, under which a defendant who Probation Acriminal sanction in which a convictis lowed to remain in the community rather than be imprisoned Suspended Sentence Adicially imposed condition in which an offender is sentenced after being convicted of a crime, but is not required to begin serving the sentence immediately CHAPTER 10 Probation, Pole and intermediate actions 209 nd po of of tor is Split Sen Gation in community 210 PAH FIGURE 10.2 AVERAGE LENGTH OF SENTENCE: PRISON VERSUS PROBATION 100 Average Maximum Sentang Violent Offenses Property Orlenses Time in prison Time on probation Drug Offenses Public Order Offenses court to be released on probation. Shock incarceration is discussed more fully later in the chapter. Intermittent incarceration. With Intermittent incarceration, the offender spends a certain amount of time each week, usually during the weekend, in a jail, workhouse, or other government institution. Split sentences are popular with judges, as they combine the treatment aspects of probation with the "punishment" aspects of incarceration. According to the U. S. Department of Justice, about a fifth of all probationers are also sentenced to some form of incarceration. CHOOSING PROBATION Generally, research has shown that offenders are most likely to be denied probati on if the yAre convicted on multiple charges. ► Were on probation or parole at thetime of the arrest. As you can see, the average probation sentence is much shor ter tha n theHave two or more prior average prison sentence for most crimes. convictions Source Bureausta Statistics Febny Defendere in State Courts X09-Stanical Tools Washington, DC: US Depart mentorustic December 2013, Table 2. page 30 and Table 27. page 31► Are addicted to narcotics. Seriously injured the victim of the has been convicted and sentenced to be incarcerated iscrime. not required to serve the sentence. Instead, the judge Used a weapon during the commission of the crime." puts the offender on notice, keeping open the option of reinstating the original sentence a nd send ing theAs might be expected, the chances of a felon being offender to prison or jail if he or she reoffends. In pracsentenced to probation are highly dependent on theseriousness of his or her crime. Only 19 percent of protice, suspended sentences are quite similar to probation. bationers in the United States have committed a violent Judges can also combine probation with incarceration. Such sentencing arrangements include: crime, including domestic violence and sex offenses. Themajority of probationers have been convicted of prop► Split sentences. In split sentence probation, alsoerty crimes, drug offenses, or public order crimes such known as shock probation, the offender is sentencedas drunk driving. to a specific amount of time in priso n or ja ll, to beProbation permits the judicial system to recognize followed by a period of probation. that some offenders are less blameworthy than others. Shock incarceration. In this arrangement, an offender Several years ago, for example, a judge in Arizona found is sentenced to prison or jail with the understandinghimself with the difficult task of punishing eighty-sirthat after a period of time, she or he may petition the year-old George Sanders for fatally shooting Virginia, hís eighty-one-year-old wife. Virginia, who was sufferingfrom a painful health condition, had begged George to Split Sentence Probation A sentence that consists of incarend her life. In handing down his sentence of two years ceration in a prison or jail, followed by a probationary period in theprobation, Judge John Ditsworth said that his decision communitytempered "justice with meroy 17 210 PART 4 Corrections 10-21 Conditions of Probation Ajudge may decide to impose certain conditions as part of a probation sentence. These conditions represent a com tract between the judge and the offender, in which the latter agrees that if she or he does not follow certain rules, probation may be revoked. Revocation is the formal process by which probation is ended and a probationer is punished for his or her wrongdoing, often by being sent to jail or prison for the ariginal term decided by the court. Judges have a great deal of discretion to impose any terms of probation that they feel are necessary. In the case that opened this chapter, for example, Champaign County (Illinois) judge Tom Difanis ordered Katie Daly not to use any alcohol or illegal drugs during her thirty-month probationary period. He also prohibited her from entering an establishment whose primary purpose is selling alcohol, and required her to wear an alcohol-monitoring device for the first year of her supervised sentence. PRINCIPLES OF PROBATION A judge's personal philosophy is often reflected in the probation conditions that she or he creates for probationers. In In re Quirk (1997)." for example, the Louisiana Supreme Court upheld the ability of a trial judge to impose church attendance as a condition of probation. Though judges have a great deal of discretion in setting the conditions of probation, they do operate under several guiding principles. First, the conditions must be related to the dual purposes of probation, which most federal and state courts define as (1) the rehabilitation of the probationer and (2) the protection of the community. Second, the conditions must not violate the U. S. Constitution, as probationers are generally entitled to the same constitutional rights as other prisoners."Of course, probationers do give up certain constitutional rights when they consent to the terms of probation Most probationers, for example, agree to spot checks of their homes for contraband such as drugs or weapons, and they therefore have a diminished expe ctation of privac yIn United States e Knights (2001)." the United States Supreme Court upheld the actions of deputy sheriffs in Napa County, California, who searched a probationer's home without a warrant or probable cause. The unanimous decision was based on the premise that because those on probation are more likely to commit crimes, law enforcement agents "may therefore justifiably focus on probationers in a way that they do not on the ordinary citizen." TYPES OF CONDITIONS Obviously, probationers who break the law are very likely to have their probation revoked. Other, less serious infrac L010-2tions may also result in revocation. The conditions placed on a probationer fall into three general categories: Standard conditions, which are imposed on all probationers. These include reporting regularly to the probation officer, notifying the agency of any change of address, not leaving the jurisdiction without per mission, and remaining employed. Punitive conditions, which usually reflect the seriousness of the offense and are intended to increase the punishment of the offender. Such conditions include fines, community service, restitution, drug testing and home confinement (discussed later): Treatment conditions, which are imposed to reverse patterns of self-destructive behavior. Such treatment generally includes counseling for drug and alcohol abuse, anger management, and mental health issues, and is a component of approximately 27 percent of probation sentences in this country."Some observers feel that judges have too much discretion in imposing overly restrictive conditions that no person, much less one who has exhibited antisocial tendencies, could meet. Citing prohibitions on drinking liquor, gambling, and associating with "undesirables, as well as requirements such as meeting early curfews, the late University of Delaware professor Carl B. Klockars claimed that if probation rules were taken seriously, "very few probationers would complete their terms without violation.-23As the majority of probationers do complete their terms successfully, Klockars's statement suggests that either probation officers are unable to determine that violations are taking place, or many of them are exercising a great deal of discretion in reporting minor probation violations. Perhaps the officers realize that violating probationers for every single "slip-up" is unrealistic and would add to the already significant problem of jail and prison overcrowding 10-2c The Supervisory Role of the Probation Officer The probation officer has two basic roles. The first is investigative and consists of conducting the presentence investigation (PSI), which was discussed in Chapter 9. The second is supervisory and begins as soon as the offender has been sentenced to probation. In smaller probation Revocation The formal process that follows the blue of a probationer or parole to comply with the terms of his or her probation or parole che resulting in the probationers incarceration0 CUPTER 10 Motion, Pole and intermediate Sanctions 211 1 Aut who d d is O he der lon obation 211 PROBATION OFFICER Job Description: Work with offenders or clients who have been sentenced to probation and will not go to prison or Jall for their offenses. In some departments, Investigate offender backgrounds, write presentence reports, and recommend sentences. Includes extensive fieldwork to meet with and monitor offenders. May be required to carry a firearm or other weapon for protection. What kind of Training Is Required? A bachelor's degree in criminal justice, social work, psychology, or a related field. Must be at least twenty-one years old, have no felony convictions, and have strong writing and interview skills. Experience in multicultural outreach is a plus. Annual Salary Range? $30,000-$80,000 Car ePress GET TING LINKEDIN A rec entLinkedin posting fora deputy chief probation office in Alameda County, California focuses on the importancro community relation skills in the professor Tedeal candidate for the past has pasion and sensitivity fortgereeds of Alameda County etboltally coltutally detserban population and a truck record of building trustund consensus among coworkers and dients agencies, individual officers perform both tasks. In larger jurisdictions, the trend has been toward separating the responsibilities, with incestigating officers handling the PSI and line officers concentrating on supervision. Supervisory policies vary and are often a reflec tion of whether the authority to administer probation services is decentralized (under local, judicial control) or centralized (under administrative control). In any circumstance, however, certain basic principles of supervision apply. Starting with a preliminary interview, the probation officer establishes a relationship with the offender. This relationship is based on the mutual goal of both parties: the successful completion of the probationary period. Just because the line officer and the offender have the same goal, however, does not necessarily mean that cooperation will be a feature of probation, Authority The power designated to an agent of the law over a person who has broken the law. 212 PART 4 Corrections THE USE OF AUTHORITY Not surprisingly, research shows that the ideal officer-offender relationship is based on mutual respect, honesty, and trust." In reality, these qualities are often hard to maintain between probution officers and their clients. Any incentive an offender might have to be completely truthful with a line officer is marred by one simple fact: self-reported wrongdoing can be used to revoke probation. Even probubon officers whose primary mission is to rehabilitate are under institutional pressure to punish their clients for violating conditions of probation. One officer deals with this situation by telling his clientsthat I'm here to help them, to get them a job, and whatever else I can do. But I tell them too that I have a family to support and that if they get too far off track, I cant afford to put my job on the line for them. I'm goin g to have to violate themIn the absence of trust, most probation officers rely on their authority to guide an offender successfully through the sentence. An officer's authority, or ability to influence a person's actions without resorting to force, is based partially on her or his power to revoke probetion. It also reflects her or his ability to impose a number of lesser sanctions. For example, if a probationer fails to attend a required alcohol treatment program, the officer can send him or her to a lockup or detention center, overnight. To be successful, a probation officer must establish this authority early in the relationship because it is the primary tool for persuading the probationer to behave in an acceptable manner. THE CASELOAD DILEMMA Even the most balanced, "firm but fair" approach to probation can be defeated by the problem of excessive caseloads. A caseload is the number of dients a probation officer is responsible for at any one time. Heavy probation caseloads seem inevitable: unlike a prison cell, a probation officer can always take just one more client. Furthermore, the ideal caseload size is very difficult to determine because different offenders require different levels of supervision."The consequences of disproportionate probation officer-probationer ratios are self-evident, however, When burdened with large caseloads, probation officers find it practically impossible to rigorously enforce the conditions imposed on their clients. Lack of surveillance leads to lack of control, which can undermine the very basis of a probationary system. Between 2003 and 2014, the number of federal pro bation officers declined by 5 percent. Due to the stricter federal sentencing guidelines discussed the previous chapter, the number of federal probationers increased by 19 percent over that time period. Furthermore, the rolls of federal probationers with mental health treatment conditions and substance abuse treatment con ditions expanded significantly placing even more time pressure on federal probation officers. 10-20 Revocation of Probation The probation period can end in one of two ways. Either the probationer successfully fulfills the conditions of the sentence, or the probationer misbehaves and probation is revoked, resulting in a prison or jail term. The decision of whether to revoke after a technical violation such as failing to report a change of address or testing positive for drug use is often made at the discretion of the probation officer and is therefore the focus of controversy (See the f eature Discretion in ActionJudgment Call to learn more about the issues surrounding revocation)As we have seen, probationers do not always enjoy the same protections under the U. S. Constitutions other members of society. The United States Supreme Court has not stripped these offenders of all rights, however. In Mempa a Rhay (1967)," the Court ruled that probationers are entitled to an attorney during the revocation process. Then, in Morrisseye. Brewer (1972) and Gagnon a Scarpelli (1973), the Court established a three-stage procedure by which the limited" due process rights of probationers must be protected in potential revocation situations: Preliminary hearing. In this appearance before a "disinterested person" (often a judge), the facts of the violation or arrest are presented, and it is determined whether probable cause for revoking probation exsts. This hearing can be walved by the probationer. Revocation hearing During this hearing the probation agency presents evidence to support its claim of violation, and the probationer can attempt to refute this evidence. The probationer has the right to know the charges being brought against him or her. Furthermore, probationers can testify on their own behalf and present witnesses in their favor, as well as confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses. A "neutral and detached body must hear the evidence and rule on the validity of the proposed revocation. Revocation sentencing. If the presiding body rules against the probationer, then the judge must decide whether to impose incarceration and for what length of time. In a revocation hearing dealing with technical violations, the judge will often reimpose probation with stricter terms or intermediate sanctions. In effect, this is a "bare-bones approach to due process. Most of the rules ofience that govern regular trials do not apply to revocation hearings. Probation officers are not, for example, required to read offenders their Miranda rights before questioning them about crimes they may have committed during probation. In Minnesota e Murphy (1984)." the Supreme Court ruled that a meeting between probation officer and client does not equal custody and, therefore, the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination does not apply, either Caseload The number of individ probationers or paroles under the supervision of a probation or parole office Technical Violation An action taken by a probationer or parole that although not be the terms of probation or parole as designated by the court CHAPTER 10 Probation, Parole and intermediate Sanctions 213 to pe th pro pur the 214 PA Discretion in Action A JUDGMENT CALL THE SITUATION You are a probation officer. Your client, Alain, was convicted of selling drugs and given a split sentence three years in prison and three years on probation. You meet Alain for the first time two days after his release, and you are immediately concernedabout his mental health. His mother confirms your worries, telling you that Alain needs help. You refer him to a psychiatric hospital, but the officials there determine that he does not require mental health treatment at this time. Several weeks later, Alain's mother tells you that he is staying out late at night and "hanging out with the wrong crowd," both violations of his probation agreement. After he tests positive for marijuana, you warn Alain that, after one more violation, you will revoke his probation and send him back to prison. He tells you that he is "feeling agitated" and "having intermittent rage."You refer him to a substance abuse and mental health treatment facility, where he tests positive for marijuana once again. 10-2e Does Probation Work? On March 11, 2014, police in Berkeley County, West Virginia, arrested William Jackson for placing a plastic bag over seventy-two-year-old Martha Tyler's head and suffocating her to death. At the time of the murder, Jackson was on probation for drug charges and grand larceny. Indeed, probationers are responsible for a significant amount of crime. According to recent data, 11 percent of all suspects arrested for violent crimes (and 13 percent of those arrested for mur der) were on probation at the time of their apprehension. Such statistics raise a critical question—is probation worthwhile? To measure the effectiveness of probation, one must first establish its purpose. Generally, as we saw earlier, the goal of probation is to reintegrate 214 PART 4 Corrections THE LAW For any number of reasons, but particularly for the falled drug tests, you can start revocation proceedings against Alain. These proceedings will almost certainly conclude with his return to prison. WHAT WOULD YOU DO7 On the one hand, Alain has violated the terms of his probation agreement numerous times. On the other hand, he has been convicted of only one crime-a drug violation and you have no evidence that he is behaving violently or poses a danger to himself or others. Furthermore, Alain has strong family support and is willing to enter treatment for his substance abuse problems. Do Alain's technical violations cause you to begin the revocation process? Why or why not? To see how a Fairfield County. Connecticut probation officer deat with a similar situation, go to Example 10.1 in Appendix A.) A Wareham Massachusetts, penso chce ched heraprcontinent Schedu eWestern obater and direkte oferu difficult to diese and divert as many offenders as possible while at the same time protecting the public. Specifically, probation and other community corrections programs are evaluated by their success in preventing recidioism--the eventual rearrest of the probationer. Given that most probationers are first-time, nonviolent offenders, the system is not designed to prevent relatively rare outbursts of violence, such as the murder committed by William Jackson. RISK FACTORS FOR RECIDIVISM About 15 percent of all probationers are returned to prison or jail before the end of their probationary terms. There are several risk factors that make a probationer more likely to recidivate, including the following 1. Antisocial personality patterns, meaning that theprobationer is impulsive, pleasure seeking, restlessly aggressive, or irritable. 2. Procriminal attitudes, such as negative opinionsof authority and the law, as well as a tendency torationalize prior criminal behavior. 3. Social supports for crime induding friends who areoffenders and a living environment lacking in positive role models. Other important risk factors for recidivism include substance abuse and unemployment. By concentrating resources on those probationers who cribit these risk factors, probation departments can succeed in lowering caseloads and overall recidivism rates. "SWIFT AND CERTAIN" One of the problems with traditional methods of sanctioning probation violations is the length of the proceedings. If, for example, a probationer fails a drug test, it may take months before a penalty is enforced, weakening the link between wrongdoing and punishment. As criminologist James Q. Wilson pointed out, one does not discipline a child by saying, "Because you've misbehaved). you have a 50-50 chance nine months from now of being grounded. A number of probation departments have implemented strategies that operate on the principle of providing "swift and certain" sanctions for probation violations. Perhaps the most successful of these strategies is Hawaii's Opportunity Probation with Enforcement (HOPE) program. The rules of HOPE are simple Each substance abuse probationer must call the courthouse every day to learn if she or he is required to come in for urine tests for drugs, or urinalysis. If drugs are found in the probationer's system during one of these frequent tests, a short jail term-one to two weeksis automatically served. HOPE has resulted in large reductions in positive drug tests by probationers, and its fifteen hundred participants are significantly less likely to be rearrested than those not in the program." 10-3 HOW DOES PAROLE WORK? At any given time, about 850,000 Americans are living in the community on parole, or the conditional release of a prisoner after a portion of his or her sentence has been served behind bars. Parole allows the corrections system to continue to supervise an offender who is no longer incarcerated. As long as parolees follow the conditions of their parole, they are allowed to finish their terms outside the prison. If parolees break the terms of their early release, however, they face the risk of being returned to a penal institution. Parole is based on three concepts. 1. Grace. The prisoner has no right to be given an earlyrelease, but the government has granted her or himthat privilege. 2. Contract of consent. The government and theparolee enter into an arrangement whereby the latter agrees to abide by certain conditions in returnfor continued freedom. 3. Custody. Technically, though no longer incarcerated. the parolee is still the responsibility of the state. Parole is an extension of corrections Because of good-time credits and parole, most prisoners do not serve their entire sentence in prison. In fact, the average felon serves only about half of the term handed down by the court 10-3a Comparing Probation and Parole LO10-3Both probation and parole operate under thebasic assumption that the offender serves her or his time in the community rather than in a prison or jail. The main differences between the two concepts which sound confusingly similar--involve their circumstances. Parole The condonase of an inmate before or her sentence has expired O CHAPTER 10 Pobono, and Sanctions 215 CEE ter ook Parole that astabil FIGURE Basic Timing Auctor Charac offe Probation combine th above. 216 PART 4 sence 215 Probation is a sentence handed down by a judge following conviction and usually does not include incarceration. Parole is a conditional release from prison and occurs after an offender has already served some time in a correctional facility. (See Figure 10.3 for clarification.) CONDITIONS OF PAROLE In many ways, parole supervision is similar to probation supervision. Like probationers, offenders who are granted parole are placed under the supervision of community corrections officers and required to follow certain conditions. Parole condtions often mirror probation conditions. All parolees, for example, must comply with the law, and they are gener ally responsible for reporting to their parole officer at certain intervals. The frequency of these visits, along with the other terms of parole, is spelled out in the parole contract, which sets out the agreement between the state and the paroled offender. Under the terms of the contract, the state agrees to conditionally release the inmate, and the future parolee agrees that her or his conditional release will last only as long as she or he abides by the contract. Parole Contract An agreement between the state and the offender that establishes the conditions of parole FIGURE 10,3 PROBATION VERSUS PAROLE Basc Definition Timing Authorty Characteristics offenders Probation PAROLE REVOCATION About a quarter of parolees return to prison before the end of their parole period, most because they were convicted of a new offense or had their parole revoked." Property crimes are the most common reason that both male and female parolees return to incarceration, and men on parole are twice as likely as their female counterparts to have their parole revoked for a violent crime. Parole revocation is similar In many aspects to probation revocation. If the parolee commits a new crime, then a return to prison is very likely. If, however, the individual commits a technical violation by breaking a condition of parole, then parole authorities have discretion as to whether revocation proceedings should be initiated. A number of states, including Michigan, Missouri, and New York, have taken steps to avoid reincarcerating paroloes for technical violations as part of their continuing efforts to reduce prison populations."When authorities do attempt to revoke parole for a technical violation, they must provide the parolee with a revocation hearing. Although this hearing does not provide the same due process protections as a criminal trial, the parole does have the right to be notified of the charges, to present witnesses, to speak in his or her defense, and to question any hostile witnesses (so long as such questioning would not place these witnesses An alternative to imprisonmerit in which a person who has been convicted of a crime is allowed to serve his or her sentence in the community subject to certain conditions and supervision by a probation officer The offerder is sentenced to a probationary termin place of a prison or jaf term. If the offenders breaks the conditions of probation, he or she's sent to prison or jail. Therefore, probation generally occurs before imprisonment Probation is under the domain of the judiciary. A Judge decides whether to sentence a convict to probation, and a judge determine whether a probation violation war cants revocation and incarceration As a number of studies have stown, probationers are not mally less involved in the criminal festyle. Most of them are first time offenders who have committed nonvio lent crimes. Parole An early release from a correctional facility in which the convicted offender is given the chance to spend the remainder of her or his sentence under supervision in the community Parole sa form of early release. Therefore parole occurs after an offender has spent time behind bars. Parole often falls under the domain of the parole board. This administrative body determine whether the prisoner qualifies for early release and the conditions under which the parole must be served Mary proces have spent months or even years in prison and besides abdng by conditions of pokemust make the difficult transition to 'fe on the outside Probation and parole have many aspects in common. In fact, probation and parole are so similar that many jurisdictions combine them into a single agency. There are, however, some important distinctions between the two systems, as noted above. 216 PART 4 Corrections in danger). In the first stage of the hearing, the parole authorities determine whether there is probable cause to believe that a violation occurred. Then, they decide whether to return the parolee to prison. PROBATION AND PAROLE OFFICERS Unlike police officers or sherifts' deputies, probation and parole officers generally do not wear uniforms. Instead, they have badges that identify their position and agency. The duties of probation officers and parole officers are so similar that manysmall jurisdictions combine the two posts into a single position. Given the supervisory nature of their professions, probation and parole officers are ultimately responsible for protecting the community by keeping their clients from committing crimes. There is also an element of social work in their duties, and these officers must constantly balance the needs of the community with the needs of the offender. Parole officers in particular are expected to help the parolee readjust to life outside the correctional institution by helping her or him find a place to live and a job, and seeing that she or he receives any treatment that may be necessary 10-30 Discretionary Release As you may recall from Chapter 9, corrections systems are classified by sentencing procedure-indeterminate or determinate. Indeterminate sentencing occurs when the legislature sets a range of punishment for particular crimes, and the judge and the parole board exercise discretion in determining the actual length of the prison term. For that reason, states with indeterminate sentencing are said to have systems of discretionary release. ELIGIBILITY FOR PAROLE Under indeterminate sentencing parole is not a right but a privilege. This is a crucial point, as it establishes the terms of the relationship between the inmate and the corrections authorities during the parole process. In Greenholtz o. Inmates of the Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex (1979), the United States Supreme Court ruled that inmates do not have a constitutionally protected right to expect parole, thereby giving states the freedom to set their own standards for determining parole eligibility. In most states that have retained indeterminate sentencing, a prisoner is eligible to be considered for parole release after serving a legislatively determined percentage of the minimum sentenceusually one-half or two-thirdsless any good time or other credit sNot all convicts are eligible for parole. As we saw in Chapter 9. offenders who have committed the most serious crimes often receive life sentences without the possibility of early release. In general, life without parole is reserved for those who have committed first degree murder or are defined by statute as habitual offenders, As was also discussed in Chapter 9, however, more than 3,200 inmates convicted of nonviolent drug and property crimes have also received this sentence." Today, about one-third of convicts serving life sentences have no possibility of parole. PAROLE PROCEDURES A convict does not apply for parole. Rather, different jurisdictions have different procedures for determining discretionary release dates. In many states, the offender is eligible for discretionary release at the end of his or her minimum sentence minus any good-time credits the offender has earned. In 2014, for example, Glenwood Carr was sentenced to six to twelve years in prison for fleeing the scene of a fatal accident that he caused by driving drunk in Clay, New York. This means that Carr will become eligible for parole after serving six years, less good time. In other states, parole eligibility is measured at either one-third or one-half of the maximum sentence, or it is a matter of discretion for the parole authorities. In most, but not all, states, the responsibility for making the parole decision falls to the parole board, whose members are generally appointed by the gover nor. According to the American Correctional Association, the parole board has four basic roles: 1. To decide which offenders should be placed onparole. 2. To determine the conditions of parole and ald in thecontinuing supervision of the parolee. 3. To discharge the offender when the conditions ofparole have been met. 4. If a violation occurs, to determine whether paroleprivileges should be revoked. Most parole boards are small, made up of three to seven members. In many jurisdictions, board members terms are limited to between four and six years. The Discretionary Release the release of an inmate into a community supervision program at the discretion of the parole board within limits set by state or federal law. Parole Board A body of appointed civilians that decide whether a convict should be granted conditional release before the end of his or her sentence CHAPTER 10 Probation Paroles and intermediacions 217 P Parole the entire Informatio testimony whether to without the thout parole first degreeoffenders. T, more than and property Today, about have no pos not apply for ave different release dates. For discretionnum sentence er has earned s sentenced to the scene of a drunk in Clay ome eligible for time. In other either one-third it is a matter of sponsibility for parole board, d by the gover ctional Associa requirements for board members vary. Nearly half the states have no prerequisites, while others require a bachelor's degree or some expertise in the field of criminal justice THE PAROLE DECISION Parole boards use L010 Aa number of criteria to determine whether a convict should be given discretionary release. These criteria include the nature of the underlying offense, the threat the offender would pose to the community if released, any prior criminal record, and the Inmate's behavior behind bars. The attitude of the victim or the Victim's family is also taken into consideration. In a system that uses discretionary parole, the actual release decision is made at a parole grant hearing. During this hearing the entire board or a subcommittee reviews relevant information on the convict. Sometimes, but not always, the offender is interviewed. Because the board members have only limited knowledge of each offender, key players in the case are often notified in advance of the parole hearing and asked to provide comments and recommendations. These par ticipants include the sentencing judge, the attorneys at the trial, the victims, and any law enforcement officers who may be involved. After these preparations, the typical parole hearing itself is very short-us ually lasting just a few minute sAs parole has become a more important tool for reducing prison populations, corrections authorities are maling greater efforts to ensure that the process does not endanger the community. Four fifths of the parole boards in the United States now use risk assessment software to help with the parole decision. The use of such programs generally increases a states number of parolees, as parole board members-left to their own devices may hesitate to grant parole if there is even the slightest hint that an offender will recidivate. Texas, for example, released ten thousand more inmates on parole in 2012 than in 2005 as a result of using risk assessment software. Similarly, with the aid of this technology, Michigan decreased its prison population by more than 15 percent between 2007 and 2013. PAROLE DENIAL When parole is denied, the reasons usually involve poor prison behavior by the offender and/or the severity of the underlying crime. After a parole denial, the entire process will generally be replayed at the next 'action date," which depends on the nature of the offender's crimes and all relevant laws. In February 2014, for example, Herman Bell was denied parole for the sixth time. More than four decades earlier, Bell had been convicted of murder and sentenced to twenty-five years to life in prison for his involvement in the execution-style ballings of two New York City police officers. Although Bell was sixty-six years old at the time of his latest parole grant hearing the state parole board told him that "If released at this time, there is a reasonable probability that you would not live and remain at liberty without again violating the law.**On rare occasions, a state governor will veto the decision of a parole board to grant supervised release. In 2014, for example, a California parole board granted the release of seventy-one-year-old Bruce Davis, who had spent forty-three years behind bars for a double murder that took place in 1960. The board cited Davis's age, his religious conversion, and his role as a counselor to other inmates as factors in its decision. California governor Jerry Brown blocked Davis's parole, however, calling him an unreasonable danger to society. placed on e and aid in the conditions of hether parole ade up of three to board members and six years. The an inmate into a community parole board within limits ans that decides whether a se before the end of his or her Parole Grant Hearing A hearing in which the entire parole board or a subcommittee reviews Information, meets the offender, and hears testimony from relevant witnesses to determine whether to grant parole Albo Watasha car com termediate Sanct ions 217 218 PART 4 Corrections MacBook Air 10-3c Parole Guidelines Nearly twenty states have moved away from discretionary release systems to procedures that provide for mandatory release. Under mandatory release, offend. ers leave prison only when their prison terms have expired, minus adjustments for good time. No parole board is involved in this type of release, which is designed to eliminate discretion from the process. Instead, in mandatory release, corrections officials rely on parole guidelines to determine the early release date. Similar to sentencing guidelines (see Chapter 9). parole guidelines determine a potential parolee's risk of recidivism using a mathematical equation. Under this system, inmates and corrections authorities know the presumptive parole date soon after the inmate enters prison. So long as the offender does not experience any disciplinary or other problems while incarcerated, he or she can be fairly sure of the time of release. Note that a number of states and the federal goverment claim to have officially abolished" parole through truth-in-sentencing laws. (As described in Chapter 9 this form of legislation requires certain statutorily determined offenders to serve at least 85 percent of their prison terms.) For the most part, however, these laws simply emphasize prison terms that are "truthful." not necessarily longer." Mechanisms for parole, by whatever name, are crucial to the criminal justice system for several reasons. First, they provide inmates with an incentive to behave properly in the hope of an early release. Second, they reduce the costs related to incarceration by keeping down the inmate population, a critical concern for prison administrators 10-4 WHAT ARE SOME TYPESOF INTERMEDIATE SANCTIONS? Many observers feel that the most widely used sentencing options-imprisonment and probation--fail to reflect the immense diversity of crimes and criminals. Intermediate sanctions provide a number of additional sentencing options for those wrongdoers who require stricter supervision than that supplied by probation, but for whom imprisonment would be undaly harsh and counterproductive. The intermediate sanctions discussed in this section are designed to match the specific pun. ishment and treatment of an individual offender with a corrections program that reflects that offender's situation Dozens of different variations of intermediate sanc tions are handed down each year. To cover the spec trum succinctly, this section will discuss two general categories of sanctions: those administered primarily by the courts and those administered primarily by corrections departments. The latter include day reporting centers, intensive supervision probation, shock incar ceration, and home confinement. Remember that these sanctions are not exclusive. They are often combined with imprisonment, with probation or parole, and with each other. 10-4a Judicially Administered Sanctions The lack of sentencing options is most frustrating for the person who, in the majority of cases, does the sentencingthe judge. Consequently, when fudges are given the discretion to "color" a punishment with intermediate sanctions, they will often do so. In addition to imprisonment and probation, a judge has five sentencing options: 1. Fines. 2. Community service. 3. Restitution. 4. Pretrial diversion programs. 5. Forfeiture. Fines, community service, and restitution were discussed in Chapter 9. In the context of intermediate sanctions, it is important to remember that these punishments are generally combined with incarceration or probation. For that reason, some crities feel the retributive or deterrent impact of such punishments is severely limited. Many European countries, in contrast, rely heavily on fines as the sole sanctions for a variety of crimes. PRETRIAL DIVERSION PROGRAMS Not every criminal violation requires the courtroom process. Consequently, some judges have the discretion to order an Mandatory Release Release from prison that occurs when offender has served the full length of his or her sentence minus any djustments for good time Parole Guidelines Standards that are used in the parole process to measure the risk that a potential role will recidivate Intermediate Sanctions Sanctions that are more restrictive than probation and less than imprisonment CHAPTER 10 Poto Prole, and intermediate Sanctions 219 offe the offe for prog proc first of miso exter offen gram PRO found by po Pretrial Di ajudge or pre specified cour the charges 220 PART Biate sane the spec wo general primarily rily by cor reporting back incar that these combined , and with nctions mating for the entencinge given the intermediateto imprisoning options: were discussed ate sanctions, nishments are probation. For ve or deterrent "limited. Many vily on fines as Fot every crimrocess Conseon to order an that occurs when an entence, minus any in the parole process to date are more restrictive than ht mediate Sanctions 219 SUBSTANCE ABUSE COUNSELOR Job Description: Assess the background and needs of patients suffering from substance abuse and addiction, and craft and execute a plan for recovery Lead group and one on one counseling sessions geared toward providing the patient with a sense of accountability and a desire to change the direction of her or his life. What kind of Training Is Required? A bachelor's degree from a counselor program, often found in the department of education or psychology in undergraduate Institutions as well as two years of counseling in a related field or equivalent life experience For licensing and employment with a government agency, a master's degree in substance abuse counseling or rehabil tation counseling is often required Annual Salary Range?$30,000-$60,000 SOCIAL MEDIA CAREER TIP Moncge your online reputation-orsowane else wil dattforyou. Wonor your proble us og tools such as Seater, Poland Zeba Search Cheol Boardrocice Board Readet, and Orgiafoe Informationen what people cre saying about you a message boards offender into a pretrial diversion program during the preliminary hearing (Prosecutors can also offer an offender the opportunity to join such a program in return for reducing or dropping the initial charges:) These programs represent an interruption of the criminal proceedings and are generally reserved for young or first-time offenders who have been arrested on charges of illegal drug use, child or spousal abuse, or sexual misconduct. Pretrial diversion programs usually include extensive counseling, often in a treatment center. If the offender successfully follows the conditions of the program, the criminal charges are dropped. PROBLEM-SOLVING COURTS Many judges have found opportunities to divert low-level offenders by presiding over problem-solving courts. In these Pretrial Diversion Program An alternative to trial offered by judge or prosecutor in which the offender agrees to participate in specified counseling or treatment program in return for withdrawal of th e charges 220 PART 4 Corrections Ma cBook Air fint comparatively informal courtrooms, judges attempt to address problems such as drug addiction, mentalness, and homelessness that often lead to the eventual rearrest of the offender. About three thousand problem solving courts are operating in the United States. Although these specialized courts cover a wide variety of subjects, from domestic violence to juvenile crime to mental illness, the most common problem-solving courts are drug courts. Although the specific procedures of drug courts vary widely, most follow a general pattern. Either after arrest or on conviction, the offender is given the option of entering a drug court program or continuing through the standard courtroom process. Those who choose the former come under the supervision of a judge who will oversee a mixture of treatment and sanctions designed to cure their addiction. When offenders successfully complete the program, the drug court rewards them by dropping all charges. Drug courts operate on the assumption that when a criminal addict's drug use is reduced, his or her drug-fueled criminal activity will also decline The success of drug courts has led state legislatures $2.2 billion worth of contraband and property impounded to target other areas of criminality for similar treatment. from criminals and criminal suspects. In 2014, the agency In 2013, new state laws were passed allowing prostitutes shared about $487 million of these funds with state access to mental health courts (Illinois), authorizing and local law enforcement agencies, with an additional problem-solving courts as a condition of a misdemeanor $1.9 billion going to crime victims." sentence (Indiana), and permitting any jurisdiction in the state to create a problem-solving court (Wa shington)."10-46 Day Reporting Center sFirst used in Great Britain, day reporting centers (DRC) CAREER TIP If you want to influence how intermediateare mainly tools to reduce jail and prison overcrowding sanction legislation and other criminal laws are written Although the offenders are allowed to live in the comin your state, you should consider running for office as a munity rather than jail or prison, they must spend all or state legislator at some point in your career. part of each day at a reporting center. In general, being sentenced to a DRC is an extreme form of supervis ionWith offenders under a single roof, they are much more FORFEITURE In 1970, Congress passed the Racketeer easily monitored and controlled. (According to critics of Influenced and Comupt Organizations Act (RICO) in DRCs, they are also more easily able to "network with an attempt to prevent the use of legitimate business other individuals who have criminal histories and drug enterprises as shields for organized crime. As amended, and alcohol abuse issues. We RICO and other statutes give judges the ability to imple DRCs are instruments of rehabilitation as well. ment forfeiture proceedings in certain criminal cases. They often feature treatment programs for drug and Forfeiture is a process by which the goverment seizes alcohol abusers and provide counseling for a number of property gained from or used in criminal activity. For example, if a person is convicted for smuggling cocaine into the Uni ted States from South America, a judg e canForfeiture The process by which the government seizes private order the seizure of not only the narcotics, but also theproperty attached to criminal activity speedboat the offender used to deliver the drugs to a pickup po int off the coast of South Florida. In BennisDay Reporting Center (DRC) A community based correctionscenter to which offenders report on a daily basis for treatment Michigan (1996)," the Supreme Court ruled that aeducation, and rehabilitation person's home or car could be forfeited even though the owner was unaware that the property was connected to illegal activity. Once property is forfeited, the government has several options It can sell the property, with the proceeds going to the state and/or federal law enforcement agencies involved in the seizure. Altematively, the government agency can use the property directly in further crime-fighting efforts or award it to a third party, such as an informant. In Harris County, Texas, for example, law enforcement officials purchased about eight hundred body-wom cameras for local police officers (discussed in Chapter 5) using funds from civil forfeitures. Forfeiture is financial ly rewardThall courtyarth Judge Amcong the graduta ing for both federal and local lawof terugian programowanie enforcement agencies. The U. S. mata din c are progressional Marshals Service ma nages aboutCHAPTER 10 Pobation and intermediate Sanctions 221 Inte orier Strict prob Sho desio psychological problems, such as depression and anger management. Many of those found guilty in the Roanoke (Virginia) Drug Court, for example, are ordered to participate in a yearlong day reporting program. At the center, offenders meet with probation officers, submit to urine tests, and attend counseling and education programs, such as parenting and life-shdills classes. After the year has passed, if the offender has completed the program to the satisfaction of the judge and has found employment, the charges will be dropped. 10-4c Intensive Supervision Probation Over the past several decades, a number of jurisdictions have turned to intensive supervision probation (ISP) to solve the problems associated with burdensome caseloads we discussed earlier in the chapter. ISP offers a more restrictive alternative to regular probation, with higher levels of face-to-face contact between offenders and officers and frequent modes of control such as urine tests for drugs. In New Jersey, for example, ISP officers have caseloads of only 20 offenders (compared with 115 for other probation officers in the state) and are provided with additional resources to help them keep tabs on their charges. Different jurisdictions have different methods of determining who is eligible for ISP, but a majority of states limit ISP to of fenders who do not have prior probation violation sThe main goal of ISP is to provide prisonlike control of offenders while keeping them out of prison. Critics of ISP believe that it causes high failure rates, as more supervision increases the chances that an offender will be caught breaking conditions of probation. One comparison of ISP with DRCs, however, found the intensive supervision of ISP to be more effective. In the six months following termination of the program, DRC participants were more likely to be convicted for a new offense and to test positive for drugs than their ISP counterparts. The study suggests that when combined with services such as outpatient drug treatment and educational training, ISP can be effective in producing low rates of recidivism. Intensive Supervision Probation (ISP) A punishmentoriented form of probation in which the offender is placed under stricter and more frequent surveillance and control than in conventional probation Shock Incarceration A short period of Incarceration that is designed to deter further criminal activity by "shocking the offender with the hardships of imprisonment 222 PART 4 Corrections 10-4d Shock Incarceration As the name suggests, shock incarceration is designed to "shock criminals into compliance with the law. Following conviction, the offender is first sentenced to a prison or jail term. Then, usually within ninety days, he or she is released and resentenced to probation. The theory behind shock incarceration is that by getting a taste of the brutalities of the daily prison grind, the offender will be shocked into a crime-free existence. THE VALUE OF SHOCK In the past, shock incarceration was targeted primarily toward youthful, first-time offenders, who were thought to be more likely to be "scared straight" by a short stint behind bars. Recent data show, however, that 20 percent of all adults sentenced to probation spend some time in jail or prison before being released into the community. Critics of shock Incarceration are dismayed by this trend. They argue that the practice needlessly disrupts the lives of low-level offenders who would not otherwise be eligible for incarceration and exposes them to the mental and physical hardships of prison life (which we will discuss in Chapter 12). Furthermore, there is little evidence that shock probationers fare any better than regular probationers when it comes to recidivism rates. BOOT CAMPS Impact incarceration programs, or boot camps, are a variation on traditional shock incarceration. Instead of spending the "shock" period of incarceration in prison or jail, offenders are sent to a boot camp. Modeled on military basic training, these camps are generally located within prisons and jails, though some can be found in the community. The programs emphasize strict discipline, manual labor, and physical training. They are designed to instill self-responsibility and self-respect in participants, thereby lessening the chances that they will retum to a life of crime. More recently, boot camps have also emphasized rehabilitation, i

thirteen chapter thirteen Community Corrections and Juvenile Justice If mass imprisonment costs tens of billions of dollars annually while reducing crime only to a small degree, perhaps other measures might keep society at least as safe while costing far less money. Several such measures exist and together are called community corrections. We first discuss probation and parole before turning to intermediate sanctions. PROBATION AND PAROLEProbation refers to the sentence of a convicted offender to supervision in the community by an agent of the court called a probation officer, this sentence is in lieu of incarceration as long as the offender obeys all terms of the probation. These conditions vary from one case to another but typically include reporting to the probation officer regularly, abstaining from alcohol and other drugs, not engaging in criminal behavior, being home by a certain time at night, looking for work, and showing up for work if the offender obtains a job. If an offender violates any of these conditions, he or she risks being incarcerated. Parole is often confused with probation, because it also occurs in the community, but it refers to the supervision of an offender who is released from prison after serving a term of incarceration but before his or her full sentence expires. The person who supervises an offender on parole is the parole officer. The conditions of parole are very similar to those for probation, and an offender who violates any condition also risks being returned to prison. The public hears little about probation or parole unless a probationer parolee commits a new, serious crime. Yet millions of people are in one of these statuses at any one time. In 2011, almost 4 million individuals were on probation, and about 850,000 were on parole. These numbers, when added to the 2.2 million prison and jail inmates, yield a total of almost 7 million indi. viduals under some form of correctional supervision, a figure that amounts to about 3% of all American adults. or How Probation Work sAlthough probation is one type of community corrections, probation officers actually are involved in all stages of the criminal justice system. They first gather information to help judges determine whether defendants should be released on their own recognizance or on bail. If the defendant is convicted, a probation officer gathers more information and files a presentence report with the court. The judge's sentence normally follows the sentence recommendation contained in the probation officer's report. For every 100 defendants convicted of a felony, about 27% are sentenced to straight probation (with no jail or prison time to serve), and 69% are sentenced to prison or jail. What determines whether someone is sentenced to probation instead of incarceration? The seriousness of the offense and the defendant's prior record play the greatest role, but other factors also matter. One of the best probation studies analyzed the cases of 16,500 California males convicted of various felonies. The researchers found that defendants were more likely to receive probation instead of imprisonment if, among other factors, they had fewer than two prior convictions, were not using drugs, did not use a weapon to commit their crime, and did not injure their victim seriously. They were also more likely to receive probation if they had a private attorney instead of a public defender and if they had been out on bail before their trial. When judges sentence defendants to probation, they list the conditions the probationers must follow; these conditions form a contract between the court and the offender. Usually, these conditions have been recommended by the probation officer in the presentence report, but judges also sometimes come up with their own. Three types of conditions exist. Standard conditions, Н. as the name implies, are given to virtually all probationers and involve such requirements as looking for work, reporting changes of address, and not associating with known criminals. Punitive conditions are given to the more serious offenders and include the intermediate sanctions we discuss below. Treatment conditions are sometimes required for offenders with various personal problems such as drug or alcohol abuse. Court rulings have established that all these conditions must be reasonable and constitutional; for example, they cannot take away a probationer's freedom of speech, If a probationer violates the terms of probation, several outcomes are possible. First, the judge may simply continue the probationary sentence without any changes in the conditions. Second, the judge may extend the length of the sentence and/or impose new, more restrictive conditions. Third, the judge may revoke probation and order the probationer to prison or jail. Certain personal characteristics predict who is most likely to complete probation successfully. In general, successful completers include those who are married and who have children, who are employed, who are more educated, and who have fewer prior arrests and convictions. Probationers with fewer or no substance abuse problems also are more likely to complete proba. tion successfully. How Effective is Probation? Probation allows an offender to be in the community but costs much less than imprisonment would have cost. Whether probation is effective depends on what criteria we have in mind. The two most common criteria in measuring effectiveness are cost and recidivism. When it comes to dollars, probation is very effective, with probation estimated to cost $2,000 per year for each probationer, a figure much lower than the $25,000-$30,000 it costs to imprison one person. If we venture to say that probation saves at least $23,000 per year per person, and then assume for the sake of argument that half of all probationers, or about 2 million people, would need to be added to our nation's prisons if probation did not exist, imprisonment costs would rise by about $46 billion annually. This figure does not even include the extra 2,000 prisons that would have to be built (assuming 1,000 persons per prison) at a cost of more than $200 billion. Probation clearly saves a lot of money, But does probation keep society safe? When it comes to recidivism, whether probation is effective depends on how we view the data. On the one hand, about 60% of probationers end their terms successfully. But about 15% are incarcerated after committing a new offense or violating the terms of their probation. These new offenses amount to thousands of new crimes. Close to 30% of prisoners overall were on probation at the time they committed the crime that put them behind bars. This amounts to several hundred thousand crimes. If all the felons who fail probation had been put in prison originally instead of on probation, their many crimes would not have occurred. How? ever, it would have been impossible to predict at the time of sentencing which probationers would fail. Thus the only way to prevent new crimes during probation would be to end probation altogether. As we have seen, that would be prohibitively expensive. Although this evidence indicates that probation does not always keep society safe, a more relevant question concerns the effectiveness of probation compared to the effectiveness of imprisonment. Research on this issue finds that the recidivism rates of felons sentenced to probation are very similar to those of matched groups of felons sentenced to prison. Put another way, the recidivism of offenders put on probation is not higher than that of similar offenders put in prison, but neither is it lower. Although probation is thus no more or less effective than prison, it still saves billions of dollars compared to imprisonment. Probation may be more effective if probation officers had smaller caseloads, which are five to eight times larger than optimal, and if many more programs and services were made available for probationers. This last point suggests that more money should be put into probation. The needed dollars could come from a decreased emphasis on imprisonment, say for the almost half of all inmates now in prison for property and drug offenses not involving violence, who could instead be put on probation. This increased funding for probation would have two important benefits. First, it would save money, because the increased cost of probation would still be much less than the cost savings achieved by the reduced use of incarceration. Second, it would make society safer because it would permit hiring many more probation officers, reduce caseloads and thus increase supervision, and pay for more numerous and effective treatment programs and other services. Where it has been tried, the combination of increased supervision and greater treatment and programming achieves significant reductions in recidivism. How Parole Wor k sAs noted earlier, parole involves supervising offenders released to the community after serving a prison sentence. Two types of parole exist. Discretionary parole occurs when parole boards grant early release to inmates serving indeterminate (e. g., 5-10 years) prison sentences. Mandatory parole occurs without a parole board decision and occurs because of good-time provisions under Но D е у h Id ep on ds to he lar no red 51 be ion. any and nder determinate sentencing (e. g., exactly 5 years) statutes. Inmates receiving either type of parole typically leave prison before their full sentences expire. Regardless of the reasons for their release, they report to a parole officer and must heed various restrictions on their behavior. They also take part in one or more intermediate sanctions. In many respects, parole is very similar to probation. As noted earlier, the key difference is this: probation is used in lieu of imprisonment, while parole is used after imprisonment. Like probationers, parolees can be sent back to prison if they commit either new crimes or technical violations of the conditions of their supervision. Discretionary parole used to be very common, but it came under attack during the 1970s. Some critics believed that discretionary parole returned dangerous criminals to the community far too soon, while other critics claimed the parole process was arbitrary and racially discriminatory. In response, more than a dozen states, led by Maine in 1976, have since abolished discretionary parole. These states use determinate sentencing and automatic release from pr iso nIronically, the abolition of discretionary parole for good behavior has made it even more difficult for inmates to succeed in the outside world after release from prison, as they have less incentive to take part in rehabilitation programs while still behind bars. This abolition has also probably increased misbehavior in prison because inmates no longer have an incentive to behave well. Another problem concerns the length of prison terms in the states that abolished discretionary parole. One reason for its abolition, as we have seen, was the belief that discretionary parole allowed dangerous criminals to be let out too early. Ironically, however, inmates released in states that have abolished discretionary parole serve terms 7 months shorter than those released in states that still have it. The reason for this surprising outcome stems from the discretion of parole boards. Although they have been criticized for letting dangerous inmates out early, they, in fact, can identify these inmates and have them stay behind bars longer. States that moved from indeterminate sentences and discretionary parole to determinate sentences and automatic release established, in effect, automatic parole for most inmates, including ones who are still dangerous. The abolition of discretionary parole has thus had the opposite effect that its critics intended. How Effective is Parole? Sometimes parolees commit new, serious crimes. When this happens, the public is justifiably outraged. Because many parolees are serious offenders who have been released from prison, their recidivism rates are of special be high for two reasons. First, exinmates have many of the same personal problems, and, in some cases, even worse problems as when they entered of employable skills, and mental and emotional disorders. They also have a prison. These include drug and alcohol abuse, functional illiteracy and a lack prison record that may limit their opportunities for gainful employment and for friendships with law-abiding citizens. Parolees' personal histories and difficulties explain much of their high recidivism rates. But some of the blame also must go to the lack of services for them. As states have spent billions of dollars to build new prisons, they have cut back on services for parolees. States lack shelter beds for homeless parolees, they lack mental health services for those parolees with mental disorders, and they lack substance abuse treatment services for parolees with drug and alcohol problems. For all of these reasons, it would be surprising if parolees did not have high recidivism rates. Unfortunately, such high rates do exist. About 60% of parolees are rearrested for a felony or serious misdemeanor within 3 years of their release from prison, and just over 40% are sent back to prison for these offenses. About one-third of all new prison admissions are these parolees. Observers continue to criticize parole for multiple reasons. Some criticize it for allowing dangerous offenders to leave prison early and thus endanger public safety, while others criticize it for being an arbitrary process that also lacks adequate rehabilitation services. Our discussion of intermediate sanctions suggests it is possible to have ex-prisoners in the community on parole without endangering public safety unduly so long as they are in programs combining adequate supervision with adequate treatment. A lack of interest in providing appropriate funding has hampered the establishment and development of such programs. Yet a decreased reliance on imprisonment for many types of offenders would free up the funds needed for the types of community corrections for parolees that, like those for probationers, show strong promise of satisfying public concerns for both punishment and safety. Many scholars think that discretionary parole should be restored in the states that abolished it. It could be made less arbitrary and discriminatory with appropriate standards and due process procedures. The restoration of discretionary parole could also help ensure that dangerous offenders stay longer in prison. In Risk pecial pt to sonal tered a lack ave a at and high rvices , they neless al dis5 with and bitrary ion of е со dnaoration Ts stay Intermediate Sanctions 325 A promising crime reduction strategy involves the use of intermediate sanctions. As their name implies, intermediate sanctions occur between probation and incarceration; they are meant to be more punitive than probation but less punitive than incarceration. Today about 10% of adult probationers and parolees participate in them. Commonforms of intermediate sanctions include: (a) house arrest and electronic monitoring: (b) boot camps involving young offenders in a paramilitary setting; (c) intensive supervision, involving surveillance of offenders that is more intense than routine probation in frequency and behavioral restrictions; (d) day-reporting centers where offenders attend required treatment and other programs during the daytime and then leave to go home for the night; (e) community service; and (f) fines and restitution. These sanctions all cost much less than imprisonment, so the key question regarding their effectiveness is whether the recidivism rates of the offenders experiencing them are higher than the rates of imprisoned offenders. Although we do not have space to discuss the research on this issue, intermediate sanctions as a whole do not produce lower recidivism rates than incarceration, but neither do they produce higher recidivism rates. In fact, intensive supervision combined with mandatory drug treatment does appear to produce lower recidivism rates than imprisonment for comparable offenders. This body of evidence is important in assessing the effectiveness of intermediate sanctions, as it suggests that these sanctions keep society as safe (or no more unsafe) as imprisonment while saving billions of dollars. The greater use of probation and intermediate sanctions for the many people now in prison who do not pose a threat of violence to the public would save billions of dollars while not making our society any more unsafe. JUVENILE JUSTICE: YOUTHS AT RISK? Long ago our nation recognized the need to treat juvenile offenders differently from adult offenders. Officials thought juveniles were too young to be fully resp ble for their actions, and they would respond to proper treatment and services. As youth crime began to rise a few decades ago, a crackdown on juvenile offenders began, with many more sentenced to juvenile detention centers or tried in (adult) criminal court. We discuss juvenile delinquency and the juvenile justice system here and address the contemporary treatment of juvenile offenders. Juveniles and Delin quenc yAbout 12% of the U. S. Population are teenagers, who account for about 17% of all arrests, including 16% of all violent crime arrests and 32% of all property crime arrests. The juveniles who commit the most serious offenses are called serious and violent juvenile (SV)) offenders. The roots of their behavior are generally identified in the explanations discussed previously, but scholarly research has pinpointed more specific factors underlying their behavior. In general, the youths who become SVJ offenders exhibited rela. tively high levels of aggression and impulsiveness during early childhood and tend to begin committing their serious offenses early in their teenage years rather than later. They are overwhelmingly male and generally grew up in poverty and in dilapidated urban neighborhoods. They are also disproportionately likely to have been abused or neglected by their parents during their childhoods and to have grown up in families beset by marital conflict. They are more likely than other youths to have seriously delinquent friends and to use illegal drugs. Overall, then, and without trying to defend or excuse their actions, it is fair to say that SVJ offenders typically come from very troubled backgrounds. This fact forces us to ask whether these youths are fully responsible for their crimes. It also suggests that, to reduce SVJ offending, our society must adequately treat the problems these backgrounds cause for SVJ offenders and also alleviate the problems that lead to such backgrounds in the first place. We return to this issue later when we discuss ways of reducing delinquency. Juveni le Ga ngsWhile there is no commonly shared definition of a juvenile (or youth) gang, it is typically thought to have the following characteristics: • three or more individuals, typically between the ages of 12 and 24 • a name and sense of identity usually expressed by clothing and manner ofdress, the use of graffiti, and/or the use of hand signs • some degree of permanence and organizational structure • an elevated level of involvement in delinquent and crimina l act ivityAccording to the 2009 National Youth Crime Gang Survey of police departments nationwide, there are more than 28,000 gangs and 730,000 gang members nationwide. However, the estimates that law enforcement officials make about the number of gangs and gang members in their jurisdictions may iy not be accurate, Because the money communities receive from federally funded law enforcement programs may depend on the amount of crime and delin quency in the communities, police howson Incentive to exaggerate the number of gongs, On the other hand, fearing the loss of tourist dollars and investment money, local officialsmay pressure police to publicly underestimate the yung activity in a given community. For those reasons, it is difficult to have a very accurate count of the number of gangs and gang members in this country, Most criminologists and law personnel agree that gang setivity increased dramatically during the 1980s and early 1990s. There are at least three explanations for this rise: 1) the interrelated factors of deindustrialization and the loss of jobs in cities combined with poverty and racism that increased the size of the underclass in urban America, 2) the spread of the gang culture across the country, especially via the media, and 3) the explosion of crack cocaine that provided lucrative drug trade opportunities, The mechanism by which youths become gang members has been as hotly disputed as the issues of size, growth, number of gangs and overall member. ship. Although the public and law enforcement officials typically believe that teens are recruited into gangs by existing members, research on this issue yields a different picture: Youths join gangs to be around family members siblings and cousins in particular-who are already gang members and for the protection that gang membership affords, Gang scholars have been devoting more attention to girls' involvement in youth gangs. Three types of situations exist: 1) gangs made up exclusively of females that exist independently of males, 2) females as subordinates in male. dominated gangs, and 3) coed gangs comprising males and females with the former outnumbering the latter. According to one national report, 42% of all gang problem jurisdictions stated that the majority of these gangs had female members. As many as one out of three gang members in early adolescence is female. However, the proportion of female to male gang members diminishes as members age, because females leave gangs at an earlier age than males, How the Juvenile Justice System Work sThe stages of the juvenile justice system generally parallel those in the adult criminal justice system. However, juvenile justice procedures typically are more informal than the corresponding procedures in the adult system, and they include slightly differe nt terminol ogyWhen a juvenile allegedly breaks the law, the police exercise their discre. tion in deciding whether to arrest the offender or to take some other action, such as talking with his or her parents. If an arrest does occur, the police then decide, often in consultation with juvenile justice officials and the offender's parents, whether to divert the case from juvenile court or to refer it to the court. The police divert about one-fourth of all arrestsand refer about 70% to juvenile court. Juveniles awaiting court disposition must not be held with adult offenders. Instead, they simply live at home or, occasionally, are sent to juvenile detention facilities. The intake process begins when a case is referred to juvenile court. Similar to the prosecution stage for adult offenders, the juvenile probation department or the prosecutor's office generally handles the intake process. Its main purpose is to determine whether to dismiss the case, to divert it from the court by handling it informally (perhaps also requiring certain conditions such as restitution, curfews, and treatment programs), or to petition it to juvenile court. About half of all cases making it to the intake stage are handled informally. When this is the outcome, juveniles and their parents typically sign a consent decree in which the juvenile admits to having committed the act. A juvenile probation officer usually monitors the youth's compliance with any conditions of this informal probation. As with adult offenders, juveniles who violate their probation conditions risk having their case go back to juvenile court with possible incarceration in a juvenile detention facility the result. If, instead, a case is petitioned into juvenile court, the juvenile court judge's task then becomes whether to transfer the case to adult court, if so requested by intake officers, or to adjudicate the youth as delinquent if no transfer request is made. Almost all petitioned cases result in adjudicatory hearings, the equivalent of a trial in the adult criminal justice system. At these hearings, the juvenile court judge hears testimony from various witnesses and decides whether the youth was delinquent. If a youth is adjudicated as delinquent, the judge's next decision is the disposition, or sentencing, of the case. Before the disposition hearing, juvenile probation officers prepare a set of recommendations for the judge after interviewing the youth, speaking with his or her parents, and, perhaps, having psychological evaluations performed. The judge's disposition can include formal probation, with conditions such as restitution and drug treatment attached, or placement in a juvenile detention facility. About half of all dispositions result in formal probation, and about 30% result in residential placement. The juvenile's offense and prior record help determine whether placement is in a secure facility resembling a prison or in a more open facility resembling cottages or homes. As we have just seen, a series of decisions accompanies every stage of the juvenile justice process: Should a police officer arrest a juvenile? If an arrest does occur, should the case be diverted or referred to juvenile court? If referred, should the case be handled informally or petitioned to juvenile court? If petitioned, should it be transferred to criminal court? If it stays in juvenile court, should the juvenile be adjudicated as a delinquent? If such adjudication occurs, what should the disposition be? What factors affect all these decisions? The most important factors are the seriousness of the offense and the prior arrest record of the juvenile. Youths accused of serious offenses and those with previous arrests are more likely at all decision points of the juvenile justice process to receive the more punitive outcome—to be arrested, to be petitioned to juvenile court, and so forth. Some evidence also suggests that girls receive more lenient treatment than boys for criminal offenses but harsher treatment for status offenses like running away from home and promiscuity. Race and ethnicity also seem to make a difference, as African American youths and other minorities are greatly overrepresented in the juvenile justice system. For example, although 15% of all youths are African Americans, African Americans are about 26% of all the youths who are arrested, 31% of those referred to juvenile court, 46% of those whose cases are waived to adult criminal court, 40% of those placed in juvenile detention centers, and 58% of those placed in adult prisons. A 2000 report found that African American youths charged with drug offenses are 48 times more likely than their white counterparts to be sentenced to juvenile prison. Among youths accused of violent crime, blacks spend an average of 254 days in prison after trial and Latinos 305 days, compared to only 193 days for whites. Do these disparities reflect racial discrimination, or do they just reflect the greater likelihood of African American youths to be involved in serious crime? Many studies addressed this issue, and they generally find that race, ethnicity, and poverty do affect juvenile case processing even after differences in criminal involvement are considered. A study in California found that minority youths were twice as likely as white youths accused of the same offenses to have their cases transferred to criminal court. How Should We Treat Juvenile Offenders? We now treat juvenile offenders more harshly than in the past, and in particular, we transfer many cases of serious juvenile offending to adult criminal court. Underlying this get-tough approach is the belief that harsher punishment will reduce delinquency by deterring potential juvenile offenders and by reducing recidivism by the juveniles tried in adult court. Has this approach reduced both kinds of delinquency? The research evi. dence suggests it has not. Studies that examine the impact in several states of new legislation that required or eased the transfer of serious juvenile offenses to criminal court fail to find that delinquency decreased after the legislation was implemented. Studies that compare the recidivism of juvenile offenders tried in adult criminal court with matched samples of offenders processed in juvenile court likewise fail to find that the juveniles transferred to adult court have lower recidivism rates; some studies show that juveniles transferred to adult court actually have higher recidivism rates. Sending juvenile cases to adult court seems to endanger public safety in the long run, not protect it. The harsher treatment of juvenile offenders thus seems to be making our society less safe, not more safe. If transferring juvenile offenses to adult criminal court does more harm than good, how else should the United States deal with these offenses? Some observers suggest that all offenders, juveniles and adults, be tried in an integrated criminal justice system, with youth discounts given at sentencing to adolescents in recognition of their diminished responsibility. Under this plan, a 14-year-old may receive, say, 25% of the adult penalty, and a 16-year-old, 50%. Youthful offenders would still be kept separate from adults at all stages of the proceedings and would have the same legal rights that adults have. Other observers object that this plan would essentially abolish the juvenile court. They fear that the more formal legal proceedings that juveniles would face would stigmatize them and produce harsher punishments. In a different strategy, some scholars urge that new or better paid and designed forms of intermediate sanctions be used for serious juvenile offenders. We saw earlier that intermediate sanctions that combine surveillance with drug counseling, vocational training, and other programs offer some hope in reducing recidivism among adults. The same seems true for juvenile offenders. For these sanctions to work, they must be better funded so that important kinds of treatment, counseling, and training are readily available. The most promising strategy, however, is one aimed at preventing serious juvenile offending before it begins. This strategy involves early childhood and adolescent intervention programs aimed at the children and youths most at risk for such offending. For example, some programs involve prenatal and postnatal visits by nurses, social workers, and other professionals to the homes of poor, teenaged pregnant women. Their offspring are more likely than those born in more advantaged circumstances to become delinquent. K SU ng is of es חס ers in irtto ses ect bur rm me nte References 331 These visits help improve the physical health of the mothers and their infants and the latter's cognitive development. Studies show they more than pay for themselves by helping to prevent childhood cognitive and behavioral problems, child abuse and neglect, and later delinquency. School-based programs focusing on conflict resolution and after-school recreation also have been shown to reduce serious juvenile offending. Again, greater funding of these programs is necessary if they are to succeed in preventing such offending to any great degree, but any dollars spent on these programs save many more dollars in reduced crime, prison costs, and other problems. KEY TERMS intermediate sanctions: Social controls that are more punitive than routine probation but less punitive than incarceration parole: Supervision of an offender released from prison after serving a term ofincarceration probation: A substitute for incarceration that involves placing a convicted offenderin the community under the supervision of a probation officer as long as the offender meets certain standards of behavior UGGESTED READINGSGreenwood, P. W. (2006). Changing lives: Delinquency prevention as crime-controlpolicy. Chicago: University of Ch icago Press. Ma cKenzie, D. L. (2006). What works in corrections: Reducing the criminal activitiesof offenders and delinquents. New York: Cambridge University Press. Tonry, M. (Ed.). (2011). The Oxford handbook of crime and public policy. New York: Oxford University Press. Welsh, B. C., & Farrington, D. P. (Eds.). (2007). Preventing crime: What works forchildren, offenders, victims and places. New York: Springer. REFERENCES Page # Reference 319-320 For detailed treatments of probation and parole see: Petersilia, J. (2009). When prisoners comehome: parole and prisoner reentry. New York: Oxford University Press; Taxman, F. S. (2012). Probation, intermediate sanctions, and community-based corrections. In Petersilia, J., & Reitz, K. R. (Eds.). The Oxford handbook of sentencing and corrections. New York: Oxford Unive rsityPress. 320For every 100 defendants convicted of a felony: Durose, M. R., Farole, D., & Rosenmerkel, S. P.

ch 13 gains

CH 12 gains

twelve chapter twelve Prisons and Jails: Punishment at Any Cost? Emie Preate, Jr. was once as tough on crime as anyone could be. As district attorney in Pennsylvania, he won one guilty verdict after another and 19 murder cases in a row. He put 5 murder defendants on death row and passionately supported capital punishment. He also urged mandatory sentences for drug offenses. When he became the attorney general of Pennsylvania, Preate continued to press his tough approach to fighting crime and drugs. Several years later, Preate found himself on the other end of the law when he pleaded guilty to mail fraud in the wake of a campaign financing scandal, resigned as attorney general, and entered a federal prison in Duluth, Minnesota. There he saw that many of the inmates were African Americans serving long terms for minor drug offenses. He recalls, "I'll never forget it. In January of 1996, I walked into the mess hall the first night I was up in Duluth, and I turned around and I said, 'Oh, my God, what have we created?' It was a sea of black and brown faces." Preate was also shocked by the conditions he found in his prison. When he was released after spending 14 months behind bars, he emerged as a prison reformer and urged an end to capital punishment, a reconsideration of the nation's harsh sentencing policy for drug offenders, and a renewal of rehabilitation efforts for inmates. He explained, "Hey, look, this is common sense. We can't keep building prisons, or pretty soon we're going to wind up with more people in prisons than we have kids in school."Preate's story reminds us of the continuing controversy surrounding prisons, a key component of the nation's get-tough approach to fighting crime. As we noted in the first few pages of this book, our number of prison and jail inmates has quadrupled since 1990 and now exceeds 2.2 million inmates, yielding an incarceration rate that is more than three times higher than any other Western nation. Our corrections system costs more than $82 billion annually and forces states to cut their budgets elsewhere. What are we getting for our money? Has the surge in imprisonment lowered the crime rate appreciably? Has it made our society safer or has it set the stage for further problems down the road? What is life behind bars like anyway? We examine all these questions in the pages that follow. Ver SUCH AN ORDEAL: TODAY'S CORRECTIONS SYSTEM Prisons Versus Jail sWe often hear that someone is "going to jail," when in fact they are going to prison. Although prisons and jails both house offenders, there are important differences between these two types of facilities that are settings for incarceration. Prisons house offenders who have been found guilty of felonies and sentenced to at least 1 year of incarceration. They are run by the 50 states, by the federal government, and by private companies contracting out to the states. Each state has at least a few prisons, and some big states, such as California and Texas, have many prisons. The United States has about 1,700 prisons all types, most of which are filled beyond capacity. The word "prison" probably brings to mind a massive structure with high towers, heavily armed guards, search lights, and long, bleak hallways with cell after cell. This is one kind of prison, but other kinds of prisons exist. The one just described fits the portrait of a maximum-security prison, more commonly called the "Big House." These grim places hold inmates who are thought to be the most violent and dangerous to the outside community. Several maximum-security prisons in use today were built a century or more ago and include such famous names as San Quentin in California (just north of San Francisco) and Leavenworth in Kansas. Today San Quentin serves as death row for all California men who have been sentenced to death, and, 150 years after it was built, still holds some 4.000 inmates behind its forbidding walls. Several other Big Houses built years ago have closed, but some, such as Alcatraz, remain notorious in popular lore. Medium-security prisons hold property offenders and other inmates who are considered less dangerous than those in maximum-security institutions. Instead of high towers and walls with armed guards and searchlights, they typically are enclosed by barbed-wire fences. In many of these prisons, inmates live in large rooms, similar to a military barracks or summer camp cabin, rather than in small cells. They are less expensive to build and maintain than maximum-security prisons and usually have more educational and vocational programs and drug and alcohol counseling. Minimum-security prisons hold inmates, typically property and drug offenders, who are considered the least dangerous and who are serving the shortest sentences. They typically lack even fences and instead rely on locked doors and electronic equipment to detect escape attempts. Inmates are allowed much more freedom of movement than their counterparts in the other types of prisons and are offered a greater number of programs and services. Jails are run by towns, cities, and counties and hold several kinds of offenders and other individuals: (1) people who have been arrested and are awaiting arraignment, trial, or some other procedure (amounting to about half of all jail inmates); (2) people convicted of a misdemeanor and sentenced to less than 1 year behind bars; (3) people convicted of a felony who are waiting to be sentenced; (4) people convicted of a felony and sentenced to more than 1 year behind bars but for whom no room in a state prison is available; (5) inmates who have completed their sentence and are awaiting release to the community; (6) individuals held for contempt of court, for military legal action, or for protective custody; (7) mentally ill persons awaiting movement to a health facility; and (8) inmates awaiting transfer to other correctional facilities. About 3,400 jails exist throughout the United States, and some 12 million Americans (including repeat admissions) enter a jail each year for at least one of these reasons. Jails often have worse conditions than prisons. They generally are moreovercrowded and dilapidated. Because jails are intended for short-term conde orefinement, they also lack the vocational, educational, and drug treatmentprograms found in prisons. A special problem of jails is that they confine e people awaiting arraignment or trial (and thus in pretrial detention) withthose already convicted of crimes, some of them quite serious. Although the pretrial detention inmates have not yet been convicted of any crime and some may well be innocent of any wrongdoing, their confinement with convicted criminals subjects them to the possibility of violent assaults and negative peer influences. Even if they emerge from jail unharmed physically, they may emerge very much harmed emotionally and perhaps more apt to commit crime than before they were placed in jail. Is It Worth It? Prisons and the Crime Ra t eWith more than 2.2 million people behind bars at any one time and more than $82 billion spent on corrections every year, it is important to ask, "Is it worth it?" With any expensive effort, it is important to determine whether dollars are being spent wisely. This determination is no less important for corrections. What is our society getting for the tens of billions of dollars it spends each year on corrections? For most of us, the most important issue in deciding whether the surge in imprisonment has been worth it involves whether it is keeping society safer by reducing crime to a considerable degree. If any crime decline is substantial, then we have grounds for concluding that the money spent on incarceration has indeed been worth it. If the crime decline is small, then we may decide our dollars have not been spent wisely, especially if other strategies might achieve more cost-efficient declines in the crime rate. For these reasons, it is important to determine whether the surge in imprisonment has in fact reduced the crime rate, and, if so, the extent of this effect. The section on why individuals break the law noted that the deterrent effect of the get-tough approach has been small or nil. When we discuss here whether incarceration reduces the crime rate, we are talking about the incapacitation effect: the reduction in crime caused by keeping offenders behind bars where they cannot commit crime against the public. The rise in incarceration accompanying the get-tough approach has prompted many scholars to determine the size of this incapacitation effect. Much of their research has focused on the 1990s, when incarceration increased by 67% and the crime rate dropped by 22%. This correlation might mean that the increased incarceration caused the crime drop, but other evidence casts doubt on this conclusion. The states with the largest increases in incarceration during the 1990s actually had smaller crime rate declines than the states with the lowest increases in incarceration. Moreover, although the incarceration rate in the United States has increased steadily since the 1970s, the crime rate has fluctuated. It declined and then rose during the 1980s, for example, even though incarceration soared steadily during that time. Although the crime rate finally fell during the 1990s as incarceration continued to rise, other factors were probably at work, say many criminologists, including a strong economy, stabilizing crack cocaine trafficking in major cities, and the aging of the large baby boom generation, whose sheer size had helped fuel the crime rate increase during the 1960s. Assessing such evidence, The Sentencing Project, a national nonprofit criminal justice research and advocacy organization, found "little support for the contention that massive prison construction is the most effective way to reduce crime."If this is true, then the costs of the surge in imprisonment have not been worth it. The surge has also been creating other problems called collateral consequences that again cast doubt on the wisdom of the get-tough policy. More than 650,000 prison inmates are now being released back to their communities, most of them inner-city neighborhoods, every year. Once back home, the exinmates have few job prospects because they have few job skills, and up to 60% remain unemployed 1 year after their release. These problems drive up unemployment rates in their communities and, as a result, crime rates. The surge in incarceration and massive increase in prisoner reentry have led to other problems as well. For example, many inner-city communities have seen large numbers of their young males go to prison or jail. The absence of so many young adults weakens these communities' social cohesion and thus indirectly raises their crime rates. Other problems from the great increase in prisoner reentry include increased child abuse and family violence, the spread of HIV/AIDS and other infectious diseases, and an increase in homelessness. Many observers especially worry about the collateral effects of the surge in imprisonment on the children of inmates. About 1.5 million children now have a parent in prison, and many others also have a sibling behind bars. The Sentencing Project notes the consequence: "As more young people grow up with parents and siblings incarcerated and a view of time in jail as a normal aspect of one's life experience, the deterrent effect of prison is diminished." Parental imprisonment also leads to less effective socialization of children and a disruption in their family stability and financial well-being. All these problems mean that the U. S. incarceration policy of the last few a decades may actually be worsening some of our most serious social problemsand ironically contributing to the crime rates our nation has now and will have in the future. An additional collateral effect of the surge in incarceration has been its disparate impact on the African American community. One-third of all African American males in the 20-29 age group are now under correctional control: They are in prison or jail, or on probation or parole. Because African Americans appear to have higher rates of street crime, the rise in incarceration was bound to have a larger impact on this racial group than on others. But this impact has been much greater than what might have been expected because of the nation's war against drugs that has relied on arrest and imprisonment as the primary means of combating drug trafficking, possession, and use. Much of this war has focused on crack cocaine, with much higher mandatory penalties imposed for this drug than for its close cousin, powder cocaine. Whites tend to use powder cocaine, while blacks tend to use crack cocaine. This difference means that the war on drugs, with its focus on crack, has disproportionately affected African Americans. Citing this problem, one scholar calls the war on drugs a "search and destroy" mission against African American males. LIFE BEHIND BARS: MYTH VERSUS REALITYMany Americans probably think prisons are like country clubs, with inmates enjoying large flat-screen televisions, DVD players, other electronic equipment, and gyms and exercise equipment. Like many aspects of public beliefs about crime and justice, the reality is far different from this country-club image, which is little more than a myth. Most prisons are forbidding places, and life behind bars is anything but a country club. Why should we care about life behind bars? No one wants to see prisoners pampered, but neither should anyone want to see them treated less than humanely. On a practical level, what prisoners experience behind bars may affect how they behave when they are released. The worse their experience behind bars, the more likely they are to commit new crimes when they go back to society, and the less safe society will be. For this reason, it is important to understand what life behind bars is really like. The Pains of Imprison men tIn his 1958 classic book, The Society of Captives, Gresham M. Sykes discussed several "deprivations or frustrations of prison life." He referred to these deprivations as the pains of imprisonment and said they "pose profound threats to the inmate's personality or sense of self-worth" and for this reason can be just as painful in their own way as the physical punishment used against offenders in the past. The first deprivation is the loss of liberty. Prison inmates are obviously not free to leave the prison, and they are cut off from family, friends, and relatives. For these reasons, wrote Sykes, the deprivation of liberty impairs inmates' self-esteem. The second deprivation is the loss of goods and services. Although inmates' basic needs—food, clothing, shelter—are met, and some may actually Overc Life Behind Bars: Myth Versus Reality 305 be better off inside prison because of this, most inmates think they could have more possessions and be leading a better life outside prison. As a result, they consider the loss of goods and services a painful deprivation. They want not just the necessities of life but the amenities that most of us take for granted: their own clothing rather than prison uniforms, a variety of good food rather than monotonous prison fare, privacy rather than a shared, overcrowded cell. In a society that values an individual's worth in terms of the material possessions he or she enjoys, the loss of goods and services is a painful deprivation for inmates. The third deprivation is the loss of heterosexual relationships. Although home furloughs and conjugal visits have become more common since Sykes wrote his book, the lack of heterosexual outlets for prison inmates remains a serious problem. Their involuntary celibacy is obviously frustrating sexually and emotionally, but it can also further impair their self-worth. The fourth deprivation is the loss of autonomy. Sykes wrote that inmates are "subjected to a vast body of rules and commands which are designed to control (their) behavior in minute detail." The loss of autonomy again impairs inmates' self-worth by treating them as helpless, dependent children and, in this way, humiliating them. The final deprivation is the loss of security. Inmates' physical safety is always at risk, most often by other inmates, but also by corrections officers. Recall that many inmates have been previously convicted for violent offenses; others may have no violent convictions but still have violent tendencies. Life behind bars aggravates these tendencies. Inmates are very aware that they will be tested physically and that they must be prepared to fight to defend both themselves and their possessions. Their loss of security makes them very anxious, because they realize they can never be safe. Overcrowding and Other Cond ition sIn 2000, a troubling report cited substandard conditions at Washington, D. C.'s Central Detention Facility, more commonly known as the D. C. jail, which holds almost 1,700 inmates and employs about 450 corrections officers. The jail's ventilation system was so dirty that summertime room temperatures would sometimes become dangerously high; the lack of adequate ventilation was also implicated in a case of Legionnaires' disease that almost killed a corrections officer. Many sinks and showers simply did not work. Neither did the laundry machines, forcing the inmates to wash their clothes and sheets in their toilets. A lack of jumpsuits meant that some inmates would wear only their underwear for days on end. Mice and rats scurried everywhere, and roaches and other insects bred in puddles of water caused by leaky plumbing. These conditions are found in various degrees in jails and prisons around the country. In addition to decrepit living conditions, another common problem in our jails and prisons is overcrowding, as many prisons and jails hold many more inmates than the facility was meant to house. Overcrowding can have psychological consequences and is thought to be a prime contributor to prison violence. Overcrowding is so serious that Human Rights Watch, an international human rights organization, charges that U. S. prisons are "dangerously overcrowded." A federal judge who toured an Alabama jail found inmates sleeping on the floor next to toilets and on top of shower drains because there was no room for beds. The judge later wrote, "The sardine-can appearance of its cell units more nearly resemble the holding units of slave ships during the Middle Passage of the 18th century than anything in the 21st century."Other problems contributing to the harsh and painful experience behind bars include solitary confinement, prison violence, and inadequate health care. We now turn to these problems, which combine with decrepit living conditions and overcrowding to suggest that life behind bars is anything but a country club. Solitary Con finemen tIn June 2012, a subcommittee of the U. S. Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the extent and consequences of solitary confinement. More than 80,000 prisoners are held in solitary confinement at any one time. Although this confinement is intended to monitor and control the behavior of violent prisoners, it has serious effects including mental illness and suicide, and it is thought to increase the likelihood of recidivism (repeat offending) once inmates are finally released from prison. As two experts on this issue have observed, "Isolation can be psychologically harmful to any prisoner, with the nature and severity of the impact depending on the individual, the duration, and particular conditions (e. g., access to natural light, books, or radio). Psychological effects can include anxiety, depression, anger, cognitive disturbances, perceptual distortions, obsessive thoughts, paranoia, and psychosis."One of the witnesses at the Senate hearing was Anthony Graves, who spent 18 years in a Texas prison after being wrongly convicted of murder before being exonerated and released in 2010. Ten of his 18 years were spent in solitary confinement, which Graves said involved the "worst conditions Prisc imaginable" and caused him serious psychological problems. "I lived behind a steel door that had two small slits in it, the space replaced with iron and wire, which was dirty and filthy," he said. "I had no television, no telephone and most importantly, I had no physical contact with another human being." Graves called solitary confinement "inhumane" and said that "by its design it is driving men insane."Ironically, although solitary confinement is meant in part to improve the behavior of the inmates who are confined, it probably has the opposite effect: when inmates leave solitary confinement, their mental state and behaviorare very likely to be much worse than when they entered it. The head of the department of corrections in Mississippi told the Senate hearing that prison violence had dropped after his state greatly reduced its use of solitary confinement; he also said that his state had saved millions of dollars by doing so. Several lawsuits have aimed to eliminate or severely curtail the use of solitary confinement. One of thessuits targeted California's Pelican Bay State Prison, where more than 500 inmates as of June 2012 had been held in solitary confinement between 10 and 28 years, with 78 inmates in solitary for more than 20 years. 1 a 1 2 t t r t 5 Priso n Violenc eOne of the facts of life behind bars is violence. In saying this, we do not wish to stereotype prisoners as monsters but rather to acknowledge harsh reality. Many prisoners have violent pasts. When they enter prison, their violent tendencies are not likely to stop. They are there against their will, and for many the pains of imprisonment combine with overcrowding and substandard living conditions to foster even more violence and create even more hostility. In fact, if we wanted for some reason to design a correctional facility that would be guaranteed to produce violence, it would look very much like the prisons and jails we now have. Violence in prison, then, results not only from inmates' personal backgrounds and attitudes, but also from the ugly aspectsHow much prison violence occurs? Surveys of prison inmates find that 10-14% have been assaulted physically in the previous 6 months. Prison gangs account for much of the violence that occurs. Much of this violence is meant to help prison gangs secure economic profits illegally, for example, through drug trafficking and extortion. In this regard, prison gangs closely resemble organized crime gangs in the outside world. Like their organized crime counterparts, prison gangs sell protection, drugs, and other contraband. of prison life. Some have contacts with youth gangs and other illegal enterprises in the outside world, and, when inmates from the gangs are released, they work for these groups. lem is prison rape and other sexual assault; either completed, attempted, o rA specific type of violence in prisons that continues to be a serious probthreatened. Sexual assault in prisons and jails is a common fact of life behind bars, especially in prisons that are larger and more overcrowded. Surveys of male prison inmates find that about 20-33% are sexually assaulted and that at least 10% are raped. Most inmates who commit prison rape use rape as a weapon to exert dominance. Inmates at higher risk for sexual victimization include those who are young, small, suffering from mental disorders, not gang-affiliated, thought to be gay or effeminate, or convicted of sexual crimes themselves. Inmates who have squealed on another inmate are also at greater risk for sexual victimization. One other risk factor is race, as racial tension within prisons contributes to interracial sexual assaults. Although prison sexual assault stems from inmates' violent tendencies and overcrowding and other conditions, prison administration and staff also bear some blame for the problem. There are too few correctional officers in overcrowded facilities, and the officers receive little or no training on rape and other sexual assault. Mental health counseling for rape victims is rare. Many guards believe that rape victims are gay and consent to the sex that victimizes them. Even when guards do believe a sexual assault has occurred, they often find it easier to look the other way, and many feel that prison rape is to be expected. Some scholars paint a more ominous picture of the complicity of prison staff in prison rape, saying that the staff allows and sometimes even encourages prison rape because it helps maintain order in the prison. This happens in at least two ways. First, prison rape channels prisoners' aggression from guards to other prisoners. Second, inmates know that if they do not do what guards want they may end up in cells with known sexual aggressors. Guards may also use the threat of rape to turn inmates into informers as they may threaten to put an inmate into contact with a known aggressor if he refuses to squeal. Some guards have taken bribes from inmates to put young, new prisoners into their cells. Health and Health C areAnother harsh aspect of life behind bars is poor health and even poorer health care. Many inmates enter jail and prison with a history of mental and physical problems and/or a history of drug and alcohol abuse. These problems make WOME the = for rob1, or nind s of that as a tion not mes ater ion cies alsoin and any zes ten be of en his esnot rs. ey he th al ке complaints Inmates receive adequate care while incarcerated. it especially How adequate is this care? Although health care in jails and prisons has improved during the past 2 decades because of court rulings, many serious problems remain, and health care overall is inadequate. Prison guards and medical personnel often doubt the claims of prisoners that they are ill and instead think inmates with healthare merely malingering. It is also difficult to recruit qualified phy. sicians to work in prisons and jails: most physicians do not view these settings as desirable places to practice, and their compensation is generally lower than in the outside world. As a result, prisons and jails typically attract and employ physicians who are less qualified than their noncorrections counterparts and who are apt to have faced disciplinary charges by medical review boards. In another problem, prisons lack adequate health facilities and diagnostic equipment. Many prisons have no way to isolate prisoners with infectious diseases, and their infirmaries lack 24-hour nursing care. Prisoners with chronic illnesses are not kept separate from other inmates. Two groups of inmates, women prisoners and older inmates, face special healthcare problems. The medical needs of women prisoners differ from those of male prisoners, yet treatment behind bars for these needs is lacking. We have more to say about this problem in the next section. Older inmates (more than 50,000 prisoners are age 55 or older) have especially high rates of health problems and thus a high need for adequate medical care. The lack of adequate care in prisons thus affects women and older inmates disproportionately. WOMEN IN PRISON: SEXISM IN CAPTIVITYMost prisoners are men. In 2011, almost 1.5 million state and federal prisoners were men, and only 111,000 were women. Prison is very much a man's world, and, partly because of that, women inmates experience certain problems that male inmateseither do not experience at all or do not experience as One of these problems is a history of being abused. Women inmates are much more likely than male inmates to have been physically or sexually abused before their incarceration: in surveys of prisoners, about 60% of women inmates and only 16% of male inmates report such abuse, and more than one-third of women inmates report being raped before entering prison. Partly for this reason, women inmates are also more likely than male inmates to have histories of drug abuse. often or as severely. Se xual Victimizatio nAs in men's prisons, sexual victimization in women's prisons is a common problem, but, unlike men's institutions, the offenders are usually prison guards, not other inmates. In male prisons, no more than 20% of sexual victimization is committed by prison staff. In women's prisons, though, almost all sexual violence and other types of sexual victimization are committed by prison staff. Although women's prisons developed decades to reduce sexual abuse by male inmates and guards, most of the guards in women's prisons are still men. Although the exact prevalence of sexual victimization is unknown, Amnesty International found more than 1,000 cases of sexual abuse in prisons in 49 of the 50 states in the late 1990s. Because of fear of retaliation, most of the victims did not report their abuse. Amnesty International also found that all but three states permit male guards to do pat-down searches of female inmates, which the report called "inherently abusive." ago in part Medica l Needs and Servi cesThe medical needs of women prisoners differ from those of male prisoners. This is true for at least two reasons. First, as noted in the previous sections, women inmates are more likely to have prior histories of drug abuse and sexual victimization. Second, women need adequate gynecological care. Because women prisoners thus have have more medical and mental health needs than male prisoners, the lack of adequate medical care in prison affects women especially severely. For example, many state prisons do not offer mammograms and Pap smears. Also, although women inmates have a greater need for drug treatment, they are less likely than male inmates to receive it. Wome n Prisoners as Mo thersWomen inmates are much more likely than male inmates to have children and also, before incarceration, to be the primary caretakers for their children. As a result, incarceration poses a more serious emotional and practical problem for women inmates than it does for male inmates. The children of newly incarcerated women must now be taken care of by other people, usually relatives but sometimes the state, and some women face losing custody of their children permanently. Prisons vary in their visitation rights and facilities for T a common ally prisonof sexual igh, almost committed go in part guards in unknownabuse in etaliation, cional also earches of prisoners. sections, e and sex.. Because eeds than s women mammoter need it. children children. cal probof newly ully relaof their ities for Women in Prison: Sexism in Captivity 311 young children, and the majority do not permit extended visits. The majority of incarcerated mothers (and also fathers) report never having been visited by their children since entering prison, in part because their institutions are usually more than 100 miles from their last place of residence. About 5% of women offenders are pregnant when they enter prison. These women face special problems. Like other women inmates, they already come from backgrounds of poverty, drug and alcohol abuse, smoking, poor nutrition, and other problems that render their pregnancies high risk. Once they enter prison, conditions can further increase the chance of pregnancy complications. As with other health services in prison, obstetrical care can be inadequate. When the baby is born, inmates in most prisons have to give up the baby within a few weeks, although a few institutions have nurseries where the children may stay up to age 1 or so. A final problem facing some pregnant inmates is shackling during childbirth. The Amnesty International report found that 18 states allow pregnant inmates to be shackled while they give birth even though there is obviously no chance the woman will try to escape. The organization considered such shackling a form of abuse of women in custody. Treatment and Vocational Program sFor both female and male inmates, treatment and vocational programs in the nation's prisons are missing altogether, or, when present, they are inadequate and poorly funded. Even so, women's prisons typically have fewer treatment and vocational programs than men's prisons. Because most prisoners are men and because men are thought to be more dangerous to society, the attention and funding of the corrections system traditionally has focused on male prisoners. This, in turn, has led to a neglect of the needs of female prisoners. A more subtle bias also exists in the nature of vocational programprogramming typically has focused on preparing women inmates for traditional female jobs such as secretarial work, sewing, and food service, and not for higher-paid jobs such as carpentry, plumbing, and auto repair. Training for the latter jobs remains much less available in women's prisons than in men's prisons. The fact that treatment and vocational programs continue to be less available in women's prisons adds to the pains of imprisonment that women inmates face because of their gender. THE DEATH PENALTY DEBATECapital punishment remains one of the most controversial issues in criminal justice today, as the United States is the only Western nation that still uses it We highlight here the major questions asked about the death penalty and the evidence concerning these questions. Does the Death Penalty Reduce Murder? Many studies have tried to answer this question, and almost all fail to find a deterrent effect. States with the death penalty do not have lower homicide rates than states without it. In the last century, states that eliminated the death penalty did not see their homicide rates increase, and states that adopted the death penalty did not see their homicide rates decline. Studies of wellpublicized executions generally fail to find that executions lower the homicide rate. Some even find a brutalization effect, with the homicide rate increasing after publicized executions, perhaps because murderers are imitating the killing that execution involves or because they have a death wish and want to be executed. Drawing on our discussion of deterrence in, it is not very surprising that the death penalty does not deter homicide. For it to do so, a potential murderer would have to have the death penalty in mind while he is planning his crime and have time to weigh carefully the risk of getting caught and being executed. This, in turn, implies that homicide would have to be the type of crime that is planned carefully by someone who is acting rationally and unemotionally. Yet homicide tends to be a relatively emotional and spontaneous crime in which someone becomes angry or vengeful and lashes out without really thinking through the possible consequences for his or her future. If homicide is indeed such a crime, then capital punishment probably cannot deter it. Does the Death Penalty Save Money? Many people believe the death penalty is cheaper than life imprisonment. What do the numbers say? It turns out that the death penalty is actually two to three times more expensive than life imprisonment. Capital cases are extraordinarily time consuming and, therefore, costly. Various procedures at the pretrial and trial stages must be followed closely that are not followed in noncapital cases. Appeals following conviction are mandatory, time consuming, and, again, costly. At all these stages, the state incurs its own costs for prosecution and appeals, and it must almost always also pay these costs for capital defendants, who are typically too poor to afford their own attorneys. As a result, the average capital case costs $2-3 million. In contrast, life imprisonment costs about $1.2 million in current collars, assuming 40 years in prison and $30,000 in annual incarceration costs per capital defendant. Thus, the average capital case costs about $1-2 million more than life imprisonment. If we apply this extra cost to the 3,125 people on death row in early 2013, then this extra cost is between about $3.1 billion and $6.3 billion. Capital punishment turns out to be quite costly indeed. Is the Death Penalty Racially Biased? Probably. Some but not all studies find that when the defendant is African American, prosecutors are more likely to lodge capital charges (without which there could be no death penalty), and jurors are more likely to find the defendant guilty and to sentence him to death. But other studies do not find these differences, and thus the evidence of discrimination based on the race of the offender is inconsistent. However, evidence of discrimination is clearer when the race of the victim is considered. Simply put, when whites are victims, death penalty charges and sentences are much more likely than when African Americans are victims. In some jurisdictions, prosecutors are four to five times more likely to seek the death penalty when the victim is white than when the victim is African American. In effect, the judicial system places more value on the lives of white victims than on the lives of black victims. Are Innocent People Executed? Innocent people have been sentenced to death, and it is very likely that some have been executed over the years. Since the early 1970s, at least 140 death row inmates have been released nationwide after DNA and other evidence cast serious doubt on their guilt. Death penalty supporters say these cases prove that the system works, because these individuals were not executed, and that it has never been proven that an innocent person has been executed since Furman. Opponents reply that some of these men nonetheless came dangerously close to being executed. They concede that no wrongful execution has been proven, but they cite several cases in which the guilt of an executed person was at least highly questionable. One example was the case of Gary Graham, who was executed in Texas in June 2000 for a 1981 murder of a drug dealer. The only evidence against him was one witness's testimony, which was contradicted by two other witnesses whom the defense attorney never called to the stand or even interviewed. The gun used in the murder was never found, and no physical evidence implicated Graham. Another such case was that of Roy Roberts, who was executed in Missouri in 1999 for murder without any physical evidence of his involvement in the crime and despite changing stories by witnesses. Death penalty scholars think that at least 12 innocent people, and probably more, have been wrongly executed since the mid-1970s. Why are innocent people sentenced to death, and why are some of them apparently executed? Police, prosecutors, and witnesses may lie or conceal evidence, and honest mistakes by police or witnesses can also occur. In addition, capital defendants are often represented by attorneys who are unqualified to handle complex capital cases. Even if they are skilled, they do not have the estimated 250,000 that it takes to defend a capital defendant adequately, as states typically provide them no more than about $2,000-3,000 in legal expenses. Worse yet, some of these attorneys have been notoriously inept. They fail to call important witnesses to the stand or to present important evidence, and some even fall asleep during the trial. In one capital trial in Houston, the defense attorney slept throughout an afternoon's testimony. About onefourth of death row inmates in Kentucky were defended by attorneys who were later disbarred or resigned to avoid disbarment. An investigation by the Chicago Tribune of 131 executions in Texas found 43 cases where the defense attorney was later disbarred or disciplined. More generally, it concluded that "Texas has executed dozens of Death Row inmates whose cases were compromised by unreliable evidence, disbarred or suspended defense attorneys, meager defense efforts during sentencing and dubious psychiatric testimony. KEY TERMScollateral consequences: The negative side effects of increasing incarceration, including effects on the children of inmates incapacitation: Depriving offenders of the ability to commit new offenses andthereby improving public safety incarceration: Confinement in prison or jail jails: Penal institutions run by towns, cities, and counties that houses several kindsof offenders SUGGEST 1 REFERENCES Page 3 Re 299-300 Di SIV 500-302 Disreso 502Dis see: brid inca Quc "As "Sea in th Disc 305 503 504 504 Princ SUGGESTED READINGS Alexander, M. (2010). The new Jim Crow: Mass incarceration in the age of colorblindness. New York: The New Press. allman, J. (Eds.). (2006). The crime drop in maximum-security prisons: Large, forbidding prisons that hold inmates who arethought to be the most violent and dangerous to the outside community medium-security prisons: Prisons that hold property offenders and other inmateswho are considered less dangerous than those in maximum-security institutions minimum-security prisons: Prisons that hold inmates, typically property anddrug offenders, who are considered the least dangerous and who are serving theshortest sentences pains of imprisonment: Gresham Sykes's term for the deprivations of prison life prisons: Penal institutions that house offenders who have been found guilty offelonies and are sentenced to at least 1 year of incarceration References 315

11 Prisons and Jails LEARNING OBJECTIVES Arsying is that you will be able to... 11-3 Contrast the Pennsylvania and New York penitenciary theories of the 1800s 119 List and briefly explain the four types of prisons 13-9 List the factors that have caused the prison population to grow dramatically in the last several decades 114 Describe the arguments for and against the prisons 11-3 Summarize the distinction between Jails and prisons and indicate the importance of is in th eAmerican comection system After you finish this chapter, go to PAGES 247-248 for STUDY TOOLS A Trend Indeed? he ballot initiative offered a of Californias overcrowded prisons and Jals Caled Proposition 47. It proposedto downgrade a number of nonviolent felonies involving less than $950 Induding grand theft, shoplifting, writing bad checks, receiving stolen property, and drug possession to misdemeanors. As a result of this change offenders convicted of these crimes would probably not wind up behind bars. In November 2014 nearly 60 percent of California voters approved Proposition 47. Three months after the new law went into effect, the jail populations of Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego Counties dropped by 20 percent 22 percent and 16 percent respectively. California is hardly the only state that recently has taken steps to reduce both its Inmate population and the costs associated with its corrections system. In 2013, six states closed correctional facilities with North Carolina alone estimating S40 million in savings. In 2014, thirty states passed legislation designed to lower Incarceration rates often by steering nonviolent offenders to community supervision. These policy choices reflect a small but significant trend in American corrections fewer Inmates Before a slight (03 percent) rise in 2013, the total US prison population declined each year from 2010 to 2012, the first time that had happened in nearly four decades. To be sure these decreases do little to threaten our nation's title as the globes leading incarceratoc'About 22 million Amerkans are in prison and jail. The United States locks up sk times as many of its citizens as Canada does, and eight times as many as a number of European democracies About 2.2 million inmates are incarcerated in the United States. Economic considerations aside, what is your opinion of America's dramatically high incarceration rates? 11-1 HOW HAVE AMERICANPRISONS EVOLVED? Today's high rates of imprisonment-often referred to as evidence of mass incarceration in the United States are the result of many criminal justice strategies that we have discussed in this textbook. These include truth-insentencing guidelines, relatively long sentences for gun and drug crimes, "three-strikes habitual offender laws, and judicial freedom to incarcerate convicts for relatively minor criminal behavior. At the base of all these policies is a philosophy that sees prisons primarily as instruments of punishment The loss of freedom imposed on inmates is the penalty Still the fact that politicians are willing to accept policies that reduce the number of inmates represents a sea change in the country's corrections strategles People want their government to make a distinction in the public safety area between those who have to be locked up and those who can serve their sentence in less expensive, more humane and more effective ways' says former California state representative Darrel Steinberg who pushed for Proposition 47s approval That's what the people want FIGOILL for the crimes they have committed. Punishment has not, however, always been the main reason for incarceration in this country CAREER TIP Just as criminologists study crime, penologists study the corrections system, often with a focus on prison management and inmate rehabilitation 11-1a English Roots The prisons of eighteenth-century England, known as bridewells after London's Bridewell Palace, had little to do with punishment. These facilities were mainly used CHAPTER 11 Prisons and als 229 to hol ishme made Engli on con cuted by the a br a nTI nies d If any to use terpart early who ac Based tion, mutilat ordere victims to mal was pri still allo premed howeve colonie 11-15 The F1 On W rescinde those of Revoluti the first punish passed! through beaten chusetts exa m plePear ing the delphia's Penitentiary separating Inmat Separate Cor system developed from each other Individual els 230 PART 4 חם as tle sed is 229 to hold debtors or those awulting trial, execution, or banishment from the community. (In many ways, as will be made clear, these facilities resembled the modern Jall.) English courts generally imposed one of two sanctions on convicted felons: they turned them loose, or they executed them. Most felons were released, pardoned either by the court or the clergy after receiving a whipping or a br andin gThe correctional system in the American colonies differed very little from that of their motherland. If anything, colonial administrators were more likely to use corporal punishment than their English counterparts, and the death penalty was not uncommon in early America. The one dissenter was William Penn, who adopted the "Great Law" in Pennsylvania in 1682. Based on Quaker ideals of humanity and rehabilitation, this criminal code forbade the use of torture and mutilation as forms of punishment. Instead, felons were ordered to pay restitution of property or goods to their victims. If the offenders did not have sufficient property to make restitution, they were placed in a prison, which was primarily a "workhouse." The death penalty was still allowed under the "Great Law," but only in cases of premeditated murder. Penn proved to be an exception, however, and the path to reform was much slower in the colonies than in England. 11-16 Walnut Street Prison: The First Penitentiary On William Penn's death in 1718, the "Great Law was rescinded in favor of a harsher criminal code, similar to those of the other colonies. At the time of the American Revolution, however, the Quakers were instrumental in the first broad swing of the incarceration pendulum from punishment to rehabilitation. In 1776, Pennsylvania passed legislation ordering that offenders be reformed through treatment and discipline rather than simply beaten or executed. Several states, including Massachusetts and New York, quickly followed Pennsylvania's ex amplePennsylvania continued its reformist ways by opening the country's first penitentiary in a wing of Philadelphia's Walnut Street Jail in 1790. The penitentiary Penitentiary An early form of correctional facility that emphasized separating Inmates from society and from each other. Separate Confinement A nineteenth-century penitentiary system developed in Pennsylvania in which inmates were kept separate from each other at all times, with daily activities taking place in Individual cells 230 PART 4 Corrections operated on the assumption that silence and labor provided the best hope of rehabilitating the criminal spirit. Remaining silent would force the prisoners to think about their crimes, and eventually the weight of conscience would lead to repentance. At the same time, enforced Inbor would attack the problem of idleness-regardedthe main cause of crime by penologists of the time. Consequently, Inmates at Walnut Street were isolated from one another in solitary rooms and kept busy with constant menial chores. Eventually, the penitentiary at Walnut Street succumbed to the same problems that continue to plague institutions of confinement: overcrowding and excessive costs. As an influx of inmates forced more than one per son to be housed in a room, maintaining silence became nearly impossible. By the early 1800s, officials could not find work for all of the convicts, so many were left idle. 11-1c The Great Penitentiary Rivalry: Pennsylvania versus New York LO11-1The apparent lack of success at Walnut Streetdid little to dampen enthusiasm for the penitentiary concept. Throughout the first half of the nineteenth century, a number of states reacted to prison overcrowding by constructing new penitentiaries. Each state tended to have its own peculiar twist on the roles of silence and labor, and two such systems-those of Pennsylvania and New York-emerged to shape the debate over the most effective way to run a prison. THE PENNSYLVANIA SYSTEM After the failure of Walnut Street, Pennsylvania constructed two new prisons: the Western Penitentiary near Pittsburgh (opened in 1825) and the Eastern Penitentiary in Cherry Hill, near Philadelphia (1829). The Pennsylvania system took the concept of silence as a virtue to new extremes. Based on the idea of separate confinement these penitentiaries were constructed with back-to-back cells facing outward from the center. (See Figure 11.1 for the layout of the original Eastem Penitentiary.) To protect each inmate from the corrupting influence of the others, prisoners worked, slept, and ate alone in their cells. Their only contact with other human beings came in the form of religious instrue tion froin a visiting clergyman or prison official." THE NEW YORK SYSTEM If Pennsylvania's prisons were designed to transform wrongdoers into honest citizens, those in New York focused on obedience. When New York's Newgate Prison (built in 1791) became overcrowded, the state authorized the construction of Auburn Prison, which opened in 1816. Auburn initially operated under many of the same assumptions that guided the penitentiary at Walnut Street. Solitary confinent, however, seemed to lead to an inordinate amount of sickness, Insanity, and even suicide among Inmates, and it was abandoned in 1822. Nine years later, Elam Lynds became warden at Aubum and instilled the congregate system, also known as the Auburn system. Like Pennsylvania's separate confinement system, the congregate system was based on silence and labor. At Auburn, however, Inmates worked and ate together, with silence enforced by prison guards. If either state can be said to have won the debate, It was New York. The Auburn system proved more popular, and a majority of the new prisons built during the first half of the nineteenth century followed New York's lead, though mainly for economic reasons rather than philosophical ones. New York's penitentiaries were cheaper to build because they did not require so much space. Furthermore, Inmates in New York were employed in workshops, whereas those in Pennsylvania toiled alone in their cells. Consequently, the Auburn system was better positioned to exploit prison labor in the early years of widespread factory production. 11-10 The Reformers and the Progressives The Auburn system did not go unchallenged. In the 1870s, a group of reformers argued that fixed sentences, imposed silence, and isolation did nothing to improve prisoners. These critics proposed that penal institutions should offer the promise of early release as a prime tool for rehabilitation. Echoing the views of the Quakers a century earlier, the reformers presented an ideology that would heavily influence American corrections for the ne xt centur yThis "new penology was put into practice at New York's Elmira Reformatory in 1876. At Elmira, good behavior was rewarded by early release, and misbehavior was punished with extended time under a three-grade system of classification. On entering the institution, the offender was assigned a grade of 2. If the inmate followed the rules and completed work and school assignments, after six months he was moved up to grade 1, the necessary grade for release. If, however, the inmate broke institutional rules, he was lowered to grade 3. A grade 3 inmate needed to behave properly for three months before he could return to grade 2 and begin to work back toward grade 1 and eventual release."Although other penal institutions did not adopt the Elmir model, its theories came into prominence in the first two decades of the twentieth century thanks to the Progressive movement in criminal justice. The FIGURE IN THE EASTERN PEMITENTIARY As you can see, the Eastern Penitentiary was designed in the form of a 'wagon wheel," known today as the radial style. The back-to-back cells in each spoke of the wheel faced outward from the center to limit contact between Inmates. Progressives believed that criminal behavior was caused by social, economic, and biological factors and, therefore, a corrections system should have a goal of treatment, not punishment. Consequently, they trumpeted a medical model for prisons, which held that institutions should offer a variety of programs and therapies to cure inmates of their "ills," whatever the root causes. The Progressives were largely responsible for the spread of indeterminate sentences (Chapter 9), probation (Chapter 10), intermediate sanctions (Chapter 10), and parole (Chapter 10) in the first half of the twentieth century 11-1e The Reassertion of Punishment Even though the Progressives had a great influence on the corrections system as a whole, their theories had little impact on the prisons themselves. Many of these Congregate System A nineteenth century penitentiary systemdeveloped in New York in which Inmates were kept in separate cells during the night but worked together in the daytime under a code of enforced silence Medical Model A model of corrections in which the psychological and biological roots of an Inmates criminal behavior are identified and treated CHAPTER 11 Prisons and als 231 ti di S 11-1f The Role of Prisons in Modern Society For reasons that we will explain later in the chapter, the mumber of federal and state prisoners quadrupled between 1980 and 2010. This increase reflects the varled demands placed on the modern American penal institution. As University of Connecticut sociologist Charles Logan once noted, Americans expect prisons to correct the incorrigible, rehabilitate the wretched, ... restrain thedangerous, and punish the Inmates of the Elmira Reformatory is Nea York attend a presentation asticowicked."* Basically, prisons prison auditorium. To what extends putea tre treatment should be a part theexist to make society a safer incarceration of criminals? place. Whether this is to be achieved through retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, or rehabilitation the four facilities had been constructed in the nineteenth cenjustifications of corrections introduced in Chapter 2 tury and were impervious to change. More important, depends on the operating philosophy of the individual prison administrators usually did not agree with the Propenal institution. gressives and their followers, so the day-to-day lives of Three general models of prisons have emerged to most inmates varied little from the congregate system of describe the different schools of thought behind prison Aubum Prison. organization: Academic attitudes began to shift a way from th eThe custodial model is based on the assumption that Progressives in the mid-1960s. Then, in 1974, the pubprisoners are incarcerated for reasons of incapacitalication of Robert Martinson's famous "What Works Ption, deterrence, and retribution. All decisions within essay provided opponents of the medical model with statistical evidence that rehabilitation efforts did nothingthe prison-such as what form of recreation toprovide the inmates-are made with an eye toward to lower recidivism rates. This is not to say that Marsecurity and discipline, and the daily routine of the tinson's findings went unchallenged. A number of criticsinmates is highly controlled. The custodial model has argued that rehabilitative programs could be successful."dominated the most restrictive prisons in the United In fact, Martinson himself retracted most o f his claims inStates since the 1930s. a little-noticed article published five years after his initial report. Attempts by Martinson and others to "set The rehabilitation model stresses the ideals of indithe record straight" went largely unnoticed, however, vidualized treatment that we discussed in Chapter as críme rose sharply in the early 1970s. This trend led & Security concerns are often secondary to the many criminologists and politicians to champion "get well-being of the individual inmate, and a number of tough measures to deal with criminals they now contreatment programs are offered to aid prisoners in sidered "incurable." By the end of the 1980s, the legislachanging their criminal and antisocial behavior. The tive, judicial, and administrative strategies that we have rehabilitation model came into prominence during discussed throughout this text had positioned the United the 1950s and enjoyed widespread popularity until States for an explosion in inmate populations and prison it began to lose general acceptance in the 1970s and1980s. construction unparalleled in the nation's history. 232 PART 4 Co rrections a arianCate In the reintegration model, the correctional institution serves as a training ground for the inmate to prepare for existence in the community. Prisons that have adopted this model give the prisoners more responsibility during incarceration and offer halfway houses and work programs (both discussed in Chapter 12) to help them reintegrate into society. This model is becoming more influential, as corrections officials react to problems such as prison overcrowding."More critical views of the prison's role in society are at odds with these three "deal perspectives. Professor Alfred Blumstein argues that prisons create new criminals, especially with regard to nonviolent drug offenders. Not only do these nonviolent felons become socialized to the criminal lifestyle while in prison, but the stigma of incarceration makes it more difficult for them to obtain employment on release. Their only means of sustenance "on the outside is to apply the criminal methods they learned in prison. A study by criminal justice professors Cassia Spohn of Arizona State University and David Holleran of the College of New Jersey found that convicted drug offenders who were sentenced to prison were 2.2 times more likely to be incarcerated for a new offense than those sentenced to probation." 11-2 HOW ARE PRISONSORGANIZED AND MANAGED? The United States has a dual prison system that parallels its dual court system, which we discussed in Chapter 7. The Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) currently operates about one hundred confinement facilities, ranging from prisons to immigration detention centers to commu. nity corrections institutions. In the federal corrections system, a national director, appointed by the president, oversees six regional directors and a staff of nearly forty thousand employees. All fifty states also operate state prisons, which number about seventeen hundred and make up more than 90 percent of the country's correctional facilities." Governors are responsible for the organization and operation of state corrections systems, which vary widely based on each state's geography, demographles (population characteristics), and political culture, Generally, those offenders sentenced in federal court for breaking federal law serve their time in federal prisons, and those offenders sentenced in state court for breaking state law serve their time in state prisons. As you can see in Figure 11.2, federal prisons hold relatively few violent felons, because relatively few federal laws involve violent crime. At the same time, federal prisons are much more likely to hold public order offenders, a group that includes violators of federal immigration law. FIGURE 11.2 TYPES OF OFFENSES OF FEDERALAND STATE PRISON INMATES 16% 10% 19% 1% 54% State Prison Inmates 35% 1% 7%6% 51% Federal Prison Inmates Offenses Violent Property Drug Public Order Omer As the comparison above shows, state prisoners are most likely to have been convicted of violent crimes, while federal prisoners are most likely to have been convicted of drug and public order offenses. Source Bureau de 2013 O C US Department o fSep 2011. Sale or CHAPTER 11 Pistons and 233 1 th oc Warde organa FIGUI ons few me, Blic Ted L Order Te most hile victed of das 233 11-22 Prison Administration Whether the federal government or a state government operates a prison, its administrators have the same general goals, summarized by Charles Logan as follows: The mission of a prison is to keep prisoners to keep them in, keep them ufe, keep them in line, keep them healthy, and keep them busy and to do it with fairness, without undue suffering and efficiently as possible. Considering the environment of a prisonenclosed world inhabited by people who are generally violent and angry and would rat her be anywhere els eLogan's mission statement is somewhat unrealistic. A prison staff must supervise the daily routines of hundreds or thousands of inmates, a duty that includes providing them with meals, education, vocational programs, and different forms of leisure. The smooth operation of this supervision is made more difficult-If not, at times, impossible-by budgetary restrictions, overcrowding, and continual inmate turnover. FORMAL PRISON MANAGEMENT In some respects, the management structure of a prison is similar to that of a police department, as discussed in Chapter 5. Both systems rely on a hierarchical (top-down) chain of command to increase personal responsibility. Both assign different employees to specific tasks, though prison managers have much more direct control over their subordinates than do police managers. The main difference is that police Warden The prison official who is ultimately responsible for the organization and performance of a correctional facility departments have a continuity of purpose that is sometimes lacking in prison organizations. All members of a police force are, at least theoretically, working to reduce crime and apprehend criminals. In a prison, this continuity is less evident. An employee in the prison laundry service and one who works in the visiting center have little in common. In some instances, employees may even have cross-purposes: a prison guard may want to punish an inmate, while a counselor in the treatment center may want to rehabilitate her or him. Consequently, a strong hierarchy is crucial for any prison management team that hopes to meet Charles Logan's expectations. As Figure 11.3 shows, the warden (also known as a superintendent) is ultimately responsible for the operation of a prison. He or she oversees deputy wardens, who in turn manage the various organizational lines of the institution. The custodial employees, who deal directly with the inmates and make up more than half of a prison's staff, operate under a militaristic hierarchy, with a line of command passing from the deputy warden to the captain to the correctional officer. GOVERNING PRISONS The implications of prison mismanagement can be severe. While studying a series of prison riots, sociologists Bert Useem and Peter Kimball found that breakdown in managerial control commonly preceded such acts of mass violence. During the 1970s, for example, conditions at the State Penitentiary in New Mexico deteriorated significantly. Inmates were increasingly the targets of random and harsh treatment at the hands of the prison staff, while at the same time a reduction in structured activities left prison life "painfully boring." The result, in 1980, was one of the most violent prison riots in the nation's history, FIGURE 11.3 ORGANIZATIONAL CHART FOR A TYPICAL CORRECTIONAL FACILITY Deputy War denCustody 1. Securty 2 Guard Forces 3. Training 4. Sy 5. Prisoner Discipline 5. Investigations 7 Visiting Schedules 234 PART 4 Corrections Deputy Warden: Management 1. Budget 2 Accounting 3. Purchasing 4. Warthouse 5. Commissary 6. Food Service 7. Clothing and Laundry 8. Grounds Maintenance Deputy Warden: Program Treatment Programs 2. Medal Serions 3. Marath Portation 5 ton 6. Volunteers 7. Religious Services Deputy Warden Industry and Agriculture 1. Prisen Work Program 2 Prison Farm Programs What sort of prison management is most suited to wold such situations? Most prisons in the United States opste under an authoritarian management structure, chancterized by a strong leader, extensive control of the prison environment, and harsh discipline for misbehaving Inmates. Political scientist John Dilulio believes that, in general, the sound govemance of correctional facilities is matter of order, amenities, and services: Order can be defined as the absence of misconduct such as murder, assault, and rape. Many observers, including Ditulio, believe that, having incarcerated a person, the state has a responsibility to protect that person from disorder in the correctional institution. Amenities are those comforts that make life "liv. able, such as clean living conditions, acceptable food, and entertainment. One theory of incarceration holds that inmates should not enjoy a quality of life comparable to life outside prison. Without the basic amenities, however, prison life becomes unbearable, and inmates are more likely to lapse into disorder. Services include programs designed to improve an inmates prospects on release, such as vocational training remedial education, and drug treatment. Again, many feel that a person convicted of a crime does not deserve to participate in these kinds of programs, but they have two dear benefits. First, they keep the inmate occupied and focused during her or his sentence. Second, they reduce the chances that the inmate will go back to a life of crime after she or he returns to the community."According to Dilulio, in the absence of order, amenities, and services, inmates will come to see their imprisonment as not only unpleasant but unfair, and they will become much more difficult to control. Furthermore, weak governance encourages inmates to come up with their own methods of regulating their lives. As we shall see in the next chapter, the result is usually high levels of violence and the expansion of prison gangs and other unsanctioned forms of authority CAREER TIP For spiritual guidance behind bars, inmates of all faiths turn to prison chaplains, who coordinate religious services in correctional facilities. CLASSIFICATION One of the most important aspects of prison administration occurs soon after a defendant has been convicted of a crime and sentenced to be incarcerated. In this classification process, an inmate's mental, physical, and security needs are evaluated to help determine the best correctional facility "At." The classification process usually takes four to eight weeks and is overseen by 1 corrections counselor, also known as a case manager. During this period, the inmate undergoes numerous tests and interviews to identify education levels, medical issues, drug/alcohol addictions, and any behavioral "red flags"Taking the results of the process into consideration, prison administrators generally rely on three broad criteria for classification purposes 1. The seriousness of the crime committed. 2. The risk of future criminal or violent conduct. 3. The need for treatment and rehabilitation programs." Classification is not a one-time operation. Inmates can, and often do, change their behavior patterns during the course of their incarceration. If an inmate acts more violently, or, conversely, shows an increasingly positive attitude, that inmate will need to be reclassified. Furthermore, the successful completion of prison rehabilitation programs may require an adjustment in the inmate's release plan, discussed in the next chapter. 11-2b Types of Prisons Following the classification process, an inmate is assigned a custody level. Corrections officials rely on this custody level to place the inmate in the appropriate correctional facility. In the federal prison system and a number of state prison systems, an offender's custody level determines whether she or he is sent to one of six different types of prisons. Inmates in level 1 facilities are usually nonviolent and require the least amount of security, while inmates in level 6 facilities are the most dangerous and require the harshest security measures. To simplify matters, most correctional facilities are designated as operating at one of three security levelsminimum, medium, or maximum. A fourth LO11-2level-the supermarimum-security prison. Classification The process through which prison officials screen each incoming inmate to best determine that inmates security and treatment needs Custody Level As a result of the classification process, the security designation given to new inmates, crucial in helping corrections officials determine which correctional facility is best suited to the individual offender CHAPTER 11 Prisons and is 235 5 WARDEN Job Description: As chief managing officer of an adult correctional Institution, the war. den is responsible for the custody, feeding, clothing, housing, care, treatment discipline training, employment, rehabilitation, and wellbeing of inmates. The warden provides Institutional staff with effective communications, training, and leadership, What Kind of Training Is Required? A bachelor's degree in criminal Justice, social work, psychology, or a related field. One or more years of work experience in the management of a major division of a correctional Institution. Annual Salary Range?$38,000-$100,000 (depending on size of Institution and geographic region) Caiec Prep SOCIAL MEDIA CAREER TIP Regularly reevaluate your social media tools and the methods you use to keep up to date in your fields of interest. If you are still using the same too's as a year ago you probably aren't keeping up with the latest developments in intemestechnology Inown as the supermar-is relatively rare and extremely controversial due to its hyper-harsh methods of punishing and controlling the most dangerous prisoners. MAXIMUM-SECURITY PRISONS In a certain sense, the classification of prisoners today owes a debt to the three grade system developed at the Elmira Reformatory, discussed earlier in the chapter. Once wrongdoers enter a corrections facility, they are constantly graded on behavior. Those who serve "good time," as we have seen, are often rewarded with early release. Those who compile extensive misconduct records are usually housed, along with violent and repeat offenders, in maximumsecurity prisons. The names of these institutions Folsom, San Quentin. Sing Sing, Attica-conjure up foreboding images of concrete and steel jungles, with good reason. Maximum-Security Prison A correctional institution designed and organlad to control and discipline dangerous felons, as well as prevent escape 236 PART 4 Corrections f in E Maximum-security prisons are designed with full attention to security and surveillance. In these institutions, inmates' lives are programmed in a militaristic fashion to keep them from escaping or from harming themselves or the prison staff. About a quarter of the prisons in the United States are classified madmum security, and these institutions house about a third of the country's prisoners The Design Maximum-security prisons tend to be large holding more than a thousand inmates—and they have similar features. The entire operation is usually surrounded by concrete walls that stand twenty to thirty feet high and have also been sunk deep into the ground to deter tunnel escapes. Fences reinforced with razorribbon barbed wire that can be electrically charged may supplement these barriers. The prison walls are studded with watchtowers, from which guards armed with shotguns. and rifles survey the movement of prisoners below. Inthates live in cells, most of them with dimensions similar to those found in the Topeka Correctional Facility, a maximum-security prison in Topeka, Kansas: eight feet by fourteen feet with cinder block walls. The space con tains bunks, a toilet, a sink, and possibly a cabinet or closet. Ces are located in rows of cell blocks, each of which forms its own security unit, set off by a series of gates and bars. A maximum-security institution is essentially a collection of numerous cell blocks, each constituting its own prison within a prison. Most prisons, regardless of their design, have cell blocks that open into sprawling prison yards, where the Inmates commingle dally. The prison of the future, however, rejects this layout. Instead, it relies on a pod. ular design, as evident at the Two Rivers Correctional Institution in Umatilla, Oregon. At Two Rivers, which opened in 2007, fourteen housing pods contain ninetysix inmates each. Each unit has its own yard, so inmates rarely, if ever, interact with members of other pods. This design gives administrators the flexibility to, for example, TRACKING INMATES Technology has added significantly to the overall safety of madmum-security prisons. Walk-through metal detectors and X-ray body scanners, for example, can detect weapons or other contraband hidden on the body of an inmate. The most promising new technology in this field, however, relies on radio frequency identification (RFID). About the size of two grains of rice, an RFID tag consists of a glass capsule that contains a computer chip, a tiny copper antenna, and an electrical device known as a capacitor that transmits the data in the chip to an outside scanner, In the prison context, RFID works as a high-tech head count: inmates wear bracelets tagged with the microchips while correctional officers wear small RFID devices resembling smartphones, Guided by a series of radio transmitters and receivers, the system is able to pinpoint the location of inmates and guards within twenty feet. Every two seconds, radio signals 'search out the location of each inmate and guard, and relay this information to a central computer. On a grid of the prison, an inmate shows up as a yellow dot and a correctional officer as a blue dot. Many RFID systems also store all movements place violent criminals in pod A and white collar criminals in pod B without worrying about midng the two different security levels. Security Measures within maximum-security prisons, Inmates' lives are dominated by security measures. Whenever they move from one area of the prison to another, they do so in groups and under the watchful eye of armed correctional officers. Television surveillance cameras may be used to monitor their every move, even when sleep ing, showering or using the toilet. They are subject to frequent pat-downs or strip searches at the guards' discretion. Constant head counts" ensure that every inmate is where he or she should be. Tower guardsmany of whom have orders to shoot to laill in the case of a disturbance or escape attempt.--constantly look down on the inmates as they move around outdoor areas of the facility. CJ and Technology in a database for future reference. "IRFID) completely revolutionizes a prison because you know where every one is not approximately but exactly where they are remarked an official at the National Institute of Justice. Thinking about RFID Tracking Review the discussion of crime mapping and hot spots in Chapter 5. Drawing on your knowledge of crime-mapping technology, discuss how RFID technology can reduce violence and other misconduct such as drug sales in prisons. CHAPTER 11 Prisons and its 237 bo co eli dis ing ser cor eac Superm facility offenders Inmates ar Lockdow Intan are suspen Medium less danger prevent Vio 238 PA 237 SUPERMAX PRISONS About thirty states and the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) oper ate supermax (short for supermaximum security) prisons, which are supposedly reserved for the 'worst of the worst of America's corrections population. Many of the inmates in these facilities are deemed high risks to commit murder behind bars about a quarter of the occupants of the BOP's U. S. Penitentiary Administrative1 Maximum (ADX) in Florence, Colorado, have killed other prisoners or assaulted correotional officers elsewhere. Wher secanty measures on your ideally from this photo of u ce b led of a state prison i nArizona Supermax Inmates Supermax prisons are also used as punishment for offenders who commit serious disciplinary infractions in maximum-security meals through a slot in the door. The cells measure eight prisons, or for those inmates who become involved with by ten feet in size and are windowless. Fluorescent lights prison gangs. In addition, a growing number of superare continuously on, day and night, making it difficult for max occupants are either high-profile individuals who inmates to enjoy any type of privacy or sleep." would be at constant risk of attack in a general prison For the most part, supermax prisons operate in a population or convicted terrorists. Although different state of perpetual lockdown, in which all inmates are jurisdictions have different definitions of what consticonfined to their cells and social activities such as meals, tutes a supermax, the most reliable surveys estimate recreational sports, and treatment programs are nonexisthat about sixty such facilities exist in the United States, tent. For the sixty minutes of each day that SHU inmates holding approximately 25,000 inmates. 17are allowed out of their cells (compared with twelve to The main purpose of a supermax prison is to strictly sixteen hours in regular maximum-security prisons), they control the inmates' movement, thereby limiting (or may either shower or exercise in an enclosed, concrete eliminating) situations that could lead to breakdowns in "yard" covered by plastic mesh. Prisoners are strip discipline. The conditions at California's Security Houssearched before and after leaving their cells, and are ing Unit (SHU) at Pelican Bay State Prison are repreplaced in waist restraints and handcuffs on their way to sentative of most supermax institutions. Prisoners are and from the "yard" and showers." confined to their one-person cells for twenty-three hours each day under video camera surveillance. They receive MEDIUMAND MINIMUM-SECURITY PRISONSMedium-security prisons hold about 45 percent ofthe prison population and minimum-security prisons Supermax Prison A highly secure, freestanding correctional20 percent. Inmates at medium-security prisons have facility or such a unit within a correctional facility--that manages offenders who would pose a threat to the security and safety of otherfor the most part committed less serious crimes than Inmates and staff members If housed in the general Inmate populationthose housed in maximum-security prisons and are notconsidered high risks for es caping or causing harm. ConLockdown A disciplinary action taken by prison officials in which all Inmates are ordered to their quarters and nonessential prison activitiessequently, medium-security institutions are not designed are suspendedfor control to the same ex tent as maximum-security prisMedium-Security Prison A correctional Institution that housesons and have a more relaxed atmosphere. These facililess dangerous Inmates and therefore uses less restrictive measures toties also offer more educational and treatment programs prevent violence and escapes. and allow for more contact between inmates. Mediumsecurity prisons are rarely walled, relying instead on 238 PART 4 Corrections HD high fences. Prisoners have more freedom of movement within the structures, and the levels of surveillance are mish lower. Living quarters are less restrictive as wellmany of the newer medium-security pri sons provide dormitory housin gA minimum-security prison seems at first glance to be more like a college campus than an incarceration facility. Most of the inmates at these institutions are first time offenders who are nonviolent and well behaved. A high percentage are white collar criminals. Indeed, Inmates are often transferred to minimum security prisons as a reward for good behavior in other facilities. Therefore, security measures are lax compared with even medium-security prisons. Unlike mediumsecurity Institutions, minimum-security prisons do not have armed guards. Prisoners are provided with amenities such as televisions and computers in their rooms. They also enjoy freedom of movement and are allowed off prison grounds for educational or employment purposes to a much greater extent than those held in more restrictive facilities. CAREER TIP Many colleges now offer degrees in recreation management. Although geared toward corporate fitness/wellness programs, this discipline also has a place in the corrections system. For example, Danbury Women's Prison has a track and a gymnasium that is used for Pilates and yoga classes. 11-3 WHAT TRENDS AREDRIVING THE AMERICAN PRISON POPULATION? As Figure 114 shows, the number of Americans in prison or fail has increased dramatically in the past three decades. This growth can be attributed to a number of factors, starting with the enhancement and stricter enforcement of the nation's illegal drug laws. 11-3a Factors in Prison Population Growth LO11-3There are more people in prison and fall fordrug offenses today than there were for all offenses in the early 1970s.** In 1980, about 19,000 drug offenders were incarcerated in state prisons and 4,800 drug offenders were in federal prisons. Thirty-three years later, state prisons held about 210,000 inmates who had been arrested for drug offenses, and the number of drug offenders in federal prisons had risen to approximately 98,000 (representing about half of all inmates in federal facilities) Minimum-Security Prison A correctional Institution designed to allow Inmates, most of whom pose low security risks, a great deal of freedom of movement and contact with the outside world. FIGURE 11.4 THE INMATE POPULATION OF THE UNITED STATES 2.500 Total Inmates in Custody (x1,000) 2,000 1.500 1000 5001985 90 s2 94 O 2009 Year 02 04 05 OS TO 12 14 The total number of Inmates in the United States has risen from 744,208 in 1985 to about 2.2 million in 2014 Source US Department of Justice CHAPTER 11 Pros and 239 89 INCREASED PROLABILITY OF INCARCIRATION The growth of America) Inmate population also reflects the reality that the chance of someone who is arrested going to prison today is much greater than it was thirty years ago. Most of this growth took place in the 1980s, when the likelihood of Incarceration in a state prison after arrest Increased fivefold for drug offenses, threefold for weapons offenses, and twofold for crimes such as sexual assault, burglary, auto theft, and larceny. For federal crimes, the proportion of convicted defendants being sent to prison rose from 54 percent in 1968 to 88 percent in 2013.* INMATES SERVING MORE TIME In Chapter 9, we discussed a number of "get tough" sentencing laws passed in reaction to the crime wave of the 1970s and 1980s. These measures, including sentencing guidelines, mandatory minimum sentences, and truth-in-sentencing laws, have significantly increased the length of prison terms in the United States. Overall, inmates released from state prison in 2009 spent an average of nine months-about 36 percent-longer behind bars than those inmates released in 1990. On the federal level, in the fifteen years after the passage of the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, the average time served in federal prison increased more than 50 percent.6 FEDERAL PRISON GROWTH Even though, as noted earlier in the chapter, the overall U. S. prison population rose slightly in 2013, the number of federal prisoners dropped-by about 2,000—for the first time in thirtyfour years. This decrease is too small, however, to offset the earlier expansion of the federal corrections system. Between 2000 and 2013, the federal prison population grew 56 percent, from about 125,000 to just over 195,000As already mentioned, an increase in federal drug offenders is largely responsible for the growth of the federal prison population. Because of mandatory minimum sentencing laws, federal drug traffickers spend an average of seventy-four months behind bars, considerably longer than those sentenced to state prisons." Other factors driving federal prison population growth include the following: 1. Starting in 1987, Congress abolished parole in the federal corrections system, meaning that federal inmates must serve their entire sentences, minus good timecredits 2. The number of federal inmates sentenced for immigration violations (covered by federal law rather 240 PART 4 Corrections then state law) Increased by 30 percent from 2001 to 2013.. 3. In 2015, approximately fourteen thousand femaleoffenders were behind bars in federal prison, about double the numbers in 1995. Indeed, there were about the same number of women in federal prison for drug offenses In 2012 as there were for all offenses in 1995. 11-36 Decarceration As recently as 2007, one expert lamented the unwillingness of corrections authorities in the United States to reduce their prison populations, calling such efforts "practically virgin territory."" This is no longer the case. The high cost of imprisonment which reached $524 billion for the fifty states in 2012_has caused policy makers to embrace strategies of decarceration, or the lowering of incarceration rates. In general, decarceration policies rely on three methods to reduce the number of offenders in prison: 1. Decreasing the probability that nonviolent offenders will be sentenced to prison. 2. Increasing the rate of release of nonviolent offenders from prison. 3. Decreasing the rate of imprisonment for probationand parole violators. With Proposition 47, as we saw at the beginning of this chapter, California voters chose the first decarceration approach just listed. The federal government is focusing on the early release of nonviolent drug offenders from prisons, a strategy we discussed in Chapter 9. States increasingly are relying on evidence-based strategies, or strategies supported by statistical research, to decarcerate. Since 2005, fifteen states have lowered their recidivism rates using well-tested tactics such as community corrections, prison treatment programs, and risk assessment planning." 11-3c The Consequences of America's High Rates of Incarceration Many observers believe that America's high rate of incar ceration has contributed significantly to the drop in the country's crime rates. Even so, criminologists are well "ripple effect on their communities and on the next generation of kids, growing up with their fathers in prison, will certainly be with us for at least a generation 11-4 WHAT AREPRIVATE PRISONS? As the prison population soared at the end of the twentieth century, state correc tions officials faced a seriousproblem: too many Inmates, Whazare 3m the possible consegue frategia parut Schind bar for the affected cald and you so younot enough prisons. "States couldn't build space fast enough," explains correctionsexpert Martin Horn. "And so wware of a number of negative consequences related to they had to turn to the private sector. With corrections this country's immense prison and jail population. exhibiting all appearance of a recession-proof industry,"For one, incarcera tion can have severe social reperAmerican businesses eagerly entered the market. cussions for communities and the families that make Today, private prisons, or prisons run by private up those communities. About 2.7 million minors in firms to make a profit, are an important part of the this country-one in twenty-eight-have a parent in criminal justice system. About two dozen private compaprison. These children are at an increased risk of sufnies operate more than two hundred facilities across the fering from pov erty, depression, and academic probUnited States. The two largest corrections firms, Corlems, as well as higher levels of juvenile delinquency rections Corporation of America (CCA) and the GEO and eventual incarceration themselves. Studies also Group, Inc, manage approximately 160 correctional link high imprisonment rates to increased incidence of facilities and generate about $2.5 billion in annual rev. sexually transmitted diseases and teenage pregnancy, enue combined. By 2013, private penal institutions as the separation caused by incarceration wreaks havoc housed about 133,000 inmates, representing 8.4 per on interpersonal relationships." Incarceration also has cent of all prisoners in the state and federal corrections a harmful impact on offenders themselves. After beingsystems. released from prison or jail, these men and women fer from a higher rate of physical and mental health11-4a Why Privatize? problems than the rest of the population, and are more likely to struggle with addiction, unemployment, and It would be a mistake to automatically assume that prihomelessness, vate prisons are less expensive to run than public ones. Because of the demographics of the U. S. priso nNevertheless, the incentive to privatize is primarily population, these problems have a disproportionatefinancial impact on members of minority groups. African American males are incarcerated at a rate more than six times that of white males and about two and a half times that of Hispanic males. With more black men behind b arsPrivate Prisons Correctional facilities operated by private than enrolled in the nation's colleges and universities, Marc Mauer of the Sentencing Project, a nonprofitcorporations instead of the government and therefore, reliant on profits for survival research group in Washington, D. C., believes that the CHAPTER 11 Prisons and is 241 aly 241 COST EFFICIENCY In the 1980s and 1990s, LO11a number of states and elties reduced operat. ing costs by transferring government-run services such as garbage collection and road maintenance to the private sector. Similarly, private prisons can often be run more cheaply and efficiently than public ones for the following reasons: Labor costs. The wages of public employees account for nearly two-thirds of a prison's operating expenses. Although private corrections firms pay base salaries comparable to those enjoyed by public prison employees, their nonunionized staffs receive lower levels of overtime pay, workers' compensation claims, sick leave, and health-care insurance. Competitive bidding. Because of the profit motive, private corrections firms have an incentive to buy goods and services at the lowest possible price. Las red tape. Private corrections firms are not part of the government bureaucracy and therefore do not have to contend with the massive amount of paperwor k that can clog government organization sIn 2005, the National Institute of Justice released the results of a five-year study comparing low-security public and private prisons in California. The govemment agency found that private facilities cost taxpayers between 6 and 10 percent less than public ones." More recent research conducted at Vanderbilt University found that states saved about $15 million annually when they supplemented their corrections systems with privately managed institutions." OVERCROWDING AND OUTSOURCING Private prisons are becoming increasingly attractive to state gov. emments faced with the competing pressures of tight budgets and overcrowded corrections facilities. Lacking the funds to alleviate overcrowding by building more prisons, state officials are tu rning to the private institutions for h elpIn Oklahoma, for example, where corrections officials are sending prison inmates to local jails due to lack of prison space, more than a quarter of the state's prisoners-about 5,800 inmates--are housed in private facilities. Often, the private prison is out of state, which leads to the "outsourcing of inmates. California has alleviated its chronic overcrowding problems by sending about 9,000 inmates to private institutions in Arizona, Mississippi, and Oklahoma. 242 PART 4 Corrections 11-4b The Argument against Private Prisons The assertion that private prisons offer economic bene fits is not universally accepted. A number of studies have found that private prisons are no more cost-effective than public ones. Furthermore, opponents of private prisons worry that, despite the assurances of corporate executives, private corrections companies will "cut corners to save costs, denying Inmates important security guarantees in the process. SAFETY CONCERNS Various studies have also uncov ered disturbing patterns of misbehavior at private pris ons. For example, in the year after CCA took over operations of Ohio's Lake Erie Correctional Institution from the state corrections department, the number of assaults against correctional officers and inmates increased by over 40 percent." In addition, research conducted by Curtis R. Blakely of the University of South Alabama and Vic W. Bumphus of the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga found that a prisoner in a private correctional facility was twice as likely to be assaulted by a fellow inmate as a prisoner in a public one. PHILOSOPHICAL CONCERNS Other critics see private prisons as inherently unjust, even if they do save tax dollars or provide enhanced services. These observers believe that corrections is not simply another industry, like garbage collection or road maintenance, and that only the government has the authority to punish wrongdoers. In the words of John Dilulio: It is precisely because corrections involves the deprivation of liberty. precisely because it involves the legally sanctioned exercise of coercion by some citizens over others, t hat it must remain wholly within public handsFurthermore, some observers note, if a private corrections firm receives a fee from the state for each inmate housed in its facility, does that not give management an incentive to increase the amount of time each prisoner serves? Though government parole boards make the final decision on an inmate's release from private prisons, the company could manipulate misconduct and gaod behavior reports to maximize time served and, by extension, increase profits."? "You can put a dollar figure on each inmate that is held at a private prison," says Alex Friedmann of Prison Legal Netos. "They are treated as commodities. And that's very dangerous and troubling wherf a company sees the people it incarcerates as nothing more than a money stream. 11-4c The Future of Private Prisons The number of inmates in private prisons declined by 3 percent from 2012 to 2013,"largely as a result of a reduction in the number of federal prisoners noted earlier in the chapter. Still, the private prison industry will continue to play an important role in American corrections, for two reasons. First, states experieneing shrinking corrections budgets and congested prisons rely on private correctional institutions to handle their inmate population overflow. Second, the federal government houses about 25,000 noncitizens many of whom have violated immigration laws—in thirteen privately operated "Criminal Alien Requirement correctional facilities across the country * 11-5 WHY ARE JAILSSO IMPORTANT? L011-5 Although prisons and prison issues dominatethe public discourse on corrections, there is an argument to be made that jails are the dominant penal institutions in the United States. In general, a prison is a facility designed to house people convicted of felonies for lengthy periods of time, while a jail is authorized primarily to hold pretrial detainees and offenders who have committed misdemeanors. On any given day, about 730,000 inmates are in jail in this country, and jails admit approximately 11.7 million persons over the course of an entire year. Nevertheless, jail funding is often the lowest priority for the tight budgets of local governments, leading to severe overcrowding and other dismal conditions. Many observers see this negligence as having farreaching consequences for criminal justice. Jail is often the first contact that citizens have with the corrections system. It is at this point that treatment and counseling have the best chance to deter future criminal behavior. By failing to take advantage of this opportunity, says Professor Franklin Zimring of the University of California at Berkeley School of Law, corrections officials have created a situation in which today's jail folk are tomorrow's prisoners. (To better understand the role that these two correctional institutions play in the criminal justice system, see Figure 11.5.) 11-5a The Jail Population Like their counterparts in state prisons, jail inmates are overwhelmingly young male adults. About 47 percent of jail inmates are white, 36 percent are African American, and 15 percent are Hispanic. The main difference between state prison and jail inmates involves their criminal activity. As Figure 116 shows, jail inmates are more likely to have been convicted of nonviolent crimes than their counterparts in state prison. Jail Afacility, usually operated by the county government, used primarily to hold persons awaiting trial and those who have been found guilty of misdemeanors FIGURE 11.5 THE MAIN DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PRISONS AND JAILS 2 Prisons are operated by the federal and state governmentsholdinmates who may have lived quite tarzway before being arrested house only those who have been convicted of a crime generally hold inmates who have been found guilty of serious crimes and received sentences of longer than one year chen offer a wide variety of rehabilitation and educational programs for long-term prisones Jails are operated by county and cty government hold mosty mates from the local community - house those who are waiting trial or have recently been arrested In addition to connect general hold me who have been found quity of minor omes and are serving sentences of less than a yeardue to smaller budgets tend to focus only on the necessities of safety food and clothing O CHAPTER 11 Prisons and 243 Prel and in al Tim payt 3 FIGURE 11.6 TYPES OF OFFENSES OFPRISON MNO JAIL INMATES1% 16% 10% 19% 54% State Prison Inmates 25% 25% 1% 25% 24% Offenses Violent Property Drug Public order Other As the comparison above shows, jail inmates are more likely than state prisoners to have been convicted of nonviolent crimes. This underscores the main function of jails: to house less serious offenders for a relatively short period of time. Source Bucastic Sesc Pro 20Washington, DC: US Department ofisso Serember 2014 Le 11 page 15 and Bureau of Justice Sectia Perilor om igron DC: US Department of Justic, ly 2004 Pretrial Detainees Individuals who cannot post bail after arrest and are therefore forced to spend the time prior to their trial incarcerated in jail Time Served the period of time a person denied ball for unable to pay is has spent in jail prior to his or her trial 244 PART 4 Corrections PRETRIAL DETAINEES A significant number of those detained in jails technically are not prisoners. They are pretrial detainees who have been arrested by the police and, for a variety of reasons that we discussed in Chapter 8, are unable to post bail. Pretrial detainees are, in many ways, walking legal contradictions. According to the U. S. Constitution, they are innocent until proved guilty. At the same time, by being incarcerated while awaiting trial, they are denied a number of personal freedoms and are subjected to the poor conditions of many jails. In Bell a Wolfish (1979), the Supreme Court rejected the notion that this situation is inherently unfair by refusing to give pretrial detainees greater legal protections than sentenced jail inmates have." In essence, the Court recognized that treating pretrial detainees differently from convicted jail inmates would place too much of a burden on corrections officials and was therefore impractical." SENTENCED JAIL INMATES According to the U. S. Department of Justice, about 40 percent of those in jail have been convicted of their current charges. In other words, they have been found guilty of a crime, usually a misdemeanor, and sentenced to time in jail. The typical jail term lasts between thirty and ninety days, and rarely does a prisoner spend more than one year in jail for any single crime. Often, a judge will credit the length of time the convict has spent in detention waiting for trial known as time served toward his or her sentence. This practice acknowledges two realities of jails: 1. Terms are generally too short to allow the prisonerto gain any benefit (that is, rehabilitation) from the jail's often limited or nonexistent treatment facilities. Therefore, the jail term can serve no purpose except to punish the wrongdoer. (Judges who believe jail time can serve purposes of deterrence and incapacitation may not agree with this line ofreasoning.) 2. Jails are chronically overcrowded, and judges needto clear space for new offenders. OTHER JAIL INMATES Pretrial detainees and those convicted of misdemeanors make up the majority of the jail population. Jail Inmates also include probation and parole violators, the mentally ill, juveniles awaiting transfer to juvenile authorities, and immigration law violators being held for the federal government. Increasingly, jails are also called on to handle the overflow from state prisons. To comply with a United St Supreme Court order to reduce its prison popula. tion, California corrections officials diverted thousands of low-level offenders from its prisons to its fails. This strategy, in turn, led to such severe overcrowding of local jails that, by 2014, these institutions were releasing 13,500 inmates a month, a 34 percent increase from three years earlier." 11-5b Jail Administration About 3,300 jails are in operation in the United States. The vast majority of these are managed on a county level by an elected sheriff. Most of the remainder are under the control of the federal government or local municipalities, and six state governments (Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Rhode Island, and Vermont) also DEPUTY SHERIFF/JAIL DIVISION Job Description: Be responsible for supervising jail inmates by ensuring that order, discipline, safety, and security are maintained. Transport or escort inmates and defendants from jail to courtrooms, attorneys'offices, or medical facilities. What kind of Training Is Required? Depending on the jurisdiction, possession of a high school diploma or bachelor's degree, as well as successful completion of written and physical examinations, training, and a probationary period. Some states require completion of a jail academy" training course of up to sbiteen weeks, including field training Annual Salary Range?$44,000-$70,000 manage jails. The capacity of jails varies widely. The Los Angeles County Men's Central Jail holds nearly seven thousand people, but fails that large are the exception rather than the rule. Forty percent of all jails in this country house fewer than fifty inmates." THE FEE SYSTEM Many jails operate on the principle of a fee system, in which a government agency reimburses the sheriffs department for the daily cost of housing and feeding each inmate. This practice is often problematic, because once the daily fee per inmate has been established (at, say $8), the sheriff is free to divert some of those funds to other areas of need in her or his department. Also, it is not uncommon for sheriffs Fee System A system in which the sheriff department is reimbursed by a government agenc y for the costs of housing all Inmates. Caree rPrep GETTING LINKEDIN In rec entLinkedlo posting, the Dane County Wisconsin Sheriff's Office highlighted supervision of qallinmates as partofits job description foro potential deputy sherift hire. Indeed in many counties, a sheriff deputy's main duties involve keeping order at the county ja rather than traffic control or low erforsament f in E O CHAPTER 11 Prisons and Jails 245 245 TUN flow does the layout of this is superior i dijeten dat er on vaxtiniam sunt prison pictured carlier in the chapter. What do the differences tolyou dous the many recauthoreded forjat sunate as opposed to person inmates! departments to charge inmates "pay-to-stay"-fees for aspects of their incarceration such as food, clothing, and medical and dental care. THE "BURDEN" OF JAIL ADMINISTRATION Given that the public's opinion of jails ranges from negative to indifferent, some sheriffs neglect their jail management duties. Instead, they focus on high-visibility issues such as putting more law enforcement officers on the streets and improving security in schools. In fact, a jail usually receives publicity only after an escape or an incident in which inmates are abused by jailers. Nonetheless, with their complex and diverse populations, jails are often more difficult to manage than prisons. Jails hold people who have never been incarcerated before and who exhibit a range of behavior-from nonviolent to extremely violent--that only adds to the unpredictable atmosphere. Jail inmates have a number of other problems, including 246 PART 4 Corrections 1. Mental illness. About 60 percent of jail inmates havea history of mental illness, including symptoms of schizophrenia, depression, hallucinations, andsuicidal tendencies." 2. Physical health problems. More than one-third of jailinmates report having a current medical problem such as an injury or ailments such as arthritis, asthma, or sexually transmitted diseases. 3. Substance abuse and dependency. About two-thirds ofjail inmates are dependent on alcohol or other drugs, and half of all convicted jail inmates were under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time of their arrest. Because most jails lack the resources and facilities to properly deal with these problems, the task of managing jail inmate populations falls disproportionately on untrained prison staff.

CH 11