scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question

Showing papers in "Criminology and public policy in 2006"


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors analyzed data on 3,237 offenders placed in 1 of 38 community-based residential programs as part of their parole or other post-release control, and found significant and substantial relationships between program characteristics and program effectiveness.
Abstract: Research Summary: This study analyzed data on 3,237 offenders placed in 1 of 38 community-based residential programs as part of their parole or other post-release control. Offenders terminated from these programs were matched to, and compared with, a group of offenders (N = 3,237) under parole or other post-release control who were not placed in residential programming. Data on program characteristics and treatment integrity were obtained through staff surveys and interviews with program directors. This information on program characteristics was then related to the treatment effects associated with each program. Policy Implications: Significant and substantial relationships between program characteristics and program effectiveness were noted. This research provides information that is relevant to the development of correctional programs, and it can be used by funding agencies when awarding contracts for services.

336 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors explored the effect of old prior records and their ability to predict future offending and found that individuals who have offended in the past are relatively more likely to offend in the future, and the risk of recidivism declines as the time since the last criminal act increases.
Abstract: Research Summary: This research explores the issue of old prior records and their ability to predict future offending. In particular, we are interested in the question of whether, after a given period of time, the risk of recidivism for a person who has been arrested in the distant past is ever indistinguishable from that of a population of persons with no prior arrests. Two well-documented empirical facts guide our investigation: (1) Individuals who have offended in the past are relatively more likely to offend in the future, and (2) the risk of recidivism declines as the time since the last criminal act increases. We find that immediately after an arrest, the knowledge of this prior record does significantly differentiate this population from a population of nonoffenders. However, these differences weaken dramatically and quickly over time so that the risk of new offenses among those who last offended six or seven years ago begins to approximate (but not match) the risk of new offenses among persons with no criminal record. Policy Implications: Individuals with official records of past offending behavior encounter a barrier when they try to obtain employment, even if a person's most recent offense occurred in the distant past. There are many reasons for such obstacles, but they are at least partially premised on the concern that individuals with arrest records—even from the distant past—are more likely to offend in the future than persons with no criminal history. Our analysis questions the logic of such practices and suggests that after a given period of remaining crime free, it may be prudent to wash away the brand of “offender” and open up more legitimate opportunities to this population.

251 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The findings suggest that lawmakers should more actively consider policies grounded in rehabilitation, and, perhaps, be slower to advocate for punitive reforms in response to public concern over high-profile juvenile crimes.
Abstract: Research Summary: Accurately gauging the public's support for alternative responses to juvenile offending is important, because policy makers often justify expenditures for punitive juvenile justice reforms on the basis of popular demand for tougher policies. In this study, we assess public support for both punitively and nonpunitively oriented juvenile justice policies by measuring respondents' willingness to pay for various policy proposals. We employ a methodology known as “contingent valuation” (CV) that permits the comparison of respondents' willingness to pay (WTP) for competing policy alternatives. Specifically, we compare CV-based estimates for the public's WTP for two distinctively different responses to serious juvenile crime: incarceration and rehabilitation. An additional focus of our analysis is an examination of the public's WTP for an early childhood prevention program. The analysis indicates that the public is at least as willing to pay for rehabilitation as punishment for juvenile offenders and that WTP for early childhood prevention is also substantial. Implications and future research directions are outlined. Policy Implications: The findings suggest that lawmakers should more actively consider policies grounded in rehabilitation, and, perhaps, be slower to advocate for punitive reforms in response to public concern over high-profile juvenile crimes. Additionally, our willingness to pay findings offer encouragement to lawmakers who are uncomfortable with the recent trend toward punitive juvenile justice policies and would like to initiate more moderate reforms. Such lawmakers may be reassured that the public response to such initiatives will not be hostile. Just as importantly, reforms that emphasize leniency and rehabilitation can be justified economically as welfare-enhancing expenditures of public funds. The evidence that the public values rehabilitation more than increased incarceration should be important information to cost-conscious legislators considering how to allocate public funds. Cost-conscious legislatures may become disenchanted with punitive juvenile justice policies on economic grounds and pursue policies that place greater emphasis on rehabilitation. They may be reassured, on the basis of our findings, that the public will support this move.

230 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: For example, this paper found that nearly half (47.4%) of the children in the population represented in this study had a parent or other parent figure who had been arrested as an adult.
Abstract: The analyses reported in this article are based on data from a longitudinal epidmiologic study of youth from 11 rural counties in North Carolina—the Great Smoky Mountains Study. Nearly half (47.4%) of the children in the population represented in this study had a parent or other parent figure who had been arrested as an adult. Analyses showed that parent risk factors (i.e., substance abuse, mental illness, and lack of education) had a significant direct effect on children’s exposure to family risks. These parent risk factors were also associated with greater odds of parental involvement in the criminal justice system (CJS), which in turn, had a significant association with children’s likelihood of experiencing two types of family risks (i.e., economic strain and instability), net the effect of parent risk factors. Parent CJS involvement, however, was not significantly associated with family risks related to family structure or quality of care. Exposure to risks in these latter domains was better explained by the direct effect of parental substance abuse, mental health problems, and lack of education. Policy Implications: These findings provide empirical evidence that parent CJS involvement is significantly related to children’s exposure to certain types of family risks independent of the possible confounding effect of parent risks. The fact that the two domains of family risks that were associated with CJS involvement were economic adversity and family stability is noteworthy as these mirror two of the ecological correlates of crime that are thought to be perpetuated by high levels of incarceration—poverty and population mobility. Second, these findings suggest that it is unrealistic to expect correctional programs that focus on inmates’ relationships VOLUME 5

193 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The Project Greenlight program as mentioned in this paper was an innovative, short-term, prison-based reentry program that drew extensively from the literature on what works and showed that programs incorporating multimodal or cognitive-behavioral skills training consistently show moderate results in reducing offender recidivism.
Abstract: Research Summary: The literature on correctional interventions (“What Works”) suggests that programs incorporating multimodal or cognitive-behavioral skills training consistently show moderate results in reducing offender recidivism. Project Greenlight was an innovative, short-term, prison-based reentry program that drew extensively from that literature. Survival analyses show that intervention participants performed significantly worse on multiple measures of recidivism after one year, and multivariate analyses indicate that covariates fail to mediate the observed relationships. The authors offer several potential explanations for their findings, but they speculate that the answer lies somewhere in a combination of implementation difficulties, program design, and a mismatch between the targeted offender population and the program. Policy Implications: Although there is extensive empirical support for multimodal programs in correctional interventions, especially those that involve or rest on cognitive skills foundations, little is actually known about the efficacy or limitations of different program models. The authors' analysis suggests that some short-term, prison-based programs, especially attractive to states and criminal justice agencies because of the low cost and capability to handle large numbers of offenders, may be poorly situated to address the multiple needs of offenders as they return to the community, and may in fact, increase the probability of criminal behavior. These findings also suggest that correctional interventions need to pay attention to the treatment principles underlying successful interventions and not simply the components of programs known to work.

156 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the effectiveness of electronic monitoring (EM) for serious offenders supervised in the community was investigated. But, the results indicated that such concerns may be overblown and that EM may prove an effective public safety alternative to prison, which casts doubt on the anticipated netwidening effect of this particular intermediate sanction.
Abstract: Research Summary: This study addresses the effectiveness of electronic monitoring (EM) for serious offenders supervised in the community. Using data on 75,661 offenders placed on home confinement in Florida from 1998 to 2002, we find that both radio-frequency and global positioning system monitoring significantly reduce the likelihood of technical violations, reoffending, and absconding for this population of offenders. Additionally, we find that offenders placed on home confinement with EM are significantly more serious than those placed on home confinement without EM, which casts doubt on the anticipated net-widening effect of this particular intermediate sanction. Policy Implications: Given the anticipated increase in the use of EM in the immediate future, policy makers will surely be faced with questions about its effectiveness in preventing or deterring further criminal activity among offenders in the community, as well as concerns about the intensity of surveillance it affords and a subsequent increase in the likelihood of a prison sentence or return to prison for technical violations. The results presented here suggest that such concerns may be overblown and that EM of offenders in the community may prove an effective public safety alternative to prison. Additional implications of this research include decision making regarding which offenders should be placed on EM, which type of monitoring device will be the most cost-effective and efficient, and the potential for front-end net-widening if states adopt the practice of “Got ‘em?’ Use ‘em.’”

149 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper showed that the negative relationship between prison and crime becomes less strongly negative as the scale of imprisonment increases. But they did not consider the effect of increasing the number of prisoners on crime.
Abstract: Research Summary: Several prominent empirical studies estimate models of a constant proportional effect of prison on crime, finding that effect is substantial and negative. A separate literature argues against the crime-reducing effect of prison but mainly on theoretical grounds. This second literature suggests that the elasticity of the prison/crime relationship is not constant. We provide a model that nests these two literatures. Using data from the United States over 30 years, we find strong evidence that the negative relationship between prison and crime becomes less strongly negative as the scale of imprisonment increases. This revisionist model indicates that (1) at low levels of incarceration, a constant elasticity model underestimates the negative relationship between incarceration and crime, and (2) at higher levels of incarceration, the constant elasticity model overstates the negative effect. Policy Implications: These results go beyond the claim of declining marginal returns, instead finding accelerating declining marginal returns. As the prison population continues to increase, albeit at a slower rate, after three decades of phenomenal growth, these findings provide an important caution that for many jurisdictions, the point of accelerating declining marginal returns may have set in. Any policy discussion of the appropriate scale of punishment should be concerned with the empirical impact of this expensive and intrusive government intervention.

143 citations



Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Kempe and Levitt as mentioned in this paper showed that the crime drop in California began before, rather than after, the passing into law of the sentence enhancements in 1982 and the downward slope did not accelerate after the change in law.
Abstract: Research Summary: In 1999, Daniel Kessler and Steven Levitt published an article that purported to provide support for the marginal deterrent effects of harsher sanctions on levels of crime. Specifically, they concluded that sentence enhancements that came into effect in California in June 1982 as a result of Proposition 8 were responsible for a subsequent drop in serious crime in this state. Our article examines the analyses and findings of this article and suggests that their conclusion of a deterrent impact fails to withstand scrutiny when more complete and more detailed crime data are used and the comparability of “control” groups is carefully examined. In particular, the addition of annual crime levels for all years (versus only the odd-numbered years that Kessler and Levitt examine) calls into question the prima facie support for a deterrent effect presented by Kessler and Levitt. Specifically, it demonstrates not only that the crime drop in California began before, rather than after, the passing into law of the sentence enhancements in 1982 but also that the downward slope did not accelerate after the change in law. Furthermore, the comparability of the two “control” groups with the “treatment” group is challenged, rendering suspect any findings based on these comparisons. Policy Implications: Case studies suggesting that crime decreased after the imposition of harsh sentencing policies are often cited as evidence of marginal general deterrence. As has been demonstrated in other contexts, the question that needs to be asked is “Compared with what?” Kessler and Levitt's (1999) article demonstrates that those interested in sentencing policy need to be sensitive not only to the appropriateness of the comparisons that are made, but also to the choice of data that are presented.

67 citations



Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In the last 30 years, legislatures throughout the United States haveinstituted a series of reforms that redefined the purposes of juvenile courts and exposed young offenders to a variety of harsh punishments as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: In the last 30 years, legislatures throughout the United States haveinstituted a series of reforms that redefined the purposes of juvenile courtsand exposed young offenders to a variety of harsh punishments. Amongthe more significant changes, they amended juvenile codes to endorse thegoals of punishment and protection of public safety,expanded provisionsto transfer youths to the jurisdiction of the criminal courts, createdblended sentencing options that carry sentences that sometimes extendwell into the adult years, and adopted offense-based determinate andmandatory minimum sentencing.Legislators frequently claim that they had a public mandate to enactpunitive reforms. However, the role actually played by the public in the“get tough” movement is a matter of considerable debate. According tomost accounts, the movement was initially set in motion by an upsurge inyouth violence in the 1960s and 1970s that put the problem of youth crimesquarely on the nation’s radar screen. After a brief period of stabilizationin the early 1980s, juvenile crime—especially drug crime and urban gunviolence—increased at unprecedented rates. The media provided heavyand often sensationalized coverage, contributing to a climate of fear.According to one view, the citizenry placed much of the blame for thewave of youth violence on a juvenile justice system that was perceived tobe lenient and ineffectual. They powered the “get tough” movement bydemanding harsh punishments, which they believed would be moreeffective in reducing crime. An alternative view has it that the publicwanted “something

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, an outcome evaluation of a residential aftercare component provided to offenders graduating from the Quehanna Motivational Boot Camp in Pennsylvania was performed. And the authors found that offenders who received the mandatory aftercare components had significantly lower recidivism rates at six months, one year, and two years post-release.
Abstract: Research Summary: This study is an outcome evaluation of a residential aftercare component provided to offenders graduating from the Quehanna Motivational Boot Camp in Quehanna, Pennsylvania. Capitalizing on a policy change that set up a natural experimental design, we use survival analysis to compare recidivism outcomes of a control group of 383 offenders, who graduated before the mandatory 90-day residential aftercare component was added, to an experimental group of 337 offenders, who graduated after the policy change. Our findings reveal that offenders who receive the mandatory aftercare component have significantly lower recidivism rates at six months, one year, and two years post-release. Policy Implications: These findings are important for policy related to both boot camp programs and offender reentry in general. First, our findings suggest that adding a residential aftercare component to a boot camp program has the potential to (1) greatly reduce failure rates and (2) increase the time to failure. Second, our findings have implications that reach beyond boot camp. As the number of incarcerated offenders returning to local communities continues to increase, offender reentry has become a national issue. Our findings are promising as they suggest that a continuum of care model designed to extend services and help offenders overcome immediate obstacles to reintegration may indeed reduce criminal recidivism.



Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article found no evidence that increases in prison population growth covary with decreases in crime rates and suggested that Florida policymakers carefully weigh the costs and benefits of their continued reliance on mass incarceration against the potential costs of alternatives.
Abstract: Research Summary: Prior macro-level studies examining the impact of prison population growth on crime rates have produced widely varying results. Studies using national-level time series data find large impacts of prison growth on crime, whereas those using state panel data find more modest ones. Critics of the former studies maintain that the estimates are implausibly large, arguing that the effects are instead due to analysts' inability to control for potential confounding factors. Conversely, critics of the latter studies argue that they underestimate the total impacts of imprisonment by failing to account for potential free-riding effects. This study uses panel data for 58 Florida counties for 1980 to 2000 to reexamine the link between prison population growth and crime. Unlike previous studies, we find no evidence that increases in prison population growth covary with decreases in crime rates. Policy Implications: Our findings suggest that Florida policymakers carefully weigh the costs and benefits of their continued reliance on mass incarceration against the potential costs and benefits of alternatives. If the costs of mass incarceration do not return appreciable benefits, i.e., a reduction in crime, it is time to reconsider our approach to crime and punishment. Other research offers evidence of crime prevention programs operating inside the criminal justice system and in communities that hold promise for reducing crime; our findings indicate that policymakers carefully consider these options as a way to achieve their goals.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The study published in this issue by Phillips et al. (2006) shows that parental imprisonment is associated with family economic strain, and instability in children’s care and living arrangements, even after controlling for parental substance abuse, parental mental health problems, and low education.
Abstract: With fast growing prison populations around the world, children are increasingly exposed to parental imprisonment. In the United States, the population of children under 18 with an imprisoned parent grew from 0.9 million in 1991 to 1.5 million in 1999 (Mumola, 2000). In England and Wales, approximately 125,000 children experience parental imprisonment each year, compared with about 170,000 children who experience parental divorce (Murray, 2006). Many researchers have suggested that parental imprisonment might harm children, but there have been few high-quality studies of these effects. Accordingly, the effects of parental imprisonment on children “may be the least understood and most consequential implication of the high reliance on incarceration” (Hagan and Dinovitzer, 1999:122). The study published in this issue by Phillips et al. (2006) shows that parental imprisonment is associated with family economic strain, and instability in children’s care and living arrangements, even after controlling for parental substance abuse, parental mental health problems, and low education. Their analyses are based on the Great Smoky Mountains Study (a longitudinal survey of over 1,400 children in North Carolina), which is an extremely important and impressive prospective longitudinal survey of the development of antisocial behavior in children. The main policy issue raised by their study is that imprisoning parents may harm children’s family environments and contribute to children’s adverse outcomes through the life-course. Given the likely harms of parental imprisonment, intervention programs are needed to prevent adverse outcomes for children of prisoners. However, without a sound scientific basis, even well-intentioned interventions can be ineffective, and they may sometimes even cause harm (McCord, 2003). Support programs for children of prisoners have rarely been well evaluated, using randomized controlled trials. Therefore, little is known about their effectiveness. Pending further evidence, policies should be developed based on the best knowledge about the causes of adverse outcomes for children of prisoners. Depending on what causes these

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article investigated the factors associated with the decision to volunteer for a faith-based program and found that participants are motivated to make changes in their lives and are seeking their way in a religious sense.
Abstract: Research Summary: The current research investigates the faith, sociodemographic, psychological, and criminal history factors associated with the decision to volunteer for a faith-based program. Operational records were combined with data collected from self-administered surveys. The results of the logistic regression model were successful in identifying factors related to program participation, including factors not included in previous studies. The findings suggest that program participants are motivated to make changes in their lives and are seeking their way in a religious sense. For example, program participants scored higher on average on the motivation for change scale used here, had higher rates of attendance in religious services since incarceration, and were more active in reading sacred scripture. Conversely, inmates who claimed higher levels of knowledge about their faith were less likely to participate in the Life Connections Program examined here. Policy Implications: The results of the analysis suggest that certain religious characteristics are associated with participation in a faith-based program. The implication is that religious program providers need to pay attention to the match between the program content and the charactertistics of their potential program participants. The results also demonstrate the need to capture differences between participants and comparison subjects on dimensions not usually included in evaluations of faith-based programs. Without knowledge of the selection process, there is no way to determine whether observed differences between program participants and “comparisons” are due to actual program effects or are an artifact of preexisting differences between the groups.



Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present the findings of a rigorous evaluation of an evidence-based reentry program, Project Greenlight in New York State, and two reaction essays are available through the publisher, Blackwell Publishing, http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/.
Abstract: This essay appeared as an Editorial Introduction to an article in Criminology and Public Policy (Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2006) that presented the findings of a rigorous evaluation of an evidence-based reentry program, Project Greenlight in New York State. The article and two reaction essays are available through the publisher, Blackwell Publishing, http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/. In recent years, policymakers and practitioners have become aware of the importance of research in determining ‘what works’ in correctional programming. They have begun to use information regarding ‘evidence-based’ practices to make decisions about the programs that they should implement. Thus, the likelihood that research may actually be the basis for criminal justice practice has never been greater. This attention to developing correctional programs based on sound principles and rigorous evaluation is long overdue. It has been more than 30 years since Martinson’s famous article (Martinson, 1974) and 27 years since the National Academy of Sciences’ (NAS) Panel on Research on Rehabilitative Techniques called for “research on criminal rehabilitation [with] rigorous [attention to] experimental design, theoretical rationale, and monitoring of integrity and strength of treatment” (Sechrest et al., 1979:10). Over a decade ago, the discussion focused on identifying the principles of effective correctional treatment programs that are critical to successful outcomes (Andrews, 1995; Andrews et al., 1990; see also Petersilia, 2004). More recently, the criminal justice field has been captivated by the call for “evidence-based programs” that federal policy makers are increasingly attentive to (Coalition for Evidence-Based Policy, 2006).

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, a chain of policy directives concerning self-injury inside federal correctional facilities in Canada is examined and the impact of these policies on federally sentenced women is paid to the impact on federal sentenced women.
Abstract: Research Summary: This article examines a chain of policy directives concerning self-injury inside federal correctional facilities in Canada. Specific attention is paid to the impact of these policies on federally sentenced women. I argue that the Correctional Service of Canada's focus on risk assessment fails to address the needs of the women they confine. Instead, women's needs are reconceptualized as institutional risk factors. Policy Implications: Women who self-injure are still routinely disciplined for their behaviour in Federal Canadian prisons through admittance to administrative segregation. This policy challenges two sections of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (s. 7 and s. 15) and must be changed. In this article, I will recommend a new women-centered approach to replace current practice.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors argued that transnational comparisons are a necessary part of virtually all serious work in criminal justice ad the study of criminal behavior, and that they are necessary for any serious work The authors.
Abstract: Over the past decade I have become convinced that transnational comparisons are a necessary part of virtually all serious work in criminal justice ad the study of criminal behavior.... KEYWORDS: Juvenile justice Language: en

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: For example, the authors found that more than 60% of employers would not knowingly hire an applicant with a criminal background (Holzer, 1996) and that over 80% of those employed would not employ an ex-offender with such a background.
Abstract: The problems of prisoner reentry are by now well known to academics and policymakers. With over two million individuals currently incarcerated, and over 12 million individuals with prior felony convictions, the challenge of integrating this large and growing population has become an urgent priority. Employment is widely considered a centerpiece of the reentry process, with evidence that steady work can reduce the incentives that lead to crime (Bushway and Reuter, 1997; Travis, 2005). And yet, hindering this goal, we know that ex-offenders face bleak prospects in the labor market, with the mark of a criminal record representing an important barrier to finding work (Pager, 2003). Indeed, more than 60% of employers claim that they would not knowingly hire an applicant with a criminal background (Holzer, 1996). Overcoming the barriers to employment facing ex-offenders, then, represents an important challenge for policies aimed at effective prisoner reentry. At the same time, it is important to keep in mind that the employment of ex-offenders is not necessarily without cost. Employers bear the burden of theft and violence in the workplace, as well as the more mundane problems of unreliable staff and employee turnover. With respect to each of these concerns, a criminal record is arguably a relevant signal. Indeed, to the extent that the past is a strong predictor of the future, a conviction conveys some information about the likelihood of future illegal, dangerous, or debilitating forms of behavior. Employers thus have good reason to be cautious about hiring individuals with known criminal pasts. Any policy designed to promote the employment of ex-offenders will have to address the real and perceived risks facing employers who hire individuals with criminal records. How then can we balance our interests in promoting the employment of ex-offenders with the desire to safeguard those employers who stand at the front lines of reentry initiatives? To date, most policies focusing on exoffenders have emphasized either “promoting reentry” or “reducing risk.” The first of these approaches seeks to facilitate employment for exoffenders through various strategies, such as establishing antidiscrimination legislation, removing legal barriers, providing job training and placement services and the like. By contrast, those focused on


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Clinically, self-injury consistently has been linked to a broad range of individual-level problems, ranging from intellectual and developmental difficulties to emotional dysfunctions, and to physical and behavioral maladaptation.
Abstract: Although self-injury is not a new behavior, public awareness of it has increased dramatically since the mid-1990s (Adler and Adler, 2005). Selfinjury is generally defined as the deliberate act of physically hurting oneself, usually without conscious suicidal intent, in a manner that results in superficial, rather than traumatic, damage to body tissue. Despite typically being perceived as psychological in nature (Favazza, 1998; Muehlenkamp, 2005), the etiology is not often clear. The bulk of selfinjury behavior (SIB) research comes from a mental health perspective, rather than from sociology or related disciplines; yet the DSM IV (1994) says little about SIB, other than listing it as a symptom for other “disorders.” Clinically, self-injury consistently has been linked to a broad range of individual-level problems, ranging from intellectual and developmental difficulties to emotional dysfunctions, and to physical and behavioral maladaptation. Such typologies reduce the act to individual pathology rather than, as Kilty (2006) notes, a possible coping mechanism in a debilitating environment. Estimates of the prevalence of self-injury in the non-prisoner population are inconsistent, varying from 1% to 4% and between 12% to over 40% among adolescents and college-aged samples (Muehlenkamp, 2005; White Kress, 2003). One of the few common claims across studies is that selfinjury typically begins during early adolescence and tends to persist for an average of 10 to 15 years, although it may continue for decades (Favazza, 1998; Muehlenkamp, 2005).

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors show that Measure 11, a mandatory minimum sentencing policy passed in 1994, had fewer negative system impacts than had been anticipated by many state and local criminal justice administrators, due largely to the fact that prosecutors exercised the discretion provided them under the law to selectively prosecute cases.
Abstract: Research Summary: Oregon's Measure 11, a mandatory minimum sentencing policy passed in 1994, had fewer negative system impacts than had been anticipated by many state and local criminal justice administrators, due largely to the fact that prosecutors exercised the discretion provided them under the law to selectively prosecute cases. Consequently, fewer Measure 11-eligible cases were sentenced under the relevant statues than before passage of the measure, and more were sentenced to lesser related offenses. At the same time, incarceration rates and sentence lengths increased for both Measure 11 and lesser related offenses. Trial rates increased for two years after Measure 11 took effect before reverting to previous levels. Policy Implications: The “unintended consequences” that Measure 11 produced should not have been unexpected. Our research indicates that the entire system will quickly adapt to mitigate the more draconian outcomes predicted by those who assume a simplistic implementation, which underscores the importance of understanding system dynamics and inter-relationships before implementing reform, as well as the pitfalls of designing legislation for either symbolic appeal or formal logic rather than for actual effect.




Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Modeling what types of inmates might be at risk for contracting HIV inside prison can help public and correctional health researchers and officials improve their current prevention practices and ultimately reduce or prevent HIV transmission both inside and outside prison.
Abstract: Research Summary: The prevalence of AIDS infection is approximately four times higher in state and Federal prisons than among the general U.S. population. It is also apparent that high-risk HIV transmission behaviors occur inside prison; however, data that validly document cases of HIV transmission in prison are rare. This study uses data from a large sample of state prison inmates and logistic regression to determine what inmate characteristics are associated with contracting HIV inside prison. Findings indicate that inmates who are nonwhite and younger and who have been convicted of sexual crimes and have served longer sentences are more likely to contract HIV inside prison. Policy Implications: Documenting that HIV is transmitted inside prisons justifies the need for additional research and effective prevention strategies. Modeling what types of inmates might be at risk for contracting HIV inside prison can help public and correctional health researchers and officials improve their current prevention practices and ultimately reduce or prevent HIV transmission both inside and outside prison.