Shortfall News
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COMMUNICATIONS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fed. Sentencing Guidelines
|
|
|
|
|
Virgina 2002 Proportional Bill
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Smith, New Jersey, 2002
|
|
|
|
|
Bolivia Family Planning Aid
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sitemap
|
|
|
Shorfall News: Supporting Info on Proportional Sentencing
|
|
|
|
|
-
Support Info on Proportional Sentencing
-
as inline text as quoted text as attachment
From: Rehabmissd@aol.com
To: thomas@rehabmissed.com
Subject: Supporting Info on Proportional Sentencing
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 11:03:43 EDT
8-11-2000
RE: H.B. 1021, Proportional Suspension of Sentence
(Last 2 pages)
Att:
Dear Citizens Interested in Reducing Crime through the Rehabilitation of
Criminal Offenders,
The following paragraphs address issues relating to utilizing the punishment
of imprisonment as an incentive for effective programs in reducing crime by
offenders released from jail or prison, to the community.
Paragraph Titles:
1. Revolving Door.
2. Recidivism and Substance Abuse.
3. Therapeutic Communities.
4. Implementing Programs.
5. Program Funding.
6. Presentence Reports.
7. ASAM Criteria.
8. Sentencing Guidelines.
9. Families.
10. Expansion of Effective Programs:
11. Defense Attorneys at Sentencing:
12. Judges.
13. Mandatory Minimum Sentences.
14. Deterrence.
15. Seeding.
16. Defense Attorneys during Post Sentencing.
17. Walkaways.*
18. Program after Program
19. Probation Violations.
20. Proportioning Taxpayer Monies:
21. Responsibility for Recidivism.
* Recently added or revised
Overview:
This bill will have a small, but positive, impact, because judges will
only occasionally find Proportional Suspension of Sentence applicable. There
is already a substantial capacity for treatment of defendants in effective
alternative sanctions. Many offenders who are willing to accept intense,
alternative rehabilitation, are now getting the programs they need from
County, City and State funding. With the enactment of SABRE, funding for
treatment programs has been increased, and with that new level of funding,
the availability of programs will probably come closer to matching the level
of need. H.B. 1021 serves those instances that would be missed, where
alternative intensive sanctions could reduce recidivism, and Virginia would
be a little better place to live. Implementation of a Proportional
Suspension of Sentence has a positive fiscal impact, because the cost
reimbursement to the alternative sanction is capped at ½ the cost of the
suspended term of imprisonment.
1. Revolving Door. Currently there is a high rate of recidivism from
Virginia's prisons, in general. While the Department of Corrections attempts
to give some increased services in the last few months before release, and
there are some halfway house type programs, these services are not
comprehensive, nor as effective as possible, in at least a number of cases.
The revolving door of re-arrest and subsequent conviction, subjects Virginia
communities to unnecessary criminal violations.
2. Recidivism and Substance Abuse. The recidivism rate for offenders
with drug involvement is 60 to 70 percent. The recidivism rate for violent
offenders, without substance abuse involvement, is less than average. The
overall average recidivism rate is something close to 40%.
3. Therapeutic Communities. The recidivism rate for therapeutic
community drug treatment programs is 14%, in 5 year follow up studies, see
DeLeon, 1966-1986. For those in the 14 % with a criminal violation, the
crime of conviction is usually less serious, whereas for offenders coming out
of prison, the recidivist violations are often more serious than the prior
convictions.
4. Implementing Programs. Virginia Judges currently have the authority
to impose a period of probation, with conditions, which can include the
condition of participation in an alternative sanction. Virginia Judges can
currently suspend a term of imprisonment, conditioned upon the defendant's
completing the terms of probation. The term of probation can either be after
a term of imprisonment, or without serving any imprisonment before being
placed on probation.. Judges avoid waiting lists for effective therapeutic
community programs by limiting the number of assignments to programs. Judges
can currently encumber public funds for imprisonment, but have no authority
to create obligations for alternative sanctions. If increased funding were
available for more slots in therapeutic communities, effective programs could
be expanded. Under H.B. 1021, any alternative sanction ordered by the judge
under Proportionally Suspended Sentences would receive reimbursement of
costs, up to half the average cost of the suspended term of imprisonment
5. Program Funding. Currently, in Virginia, therapeutic community
programs are funded primarily by county agencies. Virginia has some state
funds available to Virginia Counties and Cities under the Community
Corrections Act, but this is a cumbersome process, and has not resulted in a
sufficient number of effective alternative programs to meet Virginia's
potential for reducing recidivism. The number of slots in these programs are
limited. Judges currently apportion out these programs as privileges. The
therapeutic community programs cost $16,000.00 to $20,000.00 and last 6
months to one year. With the enactment of H.B. 1021, half the savings from
the cost of imprisonment would more than pay for the cost of effective
therapeutic communities.
6. Presentence Reports. Currently, Virginia Judges can request
presentence reports from the Probation Department. Currently, Probation
Officers often do not include a comparison of the effectiveness of various
therapeutic community programs for the defendant, primarily because it is
futile, since there are only a few slots available in therapeutic
communities. Virginia Judges can request additional information from the
Probation Department, and continue cases to give Probation Officers time to
gather information on effective programs. Virginia Judges currently can
request advice from all manner of experts and medical professionals, in
determining which alternative programs will have the greatest likelihood of
reducing recidivism for each defendant. Because H.B. 1021, reimburses program
costs within 120 days, effective programs would be able to provide letters of
acceptance to more offenders. The alternative programs can include the cost
of providing assessments for Virginia Judges in their capped costs.
Alternative sanctions found to be successful by Virginia Courts would be able
to expand their number of slots, with the passage of H.B. 1021.
7. ASAM Criteria. ASAM is the American Society of Addiction Medicine,
and it has developed and published a comprehensive strategy for evaluating
the treatment needs of any particular individual with any level of substance
abuse, in a book entitled ASAM-PPC-2. Currently, ASAM criteria are utilized
by many substance abuse professionals to predict the level of treatment that
would likely be appropriate for any individual with a substance abuse
problem, including those in trouble with Virginia's criminal justice system.
Under ASAM criteria, it is determined whether an individual needs a
residential, or an outpatient program. With the enactment of H.B. 1021, the
level of treatment would be determined by a Virginia Judge, who may take ASAM
criteria into account, but can also impose a condition of probation which
exceeds the stringency and difficulty predicted as appropriate under ASAM
standards. The more stringent and difficult programs usually have better
statistics for protecting the community while the offender is in treatment,
for reducing recidivism, and for reducing the severity of recidivism. The
enactment of H.B. 1021 would allow Virginia Judges to improve the reduction
of recidivism beyond the ASAM criteria.
8. Sentencing Guidelines. Virginia's Criminal Sentencing Guidelines
specify a range of months or years of imprisonment, jail or probation, taking
into account the nature of the conviction, the defendant's past history, and
categorized individual characteristics. Virginia's sentencing guidelines do
not currently specify the amount of time that is appropriate to be suspended
for an intensive therapeutic community sanction. Virginia's Criminal
Sentencing Commission is currently pilot-testing alternative sanction
criteria, aimed at the most docile 25% of non-violent, low level offenders.
Serious drug offenders under the supervision of effective therapeutic
communities have incidents of arrest below the national average for the
general public (DeLeon, 1966 to 1986). The Virginia Judge currently has the
benefit of being able to ascertain the range of imprisonment suggested by the
sentencing guidelines, for each defendant, with the exception of a few rare
offenses, not addressed by Virginia's Sentencing Guidelines. The Virginia
Judge will be able to evaluate any defendant's proposal for an alternative
sanction, and determine if the punitive value of the program warrants the
suspension of any time of imprisonment, up to 36 months. The current limits
on the evidence admissible at a sentencing hearing, are sufficiently wide to
allow more than adequate information for the Virginia Judge to determine the
punitive value of the proposed alternative sanction.
9. Families. Family members often have multi-level and
multi-directional thrusts of feelings on the sentence of their family member.
When the defendant has previously been in prison, one sense is
disappointment with Virginia's criminal justice system which has failed to
provide reasonable incentives for effective rehabilitation. Another feeling
is a sense of unfairness, because the prosecutor and police have winked at
some other defendants involved with drugs. Prosecutors and police routinely
reduce charges for offenders who have provided evidence against others
involved with drugs. There is also the recognition that the defendant,
although a family member, has violated society's limitations, and family
members often wish for the defendant to become more responsible, and hope
that the defendant will receive the help the defendant needs to lead a more
responsible life. There is the mixed feeling of wishing for a lighter
sentence for the relative, but also a wish that the defendant not become an
informant, because loyalty to friends, co-workers, institutions and business
entities, is valued in the real world, outside the criminal justice system.
If the defendant-relative becomes a police informant, then the reputation of
other family members is further tarnished in the real world, in addition to
the tarnish of being the relative of a convicted lawbreaker. With the
enactment of H.B. 1021, any possible lag in the availability of effective
therapeutic community programs will be reduced, as funding will be available
for any needed additional treatment spaces..
10. Expansion of Effective Programs: Under Proportionally Suspended
Sentences, the judge will be able to refuse to suspend any imprisonment,
unless the defendant is willing to participate in a sufficiently stringent
program to satisfy the court. Therapeutic community programs can be
successfully replicated, duplicated and expanded. Currently therapeutic
community programs are not conveniently located in all parts of Virginia.
The 60 day interval of reimbursement and 60 day time limit on payment to the
funding provider, in H.B. 1021, will allow therapeutic community programs to
expand their number of available slots, to the extent that Virginia Judges
find they are effective. There may be periods of lagging program capacities,
as effective programs expand their facilities and create new branch
locations, but the 120 day window is sufficiently short to allow reasonable
growth rates.
11. Defense Attorneys at Sentencing:. Defense attorneys often decide
against making arguments for alternatives at sentencing for several reasons.
Clients who need treatment are often resistant to treatment, and are in
denial of their problem.. The attorney will have to spend considerable time
and effort to overcome the client's psychological denial, in order to
represent his client's interests, by proposing alternative sanctions to the
court. An important step in substance abuse treatment is admitting that
there is a problem. Also, the defendant is often hoping either for
probation, or a light sentence, and does not wish the attorney to argue for a
rehabilitation program, particularly any sanction that would be as difficult
as some therapeutic community programs, until it is clear to the defendant
that imprisonment is being imposed. Often, by the time the term of
imprisonment being imposed is clear to the defendant, the sentencing hearing
is over. Under H.B. 1021, criminal defense attorneys will have more time for
their clients to think through the advantage of participating in a
challenging therapeutic community program as an alternative to part of a
prison sentence.
12. Judges: Currently Virginia Judges have considerable expertise in
selecting appropriate alternative sanctions for individual defendants.
Currently, Virginia Judges have considerable information at their disposal to
arrive at an informed decision on alternative sanctions. Occasionally, at
sentencing, a Virginia Judge will know of a program that would reduce the
likelihood of recidivism for the defendant, but for which the number of
treatment slots is limited. The defendant should ordinarily be expected to
have a letter of acceptance to a program, or otherwise propose a regimen of
therapy, together with a specific amount of imprisonment time to be
suspended. Currently the conduct of the sentencing hearing is left to the
discretion of the Virginia Judge. With the enactment of H.B. 1021, the
Virginia Judge's discretion in conducting sentencing hearings is not changed,
except the time for reconsideration is extended, for imposing a proportional
suspension of sentence. In cases where alternative sanctions might be
appropriate, with the enactment of HB 1021, a letter of acceptance to an
effective alternative sanction should be more readily available to the
defendant, to present to the Virginia Judge, as capped funding would be
available for the proposed alternative.
13. Mandatory Minimum Sentences: Currently alternative sentences are
sometimes impossible because of mandatory minimum sentences. Sometimes a
defendant will deserve less prison time according to the sentencing
guidelines, than is required by the mandatory minimum sentences for the
offense in the plea bargain, or the conviction. The mandatory minimums are
interpreted by Virginia Courts as precluding the suspension of any part of
the mandatory minimum sentence, even for the toughest and most stringent
therapeutic community alternative. Many offenders who are subject to a
mandatory minimum sentence, receive prison sentences in excess of three years
beyond the mandatory minimum sentence of imprisonment, so Virginia Judges
currently have authority to suspend at least three years, for alternative
sanctions, in those cases. In some cases, the length of imprisonment decided
upon by the Judge, is in excess of the mandatory minimum sentence, but by
less than 3 years excess. For a stringent, challenging one, or
one-and-a-half, year therapeutic community program, a three year term of
imprisonment is needed to provide a minimally reasonable incentive for
participation in the sanction. With the enactment of H.B. 1021, a minimum of
three years of imprisonment will be available to Virginia Judges, as an
override of mandatory minimum sentences, to implement a proportionally
suspended sentence.
14. Deterrence. Currently, it is difficult for responsible, law abiding
Virginians to understand that the deterrent value of imprisonment peaks out
at the expectation of 6 Months Prison time, (Blumstein, 1978), see attachment
A. Most Virginia have long range planning capacities, and for them, the
expectation of 2, 5, or 8 years of imprisonment are conceptually of
increasing deterrent value. For most of Virginia's offenders who are on the
prowl, looking for illegal opportunities, their planning capacities are quite
short range. Also, if an illegal opportunity appears to be without risk of
discovery, then the prison sentence, regardless of length, becomes
irrelevant, because denial has set in about the chances of being apprehended.
It is important for legislators to be aware of instances of public
misunderstanding of public policy issues, because the majority opinion of
Virginians is an important factor in our republic. Deterrence by length of a
prison term is an example of a construct with which a democracy is poorly
suited to handle, because the majority has no clue about the rationale or
perspective of the minority who decide to break the law. Politicians often
receive applause and cheers when suggesting longer sentences, or mandatory
minimums, because the general citizenry is applying their own frame of
reference to the radically different outlook, of the real perpetrators of
criminal acts. H.B. 1021 may serve to educate the public that crime
increases and decreases are based largely upon unemployment, and the
willingness of society to assist those in finding a niche, whose talents may
be sub-standard in some respects. More effective alternative sanctions can
be utilized with the enactment of H.B. 1021, and crime statistics will become
lower, as the revolving door is slowed down,
15. Seeding. Currently, many offenders return to their Virginia
communities from prison with increased resentment, reduced earning power, and
reduced opportunities for lawfully pursuing happiness. Offenders leaving
prison often interact with other Virginians who are on the prowl, looking for
illegal opportunities, available with little chance of apprehension. Social
deterrence is reduced overall by the currently longer prison stays, and low
level of re-entry services. With the enactment of H.B. 1021, social
deterrence can increase as Virginia prisoners, returning to their
communities, will be substantially more successful in obtaining income
opportunities, within legal channels, and will have improved strategies for
finding happiness within the expectations of the law.
16. Defense Attorneys during Post Sentencing: Often the full extent of
the defendant's problems are known to the defense attorney, but the defense
attorney knows that admitting to a problem such as substance abuse , marital
or psychological difficulties, may increase his client's sentence. Also, if
a defendant is having difficulty finding a niche for his talents in our
society, the client is apt to elect not to finish the difficult program, and
will end up serving the suspended term of imprisonment anyway. So by
advocating an alternative sanction, the client will serve time in the
alternative sanction, till he drops out, then serve all of the suspended
sentence. From one perspective of personal responsibility, the defendant
should have sought treatment for his problems, on his own, before getting
into trouble. Under H.B. 1021, the defendant will earn prison time credit
for all time spent participating in the alternative sanction.
17.WALKAWAYS. Prison escapes generate visions of violence and car
jacking, and shootings. Walkaways from therapeutic community programs
ordinarily result in no new crimes being committed. Occasionally an offender
who leaves a therapeutic community program will pick up a new charge before
either turning himself in, being picked up on a warrant, or being re-arrested
on suspicion of a new offense. Technically, under a strict interpretation of
prison escape laws, an offender is guilty of jail break once the offender
takes the first step away form the supervision of the program. In general
practice, the total circumstances are considered, and it is rare that jail
break charges are brought, and they are brought when the offender's behavior
after leaving the program is reprehensible. It may seem illogical to a law
abiding citizen, that an offender allowed to go to a therapeutic community
program, instead of prison, would exemplify good behavior, when walking away
from a program. The statistics indicate that while walkaways occur with more
frequency than desirable, there is only a negligible criminal justice
problem with walkaways.
18. Program after Program. Currently, because of the limited funding
for alternative programs, Virginia Judges try to select an offender for a
program slot, which will turn that offender around, so that the program slot
will be a success. Studies show that the more programs that an offender,
with substance abuse involvement, participates in, the more likely that the
next program will be the one that will turn the offender to an arrest-free
lifestyle, (DeLeon, 1966-1986). Currently it is often viewed a major setback
when an offender is terminated from a program, or elects to discontinue
participation. Termination from a regimen of therapy can actually be a
pivotal, critical incident, with associated cognitive advances. It is only
because there is not a clear accounting of Virginia Taxpayer funds for the
purpose of addressing recidivism that an artificial concept of "One chance at
rehabilitation and thereafter you are incurable" is because a real world
accounting construct for funding for effective programs has not been created.
With the enactment of H.B. 1021, there will be up to three years of
imprisonment to suspend, for alternative sanctions, with capped, reimbursed
costs. There will be no limit on the number of times a defendant can
participate in alternative sanctions, with the remaining term of imprisonment
proportionally suspended, at the discretion of the Virginia Judge.
19. Probation Violations. Currently urinalysis is used to check and
violate probationers. Many Virginians lead responsible, constructive lives
in their communities, but occasionally over-indulge in substance abuse.
Absolute abstinence is not necessary for all Virginians in trouble, to
regain, and maintain, an arrest-free lifestyle. Therapeutic communities and
some other alternative sanctions closely monitor the total level of
responsibility of the probationer. Having more Virginia probationers attain
an arrest free lifestyle can be managed more effectively with the enactment
of H.B. 1021, because there would be increased monitoring of Virginia's
probationers, and more information will be available to probation officers,
resulting in more effective monitoring of Virginia's probationers. Also, in
instances when a probationer is found to be in violation of conditions of
probation, and the Virginia Judge decides that imprisonment is appropriate,
with the enactment of H.B. 1021, up to 3 years of the prison sentence can be
proportionally suspended, conditioned upon effective alternative sanctions,
with capped cost reimbursement for the alternative..
20. Proportioning Taxpayer Monies: Often offenders fail to complete a
therapeutic community program, but studies show that the longer an offender
is in an effective therapeutic community, the lower the rate of committing
additional crimes. Currently the full term of the suspended sentence is
generally imposed on a defendant who elects not to compete the alternative
sanction. Under a Proportionally Suspended Sentence, the offender would be
earning proportional credit for prison time, while participating in the
alternative program. The amount of time of imprisonment to be served under
an incomplete Proportionally Suspended Sentence, would be the suspended term
of imprisonment, less the proportional credit for the months of participation
in the alternative program. The proportion would be the number of months of
participation in the alternative, divided by the number of months of the
average length of stay in the program; then that factor multiplied by the
length of time of the suspended term of imprisonment The term of
imprisonment would be reduced proportionally by the number of months that the
offender spent participating in the alternative program. Any time that an
offender spends in the program will actually reduce the time spent in prison
by the offender. The savings from the defendant's shorter tem of
imprisonment will be used for paying the cost of the alternative program.
Under Proportionally Suspended Sentences, the Department of Corrections
budget, and Virginia taxpayers in general, will no longer be double billed.
21. Responsibility for Recidivism. Currently, the responsibility for
recidivism is spread between Virginia City Councils, County Boards,
prosecutors, judges, Probation, the State Legislature, the Governor, and the
Department of Corrections. With the enactment of H.B. 1021, Virginia Judges
will have actual, capped funded, full authority to implement the best option
for reducing recidivism for the particular offender.
Truly yours,
Alvastf.fxj
Thomas Donelson
| | | |
College Fund
Paying for College
Families often underestimate the total cost of sending a child to college. It's more than just tuition and room and board. There also are required fees, books, laundry, perhaps a computer, entertainment, and don't forget trips home to see Mom and Dad. We can provide a worksheet to help you project the four-year cost and how much you'll need to save monthly to pay the bills.
How to Pay the Bills
If your child is nearing graduation from high school, and you've saved little or nothing,
your choices for paying for college are limited. Most likely, you will have to rely on a
combination of current income, loans and financial aid.
| | | |
Estate Planning
What to know about Estate Planning
We can help you design an estate plan that is right for you and your loved ones. This plan will help:
- Prepare you if a disability occurs
- Save on attorney and court costs
- Ensure privacy for you and your family
- Give you control over distribution of your estate
- Minimize your estate taxes
| | | |
|
|
|
