Utah presentence investigation reports: User group perceptions of quality and effectiveness

Federal Probation

Volumn 64, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 7-12

  Norman, Michael D ^a   Wadman, Robert C ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0346819880     PISSN: 00149128     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (9)

1. Abadinsky, H. (2000). Probation and Parole-Theory and Practice. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle, New Jersey, pp. 133-134.
2. Blumberg, A. (1970). Criminal Justice, Chicago: Quadrangle Books.
3. Clear, T.R. and Dammer, H.R. (2000), The Offender in the Community, Wadsworth Publishing Company; Belmont, CA., p..143
4. Cromwell, P.F. and del Carmen, R.V. (1999), Community-Based Corrections, Wadsworth Publishing Company: Belmont, CA., pp. 52-54.
5. Granelli, J.S., (1983). Presentence Reports Go Private, National Law Review,Vol. 2, pp. 1-23.
6. Hoelter, H., (1984). Private Presentence Reports: Boon or Boondoggle?, Federal Probation, Vol. 48, No. 3, pp. 66-69.
7. Kulis, C.J., (1983). Profit In The Private Presentence Report, Federal Probation, Vol. 47, No. 4, pp. 11-16.
8. Latessa, E.J., and Allen, H.E., (1999). Corrections in the Community, Anderson Publishing: Cincinnati, Ohio, p. 30.
9. Sieh, E., (1993). From Augustus to the Progressives: A Study of Probation's Formative Years, Federal Probation, Vol. 57, No. 3, PP. 67-72.