Probation violations, revocations, and imprisonment: The decisions of probation officers, prosecutors, and judges pre- and post-mandatory drug treatment

Criminal Justice Policy Review

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 3-30

  Rodriguez, Nancy ^a   Webb, Vincent J ^b  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY WEST   (United States)

^b SAM HOUSTON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Mandatory drug treatment; Probation revocation; Probation violations

Indexed keywords

EID: 34250664993     PISSN: 08874034     EISSN: 15523586     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0887403406292956     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Albonetti, C. (1991). An integration of theories to explain judicial discretion. Social Problems, 38, 247-266.
2. Albonetti, C.A., & Hepburn, J.R. (1996). Prosecutorial discretion to defer criminalization: The effects of defendant's ascribed and achieved status characteristics. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 12, 63-81.
3. Albonetti, C.A.,& Hepburn, J.R. (1997). Probation revocation: A proportional hazards model of the conditioning effects of social disadvantage. Social Problems, 44, 124-318.
4. Arizona Supreme Court. (2000). Drug treatment and education fund. Phoenix: Arizona Supreme Court, Administrative Office of the Courts, Adult Probation Services Division.
5. Arizona Supreme Court. (2005). Drug treatment and education fund, reporting detailing years 2001-2004. Phoenix: Arizona Supreme Court, Administrative Office of the Courts, Adult Probation Services Division.
6. Britt, C., Gottfredson, M., & Goldkamp, J.S. (1992). Drug testing and pre-trial misconduct: An experiment on the specific deterrent effects of drug monitoring defendants on pretrial release. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 29, 62-78.
7. Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2004a). Prisoners in 2003. Washington, DC: Department of Justice.
8. Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2004b). Probation and parole in the United States, 2003. Washington, DC: Department of Justice.
9. Clear, T.R., Harris, P.M., & Baird, S.C. (1992). Probationer violations and officer response. Journal of Criminal Justice, 20, 1-12
10. Clear, T.R., & Latessa, E.J. (1993). Probation officers role in intensive supervision: Surveillance versus treatment. Justice Quarterly, 10, 441-462.
11. Crawford, C., Chiricos, T., & Kleck, G. (1998). Race, racial threat, and sentencing of habitual offenders. Criminology, 36, 481-511.
12. Curtis, C., Hoctor, D., & Pennell, S. (1994) Intensive supervision for drug-involved probationers. In C. B. Fields (Ed.), Innovative trends and specialized strategies in community-based corrections (pp. 87-122). New York: Garland.
13. Czajkoski, E.H. (1973). Exposing the quasi-judicial role of the probation officer. Federal Probation, 37, 9-13.
14. Demuth, S. (2003). Racial and ethnic differences in pretrial release decisions and outcomes: A comparison of Hispanic, Black, and White felony arrestees. Criminology, 41, 873-907.
15. Farabee, D., Hser, Y.-I., Anglin, M.D., & Huang, D. (2004). Recidivism among an early cohort of California's Proposition 36 offenders. Criminology and Public Policy, 3, 563-583.
16. Fulton, B., Stichman, A., Travis, L., & Latessa, E. (1997). Moderating probation and parole officers attitudes to achieve desired outcomes. The Prison Journal, 77, 295-312.
17. Gray, M.K., Fields, M., & Maxwell, S.R. (2001). Examining probation violations: Who, what, and when. Crime & Delinquency, 47, 537-557.
18. Hagan, J., Hewitt, J.D., & Alwin, D.F. (1979). Ceremonial justice: Crime and punishment in a loosely coupled system. Social Forces, 58, 506-527.
19. Harris, P.M., Petersen, R.D., & Rapoza, S. (2001). Between probation and revocation: A study of intermediate decision making. Journal of Criminal Justice, 29, 307-318.
20. Hepburn, J.R., & Albonetti, C.A. (1994). Recidivism among drug offenders: A survival analysis of the effects of offender characteristics, type of offense, and two types of intervention. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 10, 159-179.
21. Hser, Y.-I., Teruya, C., Evans, E., Longshore, D., Grella, C., & Farabee, D. (2003). Initial findings from a five-county study on the impact of California's Proposition 36 on the treatment system and patient outcomes. Evaluation Review, 27, 479-505.
22. Johnson, B. (2003). Racial and ethnic disparities in sentencing departures across modes of conviction. Criminology, 41, 449-490
23. Johnson, W.W., & Jones, M. (1998). Probation, race, and the war on drugs: An empirical analysis of drug and non-drug felony probation outcomes. Journal of Drug Issues, 28, 985-1004.
24. Kautt, P., & Spohn, C. (2002). Cracking down on Black drug offenders? Testing for interactions among offenders' race, drug types, and sentencing strategy in federal drug sentences. Justice Quarterly, 19, 1-36.
25. Kingsnorth, R., Cummings, D., Lopez, J., & Wentworth, J. (1999). Criminal sentencing and the court probation office: The myth of individualized justice revisited. The Justice System Journal, 20, 255-273.
26. Kingsnorth, R.F., MacIntosh, R.C., & Sutherland, S. (2002). Criminal charge or probation violation? Prosecutorial discretion and implications for research in criminal court processing. Criminology, 40, 553-577.
27. Kramer, J., & Steffensmeier, D. (1993). Race and imprisonment decisions. The Sociological Quarterly, 34, 357-376.
28. Landis, J.R., Mercer, J.D., & Wolff, C.E. (1969). Success and failure of adult probationers in California. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 6, 34-40.
29. Longshore, D., Uranda, D., Evans, E., Hser, Y.-I., Prendergast, M., Hawkins, A., et al. (2004). Evaluation of the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act 2003 report. Sacramento: California Health and Human Services Agency, Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs.
30. MacDonald, S.S., & Baroody-Hart, C. (1999). Communication between probation officers and judges: An innovative model. Federal Probation, 63, 42-50.
31. Mackenzie, D.L., Browning, K., Skroban, S.B., & Smith, D.A. (1999). The impact of probation on the criminal activities of offenders. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 36, 423-453.
32. Moore, C.A., & Miethe, T.D. (1986). Regulated and unregulated sentencing decisions: An analysis of first-year practices under Minnesota's felony sentencing guidelines. Law and Society Review, 20, 253-277.
33. Miethe, T.D. (1987). Charging and plea bargaining practices under determinate sentencing: An investigation of the hydraulic displacement of discretion. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 78, 155-176.
34. Morgan, K.D. (1994). Factors associated with probation outcome. Journal of Criminal Justice, 22, 341-353. Myers, M.A. (1982). Common law in actions: The prosecution of felonies and misdemeanors. Sociological Inquiry, 52, 1-15.
35. Myers, M.A., & LaFree, G.D. (1982). Sexual assault and its prosecution: A comparison with other crimes. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 73, 1282-1305.
36. Myers, M.A., & Talarico, S. (1986). The social contexts of racial discrimination in sentencing. Social Problems, 33, 236-251.
37. Paternoster, R., Brame, R., Mazerolle, P., & Piquero, A. (1998). Using the correct statistical test for the equality of regression coefficients. Criminology, 36, 859-866.
38. Petersilia, J. (1983). Racial disparities in the criminal justice system. National Institute of Corrections. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
39. Petersilia, J. (1985). Probation and felony offenders. National Institute of Justice research in brief. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
40. Petersilia, J., & Turner, S. (1990). Intensive supervision for high risk probationers: Findings from three California experiments. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
41. Petersilia, J., Turner, S., Kahan, J., & Peterson, J. (1985). Granting felons probation: Public risk and alternatives. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
42. Petersilia, J., Turner, S., & Piper-Deschenes, E. (1992). The costs and effects of intensive supervision for drug offenders. Federal Probation, 56, 12-17.
43. Rhodes, W. (1991). Federal criminal sentencing: Some measurement issues with application to pre-guideline sentencing disparity. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 81, 1002-1033.
44. Riley, K.J., Ebener, P.A., Chiesa, J., Turner, S., & Ringel, J. (2000). Drug offenders and the criminal justice system: Will Proposition 36 treat or create problems? Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
45. Riley, K.J., Rodriguez, N., Barnes-Proby, D., Griffith Forge, N., Ridgeway, G., & Webb, V. (2005). Just cause or just because? Prosecution and plea bargaining among low-level-drug offenders in California and Arizona. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
46. Sims, B., & Jones, M. (1997). Predicting success or failure on probation: Factors associated with felony probation outcomes. Crime & Delinquency, 43, 314-327. 314-327.
47. Smith, D.A., Wish, E.D., & Jarjoura, G.R. (1989). Drug use and pretrial misconduct in New York City. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 5, 101-126.
48. Souryal, C., & Wellford, C. (1997). An examination of unwarranted sentencing disparity under Maryland's voluntary sentencing guidelines. Baltimore: Maryland Commission on Criminal Sentencing Policy.
49. Speiglman, R., Klein, D., Miller, R., & Noble, A. (2003). Early implementation of Proposition 36: Criminal justice and treatment system issues in eight counties. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 35, 133-141.
50. Spohn, C., DeLone, M., & Spears, J. (1998). Race/ethnicity, gender and sentencing severity in Dade County, Florida: An examination of the decision to withhold adjudication. Journal of Crime and Justice, 21, 111-138.
51. Spohn, C., Gruhl, J., & Welch, S. (1987). The impact of the ethnicity and gender of defendants on the decision to reject or dismiss felony charges. Criminology, 25, 175-191.
52. State v. Estrada, 201 Ariz. 347, 34 P.3d 356 (Ariz. 2001).
53. Steffensmeier, D., & Demuth, S. (2000). Ethnicity and sentencing outcomes in U.S. federal courts: Who is punished more harshly? American Sociological Review, 65, 705-729.
54. Taxman, F.S., & Cherkos, R. (1995). Intermediate sanctions: Dealing with technical violators. Corrections Today, 57, 46-57.
55. Tonry, M. (1995). Malign neglect: Race, crime and punishment in America. New York: Oxford University Press
56. Ulmer, J.T. (2001). Intermediate sanctions: A comparative analysis of the probability and severity of recidivism. Sociological Inquiry, 71, 164-193.
57. Ulmer, J.T., & Kramer, J.H. (1996). Court communities under sentencing guidelines: Dilemmas of formal rationality and sentencing disparity. Criminology, 34, 383-408.
58. Vito, G.F. (1987). Felony probation and recidivism: Replication and response. Federal Probation, 50, 17-25.
59. Walsh, A. (1985). The role of the probation officer in the sentencing process: Independent professional or judicial hack? Criminal Justice and Behavior, 12, 289-303.
60. Whitehead, J.T. (1991). The effectiveness of felony probation: Results from an eastern state. Justice Quarterly, 8, 525-543.
61. Zatz, M. (1987). The changing forms in racial/ethnic biases in sentencing. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 24, 69-92.