Actuarial Sentencing: An "Unsettled" Proposition

Justice Quarterly

Volumn 30, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 270-296

  Hannah Moffat, Kelly ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

actuarial justice; disparity; gender; punishment; race; risk; sentencing; theory

Indexed keywords

EID: 84875342604     PISSN: 07418825     EISSN: 17459109     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/07418825.2012.682603     Document Type: Article

References (106)

1. Ægisdóttier, S., White, M. J. and Spengler, P. M. 2006. The meta-analysis of clinical judgment project: Fifty-six years of accumulated research on clinical versus statistical prediction. Counseling Psychologist, 34: 341-382.
2. Andrews, D. 1989. Recidivism is predictable and can be influenced: Using risk assessments to reduce recidivism. Forum on Corrections Research, 1: 2-4.
3. Andrews, D. A. 2001. "Principles of effective correctional programs". In Compendium 2000 on effective correctional programming, Edited by: Motiuk, L. L. and Serin, R. C. 9-17. Ottawa: Correctional Services of Canada.
4. Andrews, D. A. and Bonta, J. 1995. The level of service inventory-revised, Toronto: Multi-Health Systems.
5. Andrews, D. A. and Bonta, J. 2006. The psychology of criminal conduct, 4th ed., Newark, NJ: LexisNexis.
6. Andrews, D. A. and Bonta, J. 2007. Risk-need-responsivity model for offender assessment and rehabilitation, Ottawa: Public Safety. Retrieved December 30, 2011, from http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/res/cor/rep/_fl/Risk_Need_2007-06_e.pdf
7. Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J. and Hoge, R. D. 1990. Classification for effective rehabilitation: Rediscovering psychology. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 17: 19-52.
8. Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J. and Wormith, S. J. 2004. The level of service/case management inventory (LS/CMI), Toronto: Multi-Health Systems.
9. Andrews, D. A. and Dowden, C. 2008. The risk-need-responsivity model of assessment and human service in prevention and corrections: Crime-prevention jurisprudence. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 49(4): 439-464.
10. Ashworth, A. 2005. Sentencing and criminal justice, 4th ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. See also: von Hirsch, A., & Ashworth, A. (2005). Proportionate sentencing: Exploring the principles. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
11. Baird, C. 2009. A question of evidence: A critique of risk models used in the justice system, Madison, WI: National Council on Crime and Delinquency. Retrieved January 13, 2011, from http://faculty.uml.edu/jbyrne/44.203/NCCD%20Baird%20on%20Risk.pdf
12. Belknap, J. and Holsinger, K. 2006. The gendered nature of risk factors for delinquency. Feminist Criminology, 1(1): 48-71.
13. Blanchette, K. and Brown, S. L. 2006. The assessment and treatment of women offenders: An integrative perspective, West Sussex: Wiley.
14. Bloom, B., Owen, B. and Covington, S. 2003. Gender responsive strategies for female offenders: A summary of research, practice, and guiding principles for women offenders, Washington, DC: National Institute of Corrections, US Department of Justice.
15. Blumstein, A. 1982. On racial disproportionality of the United Sates prison populations. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 73(4): 1259-1281.
16. Bonta, J. 2008. Offender risk assessment and sentencing. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 49(4): 519-529.
17. Bonta, J., Bourgon, G., Jesseman, R. and Yessine, A. K. 2005. Presentence Reports in Canada, 2005, Ottawa: Public Safety. 12
18. Bonta, J. and Wormith, J. S. 2007. "Risk and need assessment". In Developments in social work with offenders, Edited by: McIvor, G. and Raynor, P. 131-152. London: Jessica Kingsley.
19. Bushway, S. D. and Morrison Piehl, A. 2007. The inextricable link between age and criminal history in sentencing. Crime & Delinquency, 53(1): 156-183.
20. Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC). 2003. Protecting their rights: Systematic review of human rights in correctional services for women, Ottawa: Canadian Human Rights Commission. Retrieved December 28, 2011, from http://www.chrc-ccdp.ca/legislation_policies/consultation_report-en.asp
21. Clarke Robbins, P., Monahan, J. and Sliver, E. 2003. Mental disorder, violence and gender. Law and Human Behavior, 27(6): 561-5713.
22. Cole, D. 2008. The umpires strike back: Canadian judicial experience with risk assessment Instruments. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 49(4): 493-519.
23. Cole, D. and Angus, G. 2003. Using pre-sentence reports to evaluate and respond to risk. Criminal Law Quarterly, 47(3): 302-364.
24. Crow, M. S. 2008. The complexities of prior record, race, ethnicity, and policy. Interactive Effects in Sentencing, 33(4): 502-523.
25. Cunningham, M. D. and Reidy, T. J. 2002. Violence risk assessment at federal capital sentencing: Individualization, generalization, relevance, and scientific standards. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29(5): 512-537.
26. Dal Pra, Z. 2004. "In search of a risk instrument". In Topics in community corrections: Issues for managers, Edited by: Thigpen, M. and Keiser, G. 9-12. Washington, DC: National Institute of Corrections.
27. Dolores, J. C. and Redding, R. E. 2009. The effects of different forms of risk communication on judicial decision making. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 8: 1-5.
28. Durrance, P. and Williams, P. 2003. Broadening the agenda around what works for Black and Asian offenders. Probation Journal, 50(3): 211-224.
29. Dutton, D. G. and Kropp, R. 2000. A review of domestic violence risk instruments. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 1(2): 171-181.
30. Ericson, R. V. and Haggerty, K. 1997. Policing the risk society, Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
31. Etienne, M. 2009. Legal and practical implications of evidence based sentencing by judges. Chapman Journal of Criminal Justice, 1(1): 43-60.
32. Ewald, F. 1991. "Insurance and risk". In The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality, Edited by: Burchell, G. 197-210. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
33. Fitzgibbon, D. W. 2007. Risk analysis and the new practitioner: Myth or reality. Punishment and Society, 9(1): 87-97.
34. Gavazzi, S. M., Yarcheck, C. M. and Lim, J.-Y. 2005. Ethnicity, gender, and global risk indicators in the lives of status offenders coming to the attention of the juvenile court. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 49(6): 696-710.
35. Gottfredson, D. M. 1999. Effects of judges' sentencing decisions on criminal careers 3-4, Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice. Retrieved January 4, 2012, from http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/178889.pdf
36. Grann, M. and Langstrom, N. 2007. Actuarial assessment of violence risk: To weigh or not to weigh?. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34(1): 22-36.
37. Gray, N., Laing, J. and Noaks, L. 2002. Criminal justice, mental health and the politics of risk, London: Cavendish.
38. Hannah-Moffat, K. 2004. Criminogenic needs and the transformative risk subject: Hybridizations of risk/need in penalty. Punishment and Society, 7(1): 29-51.
39. Hannah-Moffat, K. 2009. Gridlock or mutability: Reconsidering "gender" and risk assessment. Criminology and Public Policy, 8(1): 209-219.
40. Hannah-Moffat, K. and Maurutto, P. 2004. Youth risk/need assessment: An overview of issues and practices, Ottawa: Department of Justice Canada, Research and Statistics Division.
41. Hannah-Moffat, K. and Maurutto, P. 2008. Understanding risk in the context of the Youth Criminal Justice Act. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 49(4): 465-491.
42. Hannah-Moffat, K. and Maurutto, P. 2010. Re-contextualizing pre-sentence reports: Risk and race. Punishment and Society, 12: 2-286.
43. Hannah-Moffat, K., Maurutto, P. and Turnbull, S. 2009. Negotiated risk: Actuarial illusions and discretion in probation. Canadian Journal of Law and Society, 24(3): 391-409.
44. Harcourt, B. 2007. Against prediction: Profiling, policing and punishing in the actuarial age, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
45. Harcourt, B. E. (2010). Risk as a proxy for race criminology and public policy, Forthcoming; University of Chicago Law & Economics Olin Working Paper No. 535; University of Chicago Public Law Working Paper No. 323. Retrieved January 4, 2012, from SSRN,http://ssrn.com/abstract=1677654
46. Heilbrun, K. 2009. Risk assessment in evidence-based sentencing context and promising uses. Chapman Journal of Criminal Justice, 1(1): 127-142.
47. Heimer, K. and Kruttschnitt, C. 2006. Gender and crime: Patterns in victimization and offending, New York, NY: New York University Press.
48. Holleran, D. and Spohn, C. 2004. On the use of the total incarceration variable in sentencing research. Criminology, 42: 211-240.
49. Hudson, B. 2003. Justice in the risk society, London: Sage.
50. Hudson, B. and Bramhall, G. 2005. Assessing the other: Constructions of Asianness in risk assessment by probation officers. British Journal of Criminology, 45(5): 721-740.
51. Hunt, S. 2007. Standards of evidence. Criminology and Public Policy, 6(3): 483-492.
52. Hyatt, J. M., Bergstrom, M. H. and Chanenson, S. L. 2011. Federal sentencing reporter. Advice for the U.S. Sentencing Commissioners, 23(4): 266-268.
53. Kern, R.P. and Farrar-Owens, M. 2004. Sentencing guidelines with integrated offender risk assessment. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 16: 165-166.
54. Kim, D.-Y., Joo, H.-J. and McCarty, W. P. 2008. Risk assessment and classification of day reporting center clients: An actuarial approach. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35: 792-812.
55. Kleiman, M., Ostrom, B. J. and Cheesman, F. L. II. 2007. Using risk assessment to inform sentencing decisions for non-violent offenders in Virginia. Crime and Delinquency, 53(1): 106-132.
56. Kong, R. and AuCoin, K. 2008. Female offenders in Canada. Juristat: Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, 28(1): 1-23. Catalog 85-002-XIE
57. Kreamer, S. (2004). Quality assurance and training in offender assessment. In Topics in community corrections: Annual issue 2004: Assessment issues for managers. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Corrections. Retrieved May 3, 2012, fromhttp://www.nicic.org
58. Lowenkamp, C., Latessa, E., & Holsinger, A. (2004). Empirical evidence on the importance of training and experience in using the Level of Service Inventory-Revised. In Topics in community corrections. Colorado: National Institute of Corrections-US Department of Justice.
59. Marcus, M. 2009a. MPC-the root of the problem: Just deserts and risk assessment. Florida Law Review, 61(4): 751-776.
60. Marcus, M. 2009b. Conversations on evidence-based sentencing. Chapman Journal of Criminal Justice, 1(1): 61-125.
61. Martel, J., Brassard, R. and Jaccoud, M. 2011. When two worlds collide: Risk management in Canadian Aboriginal corrections. British Journal of Criminology, 51(2): 235-255.
62. Maurutto, P. and Hannah-Moffat, K. 2006. Assembling risk and the restructuring of penal control. British Journal of Criminology, 46(3): 438-454.
63. Maurutto, P. and Hannah-Moffat, K. 2007. Understanding risk in the context of the Youth Criminal Justice Act. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 49(4): 465-491.
64. Mitchell, O. 2005. A meta-analysis of race and sentencing research: Explaining the inconsistencies. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 21(4): 439-466.
65. Monahan, J. 2006. A jurisprudence of risk assessment: Forecasting harm among prisoners, predators, and patients. Virginia. Law Review, 92: 391
66. Morash, M. 2009. A great debate over using the Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R) with women offenders. Criminology & Public Policy, 8: 173-181.
67. Morash, M., Bynum, T. S. and Koons, B. A. 1998. Women offenders: Programming needs and promising approaches, Washington, DC: USDOJ, National Institute of Justice.
68. Murrie, D. C. and Balusek, K. 2008. Forensic assessment of violence risk in adversarial proceedings: Pursuing objectivity and avoiding bias. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 7(4): 141-153.
69. Netter, B. 2007. Using groups statistics to sentence individual criminals: An ethical and statistical critique of the Virginia Risk Assessment Program. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 97(3): 699-730.
70. Ogloff, J. R. P. and Davis, M. R. 2004. Advances in offender assessment and rehabilitation: Contributions of the risk-needs-responsivity approach. Psychology, Crime and Law, 10: 229-242.
71. Oleson, J. C. (2011). Risk in sentencing: Constitutionally-suspect variables and evidence-based sentencing. ExpressO Retrieved December 28, 2011, fromhttp://works.bepress.com/james_oleson/2
72. O'Malley, P. 1998. Crime and the risk society, Aldershot: Dartmouth.
73. O'Malley, P. 2008. Experiments in risk and criminal justice. Theoretical Criminology, 12(4): 451-469.
74. Ostrom, B., Kleiman, M., Cheesman, F., Hansen, A. M., Kauder, N. B.Kleiman, M. 2002. Offender risk assessment in Virginia: A three-stage evaluation, Washington, DC: US Department of Justice. document number: 196815. Retrieved January 4, 2012, from http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/196815.pdf
75. Pager, D. 2003. The mark of a criminal record. American Journal of Sociology, 108(5): 937-975.
76. Peters, T., & Warren, R. K. (2006) National Centre for State Courts. Getting smarter about sentencing: NCSC's Sentencing Reform Survey 2-3. Retrieved December 28, 2011, fromhttp://www.ncsconline.org/D_Research/Documents/Senten_GettingSmarter_SentencingReformSurvey_FinalPub.pdf
77. Petersilia, J. and Turner, S. 1987. Guideline-based justice: Prediction and racial minorities. Crime and Justice, 9: 151-173.
78. Porter, T. 1996. Trust in numbers: The pursuit of objectivity in science and public life, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
79. Quigley, T. 2008. Commentary on risk assessment. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 49(4): 531-539.
80. Raynor, P. and Lewis, S. 2011. Risk-need assessment, sentencing and minority ethnic offenders in Britain. British Journal of Social Work, 41(7): 1357-1371.
81. Reichman, N. 1986. Managing crime risks: Towards an insurance based model of social control. Research in Law Deviance and Social Control, 8: 151-172.
82. Reisig, M. D., Holtfreter, K. and Morash, M. 2006. Assessing recidivism risk across female pathways to crime. Justice Quarterly, 23: 384-405.
83. Roehl, J. and Guertin, K. 2000. Intimate partner violence: The current use of risk assessments in sentencing offenders. The Justice System Journal, 21(2): 171-198.
84. Schwalbe, C. S. 2007. Risk assessment for juvenile justice: A meta analysis. Journal of Law and Human Behavior, 31: 449-462.
85. Scott, R. 2008. Risk assessment and sentencing of serious sex offenders. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 15(2): 188-201.
86. Severson, M. and Duclos, C. W. 2003. Assessing suicide and risk behaviors in an incarcerated American Indian population: Investigating culturally sensitive risk assessment instruments and procedures in a border jail: Final report, Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas, School of Social Work.
87. Silver, E. and Miller, L. 2002. A cautionary note on the use of actuarial risk assessment tools for social control. Crime and Delinquency, 48(1): 138-161.
88. Simon, J. 1988. The ideological effects of actuarial practices. Law & Society Review, 22(4): 771-800.
89. Simon, J. 1993. Poor discipline: Parole and the social control of the underclass, 1980-1990, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
90. Simon, J. 2005. Reversal of fortune: The resurgence of individual risk assessment in criminal justice. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 1: 397-421.
91. Skeem, J. (2010) Risk technology in sentencing and corrections: Testing the promises and perils. Sentencing Symposium, Albany, NY (unpublished paper).
92. Tata, C., Burns, N., Halliday, S., Hutton, N. and McNeill, F. 2008. Assisting and advising the sentencing decision process: The pursuit of quality in pre-sentence reports. British Journal of Criminology, 48: 835-855.
93. Skeem, J. (2012). Risk technology in sentencing: Testing the promises and perils. Justice Quarterly. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1080/07418825.2012.687513.
94. Van Voorhis, P. and Presser, L. 2001. Classification of women offenders: A national assessment of current practices, Washington, DC: USDOJ, National Institute of Corrections.
95. Van Voorhis, P., Wright, E. M., Salisbury, E. and Bauman, A. 2010. Women's risk factors and their contributions to existing risk/needs assessment: The current status of a gender-responsive supplement. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37(3): 261-288.
96. Vess, J. 2009. Risk assessment of sexual offenders for extended supervision orders in New Zealand: Basic principles and current practice. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 18: 174-189.
97. Vigorita, M. S. 2003. Judicial risk assessment: The impact of risk, stakes, and jurisdiction. Criminal Justice Review, 14(3): 361-376.
98. Viljoen, J. L., Scalora, M., Cuadra, L., Bader, S., Chavez, V., Ullman, D. and Lawrence, L. 2008. Assessing risk for violence in adolescents who have sexually offended: A comparison of the J-SOAP-II, J-SORRAT-II, and SAVRY. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35(1): 5-23.
99. Vose, B., Cullen, F. T. and Smith, P. 2008. The empirical status of the level of service inventory. Federal Probation, 72: 22-29.
100. Ward, T. and Maruna, S. 2007. Rehabilitation: Beyond the risk paradigm, London: Routledge.
101. Ward, T. and Stewart, C. 2003. Criminogenic needs and human needs: A theoretical critique. Psychology, Crime and Law, 9(3): 125-143.
102. Warren, R. K. 2007. Evidence-based practices and state sentencing policy: Ten policy initiatives to reduce recidivism. 82 IND. L. J., 1307: 1312-1314.
103. White, T. 2004. "Implementing an offender risk and needs assessment: An organizational change process". In Topics in community corrections: Annual issue 2004: Assessment issues for managers, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Corrections. Retrieved January 4, 2012, from http://www.nicic.org
104. Wolfe, M. 2008. Evidence-based judicial discretion: Promoting public safety through state sentencing reform. New York University Law Review, 83(5): 1389-1419.
105. Zedner, L. 2008. Book review of Against Prediction. New Criminal Law Review, 11(2): 359-362.
106. R. v. Gladue [1999] S.C. R. 688. Malenchik v. Indiana, No. 79S02-0908-CR-365 (Ind. 9 June 2010). Retrieved December 30, 2011, fromhttp://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/06091001bd.pdf