An Alternative to Incarceration for Nonviolent Offenders Essay

dissociatenership field of studys is a range of election penaltys for nonviolent wrongdoers. on that point ar twain basic connection castigations models in the get together States. In the first-class honours degree model, coordinated residential district bailiwicks programs combine sentencing guidelines and discriminatory discretion with a variety of election upholds and unloosen and probation options. In the second model, roughly evinces choose instituted programs in which disciplineal officials whitethorn direct already prison ho practice session termd wrongdoers into resource advocate programs and parole and probation options.Both models atomic number 18 designed to help mortify prison overcrowding and be less expensive alternatives to prison. Widespread using of confederacy countervailion programs in the United States began in the late 1970s as a way to offer offenders, particularly those leaving shut up or prison, residential utility in hal fway houses. The first nominate association correction programs began in Oregon, Colorado, and Minnesota as pilot projects with actu to each oney little government-funded support.They diverted nonviolent offenders in selected pilot project argonas from jails and postulate prisons into topical anaesthetic anaesthetic alternative penalisation programs. These programs allowed judges to sentence offenders to a community- assure penalty rather than jail or prison. Rehabilitation programs were the preferred penalty option. In the late 1980s, prison remainss across the country began experiencing h mavenst overcrowding of facilities. The overcrowding work ond as a catalyst for lawmakers to develop new options for sentencing wretched offenders. Nineteen produces let now enacted different community correction programs.Community correction programs domiciliate m any communities with topical anaesthetic anesthetic anesthetic punishment options as an alternative to prison or jail. These sanction programs be lower bell alternatives to increased prison and jail construction, based on the cost per offender. They extend local courts, state departments of department of corrections, and state parole boards with a broad range of correctional options for offenders nether their jurisdiction. The intention is to match the provide punishment with the discourtesy. Community corrections programs argon co-ordinated sanctioning strategies which seek to achieve the by-line goals The offender is punished and held accountable.Public asylum is protected.Victims and local communities receive restitution from felons who throw in their accede jobs and/or in restitution programs. Community service wrench increases.Collection of court be and fees increases receivable to contractual agreements with offenders who remain in their present jobs. Eight states begin adopted comp Community chastening Acts which bring about a nedeucerk of correctional programs for u nique(predicate) types of offenders.The acts produce mechanisms by which state funds be granted to local governments and community come alongncies to get a retentive local sanctions in lieu of prison or jail. While no two state programs atomic number 18 alike, a complete community corrections program loosely embarrasss the chase elements A locally unified criminal justice system which supports a network of de centralise or centralized correctional programs for specific types of offenders. For instance, in Minnesota, local community corrections advisory boards make up of county sheriffs, chiefs of police, prosecutors, judges, defense lawyers, probation agents, and otherwise local officials create comprehensive correction plans to improve the politics of justice at the local level.The plans stage the various options of punishment in the community which argon available to judges and other criminal justice officials when sentencing offenders. These interconnected systems by and large include restitution programs for nonviolent offenders. Offenders fee atomic number 18 applied directly to restitution, court- uniform fines and fees, and means and board. Placement in the work programs commonly lasts from three to six months. Programs atomic number 18 administered by local governmental or non-for-profit agencies at the county or regional level, and be funded by the state under a single system which provides for local punishment options.Funds are provided contractually or directly depending on the involvement of nonprofit organization agencies. Sentencing guidelines for local, district, or regional judges regularise a uniform sentencing structure with a variety of punishment options for offenders. They differ from definitive sentencing by targeting alternative punishments for the non-violent offender population.The punishment authorized under sentencing guidelines is generally well-kept for the crime and applies to all similarly-situated felony offenders. For example, judges essential(prenominal) follow a rating system based on the severity of the offenders crime, the frequency of violations, and the nature of the crime. military rating scales are adjusted periodically by sentencing commissions to reflect statewide sentencing patterns.Non-violent crimes have the worst criminal rating, allowing judges the broadest range of sentencing options. In contrast, judges must(prenominal) impose very(prenominal) specific sentences for violent or serious crimes. Serious or violent felons sentenced to prison receive very little if any good while credit, and must serve a specified term tour in prison. Responsibility for community correctional service is delegated to local units of government. This joins sentencing and punishment in one administrative level, with incentives for the most economical use of local and state correctional resources. A post-prison release program, operated through a parole or probation system, is an in tegral dowry of a local community corrections interposition system. Community corrections sanctions may include24-hour residential programs which provide a structured living environment for offenders who enquire oversight when not working or looking for exercising Non-residential drug and intoxicant interposition programselectronic observeing of offenders rigid on home detention (offenders must wear bracelets that allow parole officials to monitor their movement) Diagnostic evaluation and counseling order of magnitudeed by the court as part of a pre-sentence process Pre-trial intervention which provides tightfitting supervision and support function to selected offenders introductory to trial Community service programs twenty- four hour period billing centers where offenders are take ind to establish the progress of their job search and casual activities with parole officials and Mandatory education programs.There are several key elements to an integrated community- based correctional program Collaborative long range planning by local and state law enforcement officials to reduce the use of prisons for felony sentencing Coordinated use of local and state correctional resources A state patronage mechanism to ensure a local level of correctional services and Ensuring humankind safety in community correction facilities. One of the goals of sentencing guidelines is to match the community sanction with the offender.The types of offenders which are considered for community sanctions include the spare- eon activity Offenders who competency benefit from prevention services, and are of criminal activity in the future(a) school drop-outs, urban youth conclave members, and juvenile offenders with learning disabilities. Prevention services could include mid-night basketball leagues, big pal programs, special education programs, and other activities. Offenders who might benefit from early intervention services. This stem is generally composed of fir st time offenders.Early intervention may reduce their chances for committing future crimes. They generally require services related to education, work-skill development, and substance rib and inebriant counseling. Offenders who might be eligible for recreation programs. This group is basically those people in jail or prison who may safely be diverted to alternative programs and services. They generally are second or third time offenders who have failed on probation and have been convicted of a number of non-violent offences. at a lower place atomic number 20s three rents law, they could face deportment imprisonment if their first two felonies are violent and/or if the third felony is violent.The goal of sentencing guidelines is to match target offender groups with the appropriate community sanction. While on that point are some variations among state sentencing guidelines, most establish punishment by the severity, frequency, and nature of the crime committed. For example, in Michigan, if an offender is arrested for burglary and has a introductory drug arrest, state sentencing guideline ratings provide a range of sentencing options from alternative community corrections to up to a 24 month prison sentence. The community correction option allows the judge to sentence the offender to a secured community-based substance abuse treatment program for six months, followed by a short probation period.The judge has the discretion to opt from an array of options. On the other hand, if an offender is convicted of a serious felony and has previous non-violent felony convictions, sentencing guidelines provide that alternative community corrections is not an option, and require a token(prenominal) 24 month prison sentence. While offenders sometimes violate the terms of a community correction sentence, so far there is no evidence that the offenders currently accounting entry these programs are a danger to communities. military rank studies are currently randoml y tracking offenders who participate in community correction programs to determine the success or trial of the programs. The eight states which have enacted comprehensive community correction laws require a open local implementation strategy that targets specific offender populations, and seeks to match their needs with the correct community sanction and service, before state funds are dispersed. Several states have as well enacted on-going performance evaluation reviews to recognize problem areas and fine-tune sentencing options.The other four states do not offer fiscal incentives or disincentives, although local implementation strategies are closely monitored by state legislatures. cardinal of the 8 states also offer formula-based incentives which require community agencies to develop comprehensive, integrated long-range community correctional plans. The greater local resources and services available under the plan, the high the state funding.Most local plans are coordinate d at the county level and secern all available community treatment programs, including prevention and intervention programs, training programs, and digression programs. Local plans must include information detailing how the community correction programs are expected to reduce commitments to prison. The formula grants include a disincentive for sending certain(a) kinds of felons to state prison, in the form of a per-diem fee which is deducted from the local grant.Grantees are also required to monitor offenders for possible parole violations after they complete the community corrections program. lah has the oldest state burster mob program in the country. The Intensive motivational Program of Alternative correctional handling (IMPACT) has as its goals Provide an alternative to long-term incarceration for youthful first- and second-time offenders. Reduce costs without undue risk to public safety. contract participants self-discipline, self-confidence, self-respect, individual r esponsibility, and respect for others. In order to participate, an offender must meet the following eligibility criteria Male and female offenders under the age of 40 serving sentences in state prison. First time felony offenders committed to state custody for 7 years or less for an offense with parole eligibility.Second-time felony offenders who have not previously spent time in state prison and who have been committed to state custody for 7 years or less for an offense carrying parole eligibility. No offenders with outstanding felony charges, legion(predicate) outstanding misdemeanor charges, outstanding in-migration detainers, mental or physical wellness problems, history of assaulting behavior or escape, open homo informality, sex offense against a nestling or any violent sexual offense, or absence of post-release plan.In 1987, the lah Department of Public Safety and department of corrections began operating a 136-bed military-style boot inhabit program at the medium-securi ty Hunt Correctional totality (Up to 20 female slots are also available at the Louisiana Correctional Institute for Women these inmates are bused to the boot camp daily). The 90- to 180-day program uses a three-phase barbel to promote its philosophy of discipline and treatment. secureness program activities include military reading and ceremony training, physical training and organised recreational activities.Treatment programs include a re-education therapy class that requires participants to evaluate their beliefs and values, substance abuse education classes and activities, and prerelease (life skills) preparation. Extra duty or incentive physical training are required for minor disciplinary infractions. more(prenominal) serious infractions may entrust in reduction in rank, additional duties, or, in some cases, dismissal from the program. About 55 percent of participants graduate from the program.On release, all IMPACT parolees are assigned to 3 months of intensive parole supervision where, in addition to the regular conditions mandated for all parolees (maintain employment or full-time educational training), they must satisfy the following requirements a minimum of 4 face-to-face contacts with a supervision officer each week, adherence to a curfew, 100 hours of unpaid community service work and random drug and alcohol screenings. After 3 months, supervision standards are gradually relaxed.Depending on individual performance, at the conclusion of this period, the parolee will detain receiving intensive supervision or is laid in regular parole supervision. accord to the Multi-State Evaluation of Shock Incarceration report to the discipline Institute of nicety, Louisiana is one of three states whos program results in lower recidivism rates relative to comparison groups. Failures are more often for expert violations of parole than for new crime violations. It is estimated that each 100 inmates completing the program result in a cost nest egg of $750,000 to the state (Nieto, Marcus Feb. 1996).REFERENCESTravis Hirschi, and David Rudisill, An Evaluation of calcium Probation pension Program, Vol. 1 Commitment Reduction and Probation bounty A Summary of Available Data, Center on Administration of Criminal referee, University of California at Davis, (Davis), 1977.Probation/Parole Survey, Corrections Compendium, The National Journal for Corrections, August, 1994.U.S. Department of evaluator, Office of Justice Programs. A Survey of Intermediate Sanctions, Washington, D.C. September, 1990, and Nieto, Marcus, California Research Bureau, The Changing Role Probation In Californias Criminal Justice System, April, 1996.Peters, G.T., Intermediate Sanctions A Discussion of informative Programs. Office of National Drug chequer Policy. Washington D.C. 1990.Stone, Susan and Fulton, Betsy, Achieving Public Safety through and through Rehabilitation and Reintegration The Promise of a new-fangled ISP, Presented at the Academy of Criminal Justice Science Conference. Kansas City, Missouri. 1995.Nidorf, Barry, Chief Probation Officer, Los Angeles County, Los Angeles County, Varied Uses of Electronic Monitoring The Los Angeles Experience, Edited by John Ortiz and William Selke. Intermediate Sanctions Sentencing in the 1990s. Anderson publish Company, 1995.Bourque, Blair, Han, B, Hill, Mei, and Sarah, M,. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs. An stocktaking of Aftercare Provisions for 52 Boot refugee camp Programs. NCJ 157104. Washington, DC. January, 1996.Nieto, Marcus, California Research Bureau, Community Correction Punishments An Alternative to Incarceration for Nonviolent Offenders, Sacramento, CA., February, 1996.