Overview of Split Sentencing Research October 25, 2006 Mark Rubin - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Overview of Split Sentencing Research October 25, 2006 Mark Rubin PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 69e17d-ODZkZ



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Overview of Split Sentencing Research October 25, 2006 Mark Rubin

Description:

Overview of Split Sentencing Research October 25, 2006 Mark Rubin * * * Presentations given to subcommittee Exploring the Relationship between Split Sentences and ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:33
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Date added: 9 June 2020
Slides: 25
Provided by: Stacey144
Learn more at: http://maine.gov
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Overview of Split Sentencing Research October 25, 2006 Mark Rubin


1
Overview of Split Sentencing Research October
25, 2006Mark Rubin
2
Presentations given to subcommittee
  • Exploring the Relationship between Split
    Sentences and Probation Recidivism in Maine -
    July 27, 2006
  • Who gets a Split Sentence in Maine? - August 2,
    2006
  • Who is getting revoked on probation? - September
    21, 2006

3
Study Parameters/Methodology
  • Examined 2004 and 2005 populations of individuals
    entering probation via
  • Split Sentence (spent some time in jail or prison
    just before entering probation
  • Straight Probation (received a sentence of
    probation without any jail or prison time

4
Exploring the relationship between sentence type,
risk, recidivism, and revocations
  • Examined the following variables in the analysis
  • Risk Level (LSI-R scores)
  • Crime type (MEJIS index and Class)
  • Region
  • Jail/Prison split
  • Number of Priors
  • Demographic variables (gender, age, education,
    race,et al.)
  • Criminogenic factors, including criminal
    histories (number of priors)
  • Shock Sentence
  • Probation revocations by type of offense (new
    crime vs. technical)
  • Revocations by risk level
  • Revocation information by sentence type

5
Who gets a Split Sentence?
6
Twice as many split sentenced offenders entered
probation in 2004 and 2005 as those with a
straight probation sentence
7
The likelihood of a split sentence correlates
with LSI Rating
LSI Rating Straight Probation Split Sentence
Administrative 44.9 55.1
Moderate 35.8 64.2
High/Maximum 20.6 79.4
8
Split sentences are the majority of sentences
whether the crime is a Felony or a Misdemeanor
Split Sentence Straight Probation
Felony Felony Felony
Administrative 71.7 28.3
Moderate 84.5 15.5
High/Maximum 92.2 7.8
Total 83.7 16.3

Misdemeanor Misdemeanor Misdemeanor
Administrative 48.2 51.8
Moderate 52.9 47.1
High/Maximum 55.3 44.7
Total 52.0 48.0
9
There appear to be regional differences in
sentencing practices
Straight Probation Split Sentence
Region 1 Administrative 51.4 48.6
Region 1 Moderate 40.6 59.4
Region 1 High/Maximum 26.1 73.9
Region 1 Total 40.8 59.2
Region 2 Administrative 48.2 51.8
Region 2 Moderate 44.8 55.2
Region 2 High/Maximum 20.3 79.7
Region 2 Total 43.0 57.0
Region 3 Administrative 43.7 56.3
Region 3 Moderate 31.4 68.6
Region 3 High/Maximum 12.0 88.0
Region 3 Total 33.2 66.8
Region 4 Administrative 36.4 63.6
Region 4 Moderate 27.8 72.2
Region 4 High/Maximum 18.5 81.5
Region 4 Total 28.5 71.5
10
Most offenders receive a split sentence of less
than 45 days
Risk Level Less than 45 days 45-270 days More than 270 days
Administrative 73.0 19.4 7.6
Moderate 59.9 28.3 11.8
High/Maximum 27.7 33.6 38.7
Total 58.3 27.4 14.3
11
Offense types by LSI
12
Exploring the Relationship between Split
Sentences and Probation Recidivism
13
Split Sentenced probationers have higher
recidivism rates than probationers receiving a
straight sentence
Sentence Type Recidivism Rate
Split Sentence 30.4
Straight Probation 20.5
Overall 26.9
Statistically significant difference between recidivism rates Statistically significant difference between recidivism rates
14
The data suggests first time/one time offenders
may have worse outcomes when receiving a split
sentence versus straight probation
Number of Priors Straight Probation R.R. Split Sentence R.R.
0-1 17.7 27.4
2-4 27.5 30.8
More than 4 35.7 42.7
No statistical difference between recidivism rates, due in part to small samples No statistical difference between recidivism rates, due in part to small samples No statistical difference between recidivism rates, due in part to small samples
15
Lower risk offenders appear to have statistically
higher recidivism rates when receiving a split
sentence
LSI Rating (includes overrides) Straight Probation Recidivism Rate Split Sentence Recidivism Rate
Administrative 10.5 15.3
Moderate 21.6 31.0
High 33.3 43.3
Maximum 100.0 53.8
Statistically significant difference between recidivism rates Statistically significant difference between recidivism rates Statistically significant difference between recidivism rates
16
Offenders convicted of certain crimes appear to
have statistically higher recidivism rates when
receiving a split sentence
Crime (from MEJIS Index) Straight Probation R.R. Split Sentence R.R.
Assault/Threatening 21.7 30.8
Burglary 37.1 44.0
Drugs 19.9 29.6
OUI 19.4 18.4
Sex offenses 13.5 27.0
Theft 21.3 36.5
Traffic Criminal 6.5 29.8
Statistically significant difference between recidivism rates Statistically significant difference between recidivism rates Statistically significant difference between recidivism rates
17
Recidivism rates are higher for shock sentences
than straight probation, especially after 30
days.
Sentence Type Recidivism Rates
Straight Probation 20.5
Split - 7 and less 27.9
Split - 8-14 days 21.0
Split -15-30 26.9
Split -31-60 35.8
Split -61-90 33.7
Split of 90 days 34.8
18
Concluding Thoughts
  • Split Sentence probationers appear to have higher
    recidivism rates than straight probationers even
    after accounting for specific characteristics.
  • However, sentencing practices are at best weakly
    related to a recidivist outcome. Other factors
    play a role, such as AFA, Priors, Current Age,
    Education, Married.
  • It appears that split sentencing has a more
    profound impact on lower risk offenders as to
    whether they recidivate.

19
Who is getting revoked?
20
Revocations rise dramatically as risk levels rise
LSI Rating (includes overrides) Revocation Rate
Administrative 14.4
Moderate 36.4
High 56.0
Maximum 82.4
Total 33.6
21
The higher the risk level of the offender the
more likely s/he is to be revoked for a technical
violation
LSI Rating (includes overrides) Revoked for a new crime Revoked for a technical violation
Administrative 61.2 38.8
Moderate 48.7 51.3
High 43.7 56.3
Maximum 29.0 71.0
Total 48.5 51.5
22
Split sentenced probationers have higher
revocation rates
Sentence Type Revocation Rate
Straight Probation 27.3
Split Sentence 39.7
- Split Prison 43.8
- Split Jail 39.0
Total 35.3
23
Technical violations are the most common type of
revocation violation regardless of sentence type
Sentence Type New Crime Technical
S.S. - Prison 47.3 52.7
S.S. - Jail 49.8 50.2
Straight Probation 47.8 52.2
Total 48.9 51.1
24
Take away points on revocations
  • Half of the revocations are for technical
    violations
  • Administrative cases are 50 less likely to be
    revoked than moderate cases
  • Split Sentences have higher revocation rates than
    straight probation cases
About PowerShow.com