Criminal Justice Practitioners’ Perceptions of Collateral Consequences of Criminal Conviction on Offenders

2014 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 290-304 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalie W. Goulette ◽  
Angela K. Reitler ◽  
James Frank ◽  
Whitney Flesher ◽  
Lawrence F. Travis
Author(s):  
Nora V. Demleitner

Prosecutorial decisions play an important, and sometimes a decisive, role in a defendant’s ultimate sentence. They begin with the selection of charges and may end with a recommendation on clemency or expungement of a criminal conviction. The influence of prosecutors over the sentence, therefore, is far more extensive than that of any other official. The charging decision sets the starting point for the sentence range. The prosecution tends to control entry into diversion programs that may spare an offender a criminal record after complying with a set of requirements. Plea bargains, which have become more frequent even in Europe’s civil law countries, usually focus on the type and scope of the criminal justice sentence. Mandatory minimum sentences, mandatory aggravators, and stacked charges provide prosecutors with overwhelming bargaining power, causing many defendants to waive their right to a trial. Judges tend to follow the parties’ agreements and impose the recommended sentence. In many states prosecutors routinely weigh in on parole decisions and determine whether to proceed against defendants for supervision violations. Even in clemency decisions, they frequently submit a recommendation.


2016 ◽  
Vol 63 (4) ◽  
pp. 433-451 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vickie Cooper

Despite a growing recognition of the intersectional relationship between homelessness and incarceration, we have a limited knowledge about housing policy and practice for people leaving custody and (ex)offender groups in the community. Addressing these gaps, this paper provides an overview of the main local housing authority statutory duties in the provision of housing support for prison leavers and (ex)offenders in England and Wales, and situates the issues with accessing accommodation within the wider context of austerity. The paper presents a case study that explores criminal justice practitioners’ experiences of working with local authority housing agencies. Stemming from 25 interviews with housing practitioners and criminal justice practitioners, the paper outlines the main challenges facing criminal justice agencies as they try to secure accommodation for homeless (ex)offenders and resettle them in the community. Finally, the paper concludes by raising critical questions about the housing options for this population, now and in the future.


Author(s):  
Paul H. Robinson ◽  
Muhammad Sarahne

Although an offender’s conduct before and during the crime is the traditional focus of criminal law and sentencing rules, an examination of post-offense conduct can also be important in promoting criminal justice goals. After the crime, different offenders make different choices and have different experiences, and those differences can suggest appropriately different treatment by judges, correctional officials, probation and parole supervisors, and other decision makers in the criminal justice system. Positive post-offense conduct ought to be acknowledged and rewarded, not only to encourage it but also as a matter of fair and just treatment. This essay describes four kinds of positive post-offense conduct that merit special recognition and preferential treatment: the responsible offender, who avoids further deceit and damage to others during the process leading to conviction; the debt-paid offender, who suffers the full punishment deserved (according to true principles of justice rather than the sentence actually imposed); the reformed offender, who takes affirmative steps to leave criminality behind; and the redeemed offender, who out of genuine remorse tries to atone for the offense. The essay considers how one might operationalize a system for giving special accommodation to such offenders. Positive post-offense conduct might be rewarded, for example, through the selection and shaping of sanctioning methods, through giving preference in access to education, training, treatment, and other programs, and through elimination or restriction of collateral consequences of conviction that continue after the sentence is completed.


2021 ◽  
pp. 518-598
Author(s):  
Lucy Welsh ◽  
Layla Skinns ◽  
Andrew Sanders

In this chapter, we identify and critically evaluate the kind of things that can go wrong in the criminal justice process and describe the institutional architecture used to regulate the actions and effects of criminal justice practitioners and to hold them to account. The focus of the chapter is on the organisational, legal and democratic regulatory and accountability mechanisms associated with the police, courts and CPS. Specifically the chapter covers: Police and Crime Commissioners; citizen- and volunteer-led forms of accountability/regulation; royal commissions, public inquiries and independent inquiries; police complaints processes and inspectorates; trial remedies and appeals; the Criminal Cases Review Commission; civil proceedings; inquests and Coronial Courts.


2019 ◽  
pp. 174889581986310
Author(s):  
Eve Mullins ◽  
Steve Kirkwood

Research and theory suggest that desistance narratives and pro-social identities are key to the process of desistance from crime. However, little research has examined how desistance narratives and related identities are produced in contexts other than research interviews or how core correctional skills intersect with the development of these narratives or identities. This study applies discourse analysis and conversation analysis to transcripts of 12 video-recordings of groupwork sessions for addressing sexual offending, examining how desistance narratives and identities are produced, and how practitioner skills and conversational styles intersect with their production. The analysis illustrates how criminal justice practitioners help to co-author desistance narratives through subtle and explicit aspects of interaction, although certain orientations to risk may limit this potential.


2020 ◽  
pp. 687
Author(s):  
Hayato Watanabe

At the state and federal levels, the pardon power can be used to restore the dignity and legal rights lost by a criminal conviction. Unfortunately, those facing similar consequences from municipal convictions may not have access to a pardon. Although clemency is exceedingly rare at any level of government, municipal defendants face a unique structural problem that deprives them of the possibility of a pardon. Specifically, many cities have simply failed to create a local clemency power. This Note argues that the authority to grant pardons for municipal offenses is part of the toolbox of powers provided to cities through the doctrine of home rule. Accordingly, cities do not have to wait for the permission of their parent states to create a local clemency power. By failing to advocate for a local interpretation of clemency, cities are missing a valuable opportunity to help municipal defendants overcome the stigma and collateral consequences that accompany municipal convictions. While existing scholarship largely ignores the application of clemency to municipal law, this Note offers a legal framework for reimagining the next frontier of clemency.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document