Race, Ethnicity, Crime Type, and the Sentencing of Violent Felony Offenders

Within the large body of literature on racial/ethnic disparities in criminal sentencing, some research has demonstrated that these relationships are conditional upon various legally relevant case characteristics, including the type of offense for which the defendants are sentenced. To date, however, few studies have explored the potential moderating effects of different violent crimes. Using data from Florida ( N = 186,885), the findings from these analyses indicate that Black–White sentencing disparities are particularly pronounced for manslaughter, robbery/carjacking, arson, and resisting arrest with violence. While Hispanic ethnicity exerts limited effects on sentencing outcomes generally, Hispanics are particularly disadvantaged in manslaughter cases. Relative to minority defendants, White offenders receive harsher sentences for sexual battery, other sex offenses, and abuse of children.

The Effect of Horticultural Community Service Programs on Recidivism

The average cost of housing a single inmate in the United States is roughly $31,286 per year, bringing the total average cost states spend on corrections to more than $50 billion per year. Statistics show 1 in every 34 adults in the United States is under some form of correctional supervision; and after 3 years, more than 4 in 10 prisoners return to custody. The purpose of this study was to determine the availability of opportunities for horticultural community service and whether there were differences in incidences of recurrences of offenses/recidivism of offenders completing community service in horticultural vs. nonhorticultural settings. Data were collected through obtaining offender profile probation revocation reports, agency records, and community service supervision reports for one county in Texas. The sample included both violent and nonviolent and misdemeanor and felony offenders. Offenders who completed their community service in horticultural or nonhorticultural outdoor environments showed lower rates of recidivism compared with offenders who completed their community service in nonhorticultural indoor environments and those who had no community service. Demographic comparisons found no difference in incidence of recidivism in comparisons of offenders based on gender, age, and the environment in which community service was served. In addition, no difference was shown in incidence of recidivism in comparisons based on offenders with misdemeanor vs. felony charges. The results and information gathered support the continued notion that horticultural activities can play an important role in influencing an offender’s successful reentry into society.

The Role of Tablet-Based Psychological Tasks in Risk Assessment

Risk assessment has become a prominent part of the criminal justice system in many jurisdictions, typically relying on structured questions and an interview. This approach, however, may not accurately assess certain psychological concepts correlated with reoffense, such as executive functioning, ability to plan, impulse control, risk-taking, aggression, and empathy. We hypothesized that using rapid-tablet-based neurocognitive tests would pay off in terms of objectivity, precision, and scalability when added to the existing risk assessment structure. We analyzed 240 observations from adult felony offenders from a large urban county in the South assessed by the Texas version of the Ohio Risk Assessment System (ORAS) risk tool. We identified significant differences in impulse control, planning, and reactive aggression between offenders and reoffenders. By combining these variables with the Texas Risk Assessment System (TRAS), we yielded significant improvements in risk prediction. We hope this will provide new inroads for actuarial assessments of reoffense risk that incorporate direct measurements of individual decision making.

Realignment and Recidivism

California’s 2011 Public Safety Realignment created an unprecedented policy experiment by transferring the authority over lower-level felony offenders from the state correctional system to fifty-eight county jail and probation systems. While centered in California, these changes are reflective of an ongoing national conversation about the appropriate level of government at which to focus crime control efforts. In this article, we first situate Realignment in criminological and sociolegal literatures, showing how the reform offers opportunities to further inquiry as to the effectiveness of a wide variety of correctional strategies, implementation, and local variation in correctional law and policy. We then review early research focused on the statewide effect of Realignment on recidivism, which has produced mixed findings depending on the measure of recidivism applied. We then examine variation in recidivism outcomes across county sites and present findings that indicate there is an important relationship between local Realignment implementation strategies and recidivism outcomes. Throughout, we focus on two overarching themes. The first is the challenge of disentangling the roles of offender behavior from justice system response in meaningfully interpreting changes in recidivism outcomes. The second is the challenge of evaluating the effects of policy or practice changes under limited data. Although the need for better and more expansive data is a common theme, we highlight it here in the context of a larger data collection that we have under way.

Policy Change and Recidivism: The Effects of California’s Realignment and Local Implementation Strategies on Rearrest and Reconviction

California’s 2011 Public Safety Realignment created an unprecedented policy experiment by transferring the authority over lower level felony offenders from the state correctional system to 58 county jail and probation systems. Realignment provides a unique opportunity to examine the ways that correctional policy change can influence recidivism patterns. We examine two questions about policy change and recidivism: “Did realignment affect change in statewide recidivism patterns?” and “Does county-level variation in implementation strategies help account for differences in recidivism across counties?” We find that statewide recidivism rates actually increased somewhat after realignment. However, we also find that offenders released to counties that prioritized reentry services in their implementation of realignment had better post-realignment recidivism outcomes than offenders released to counties that prioritized traditional enforcement methods. We conclude by considering additional steps needed to understand the links between policy change and recidivism outcomes.