pretrial detention
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

154
(FIVE YEARS 59)

H-INDEX

12
(FIVE YEARS 2)

Author(s):  
Ana Maria Diaz ◽  
Luz Magdalena Salas
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 49-70
Author(s):  
Will Dobbie ◽  
Crystal S. Yang

In this article, we review a growing empirical literature on the effectiveness and fairness of the US pretrial system and discuss its policy implications. Despite the importance of this stage of the criminal legal process, researchers have only recently begun to explore how the pretrial system balances individual rights and public interests. We describe the empirical challenges that have prevented progress in this area and how recent work has made use of new data sources and quasi-experimental approaches to credibly estimate both the individual harms (such as loss of employment or government assistance) and public benefits (such as preventing non-appearance at court and new crimes) of cash bail and pretrial detention. These new data and approaches show that the current pretrial system imposes substantial short-and long-term economic harms on detained defendants in terms of lost earnings and government assistance, while providing little in the way of decreased criminal activity for the public interest. Non-appearances at court do significantly decrease for detained defendants, but the magnitudes cannot justify the economic harms to individuals observed in the data. A second set of studies shows that that the costs of cash bail and pretrial detention are disproportionately borne by Black and Hispanic individuals, giving rise to large and unfair racial differences in cash bail and detention that cannot be explained by underlying differences in pretrial misconduct risk. We then turn to policy implications and describe areas of future work that would enable a deeper understanding of what drives these undesirable outcomes.


2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles E. Loeffler ◽  
Daniel S. Nagin

The US prison population stands at 1.43 million persons, with an additional 740,000 persons in local jails. Nearly all will eventually return to society. This review examines the available evidence on how the experience of incarceration is likely to impact the probability that formerly incarcerated individuals will reoffend. Our focus is on two types of studies, those based on the random assignments of cases to judges, called judge instrumental-variable studies, and those based on discontinuities in sentence severity in sentencing grids, called regression discontinuity studies. Both types of studies are designed to account for selection bias in nonexperimental estimates of the impact of incarceration on reoffending. Most such studies find that the experience of postconviction imprisonment has little impact on the probability of recidivism. A smaller number of studies do, however, find significant effects, both positive and negative. The negative, recidivism-reducing effects are mostly in settings in which rehabilitative programming is emphasized and the positive, criminogenic effects are found in settings in which such programming is not emphasized. The findings of studies of pretrial incarceration are more consistent—most find a deleterious effect on postrelease reoffending. We also conclude that additional work is needed to better understand the heterogeneous effects of incarceration as well as the mechanisms through which incarceration effects, when observed, are generated. For policy, our conclusion of the generally deleterious effect of pretrial detention adds to a larger body of evidence pointing to the social value of limiting. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Criminology, Volume 5 is January 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.


2021 ◽  
pp. 009385482110416
Author(s):  
Sarah L. Desmarais ◽  
John Monahan ◽  
James Austin

Pretrial risk assessment instruments are used in many jurisdictions to inform decisions regarding pretrial release and conditions. Many are concerned that the use of pretrial risk assessment instruments may be contributing to worsened, not improved, pretrial outcomes, including increased rates of pretrial detention and exacerbated racial disparities in pretrial decisions. These concerns have led prominent organizations to reverse their position on the role of pretrial risk assessment instruments in pretrial system change. Reforms that centered on their use have been rolled back or have failed to be implemented in the first place. However, the scientific evidence behind these concerns is lacking. Instead, the findings of rigorous research show that the results of pretrial risk assessment instruments demonstrate good accuracy in predicting new criminal activity, including violent crime, during the pretrial period, even when there are differences between groups defined by race and ethnicity. Furthermore, the scientific evidence suggests they can be an effective strategy to help achieve pretrial system change, including reducing pretrial detention for people of color and white people, alike, when their results are actually used to inform decision-making. In this article, we review the scientific evidence in relation to three primary critiques of pretrial risk assessment instruments, namely, that their results have poor accuracy and are racially biased and that their use increases pretrial detention rates. We also provide recommendations for addressing these critiques to ensure that their use supports, rather than detracts from, the goals of pretrial reform and articulates an agenda for future research.


Author(s):  
Надежда Викторовна Грязева ◽  
Валерий Викторович Кубанов

В структуре деятельности учреждений уголовно-исполнительной системы по предупреждению побегов первое место традиционно занимают меры общей и специальной профилактики, реализуемые в рамках оперативной деятельности и режимных мероприятий посредством воздействия на лиц, склонных к совершению рассматриваемых преступлений. Немаловажная роль в рассматриваемом механизме отводится техническим средствам и новациям, внедряемым в деятельность учреждений УИС. Осознание того, что средства контроля в непрерывном режиме осуществляют постоянный мониторинг деятельности учреждения, постепенно формируют у осужденных, подозреваемых и обвиняемых убежденность в бесперспективности попыток совершения преступлений, в том числе побегов. В статье анализируются вопросы использования опыта учреждений, обеспечивающих изоляцию от общества, в профилактике побегов. Охарактеризован комплекс мероприятий по предупреждению побегов из мест лишения свободы и из-под стражи, показана специфика общепрофилактического воздействия. Выявлены существенные недостатки в организации взаимодействия частей и служб отдельных учреждений и территориальных органов ФСИН России при осуществлении профилактической работы по предотвращению побегов. Сделан вывод о необходимости качественного научно-технического обеспечения деятельности исправительных учреждений и следственных изоляторов. На основе обобщения положительного опыта работы органов и учреждений ФСИН России выделены основные направления деятельности, в наибольшей степени влияющие на предупреждение побеговой активности осужденных и лиц, содержащихся под стражей: использование средств электронного мониторинга в отношении отдельных категорий осужденных; использование видеосистем и биометрических технологий в деятельности учреждений УИС; повышение качества патрулирования на режимной территории. In the structure of the penal institutions activities for the escapes prevention, the first place is traditionally occupied by measures of general and special prevention, implemented within the framework of operational activities and regime measures, by influencing persons who are inclined to commit the crimes in question. An important role in the mechanism under consideration is given to technical means and innovations introduced into the penal institutions activities. The realization that the means of control continuously monitor the institution activities, gradually form the conviction of convicts in the futility of attempts to commit crimes, including escapes. The article analyzes the issues of using the experience of institutions that provide isolation from society in the escapes prevention. The article describes a set of measures to prevent escapes from places of liberty deprivation and from custody, and shows the specifics of the general preventive effect. Significant shortcomings in the organization of parts interaction and services of individual institutions and territorial bodies of the Federal Penitentiary Service in the implementation of preventive work to prevent escapes were identified. The conclusion is made about the need for high quality scientific and technical support for the activities of correctional institutions and pretrial detention centers. Based on the generalization of the positive penal experience, the main areas of activity that most affect the prevention of escape activity of convicts and persons in custody are identified: the use of electronic monitoring tools in relation to certain categories of convicts; the use of video systems and biometric technologies in the activities of penal institutions; improving the quality of patrolling in the restricted territory.


2021 ◽  
pp. 13-35
Author(s):  
Claudia N. Anderson ◽  
Joshua C. Cochran ◽  
Andrea N. Montes
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document