Review of Guidelines Worksheet Structure - Research Proposal

1
Review of Guidelines Worksheet Structure -
Research Proposal
2
Sentencing Guidelines Design
Conviction
Section A Prison In/Out Recommendation
No Prison
Prison
Section C Prison Sentence Length Recommendation
Section B Probation/Jail Recommendation
Probation
Jail
3
Prison v. Jail Sentences

• The definition of what constitutes a prison
  (state-responsible) sentence versus a jail
  (local-responsible) sentence has changed several
  times since 1990.

4
Prison v. Jail Sentences
Abolition of parole
Prison - 1 yr. or more Jail - 12 mos. or less
Prison - 1 yr. or more Jail - 12 mos. or less
Prison - more than 6 mos. Jail - 6 mos. or less
Prison - more than 2 yrs. Jail - 2 yrs. or less
Prison - 1 yr. or more Jail - less than 1 yr.
Structure of current guidelines
policy of Virginia Department of Corrections
5
Current Sentencing Guidelines Structure
Conviction
Section A Incarceration gt 6 months Yes/No
Recommendation
No
Yes
Section C Sentence Length Recommendation
- Incarceration gt 6 months
Section B Probation or Incarceration up to 6
months Recommendation
Probation
Incarceration Up to 6 months
6
(No Transcript)
7
Current Sentencing Guidelines Structure

• The existing sentencing guidelines structure has
  been out of sync with the definition of a prison
  sentence since 1998.
• The Commission has never formally reviewed the
  impact of this inconsistency.
• Judicial practices related to the imposition of
  jail versus prison sanctions have not been fully
  explored since the change in definition occurred.

8
Truth-in-Sentencing/No Parole System

• Under the truth-in-sentencing/no-parole system,
  felons must serve at least 85 of the effective
  sentence no matter where they are physically
  housed.
• There is no longer a difference between jail and
  prison in the percent of sentence served by
  felons.
• There may be different factors, however, that
  judges consider when deciding whether to sentence
  an offender to a jail versus prison term.

9
Research Proposal

• Staff proposes performing exploratory analysis to
  examine
• the impact of the inconsistency between the
  structure of the guidelines and the definition of
  a prison sentence,
• the differences in jail versus prison sanctioning
  decisions, and
• the feasibility of simplifying the guidelines
  while maintaining statistical power of the
  sentencing models.

10
Research Proposal

• Study the possibility of revising worksheets to
  reflect current definition of a prison inmate
• Section A- In/Out (Incarceration 1 Year or More)
• Section B- Prob. or Incarceration up to 12 Months
• Section C- Sentence Length (1 Year or More)
• Study the possibility of reducing the number of
  worksheets from 3 to 2
• Section A- Incarceration In/Out
• Section B- Sentence Length
• Driven by the data

11
Data Source(s)

• Sentencing analysis utilizes the
  Pre/Post-Sentence Investigation (PSI) data
  system.
• PSI information is collected and maintained by
  the Department of Corrections (DOC).
• Probation and parole officers prepare PSIs and
  submit to DOC central office.

12
Data Source(s)

• A PSI, however, is not completed on every felon
  convicted in circuit court.
• Cases that do not result in a prison term or term
  of supervised probation will not have a PSI.
• There is a new mini-PSI option (2006 General
  Assembly) that will reduce the amount of data
  reported.

13
Data Source(s)

• When a pre-sentence report is not ordered, there
  is a considerable time lag between sentencing and
  preparation of the post-sentence report.
• Due to delay in submission of post-sentence
  reports, data for a given year will be incomplete
  for a lengthy period.

14
Supplementing PSI data

• Without supplementing the data, the data does not
  fully represent all felony cases sentenced in
  circuit court.
• Certain cases are more likely to go without a PSI
  (e.g., larceny).
• Potential for bias exists.
• Since 1985, PSI data has been supplemented.
• Method of supplementing data has evolved.
• Today, sentencing guidelines data are used to
  identify felony cases that do not have a PSI in
  the system.

15
Research Proposal Work Plan

• With the Commissions approval, staff would
  conduct this exploratory analysis over the
  summer.
• Staff would report back to the Commission at the
  September 2006 meeting.

16
(No Transcript)