NCJ Number
44641
Date Published
1977
Length
211 pages
Annotation
ISSUES SURROUNDING THE DECISION TO RETAIN, CHANGE, OR ABOLISH COMMON FEATURES OF PAROLE PROGRAMS FOR ADULTS ARE EXAMINED.
Abstract
FOUR MAIN FEATURES OF TRADITIONAL PAROLE ARE IDENTIFIED: (1) THE DECISION TO RELEASE THE PRISONER IS MADE ON A DISCRETIONARY BASIS BY A BODY SUPPOSEDLY EXPERT IN ASSESSING THE OFFENDER'S NEED FOR TREATMENT AND HIS LIKELIHOOD OF OFFENDING AGAIN; (2) THE TIME-FIXING DECISION IS DEFERRED, I.E., THE INMATE DOES NOT KNOW WHEN HE WILL BE RELEASED UNTIL HE HAS SERVED PART OF HIS SENTENCE; (3) THE PAROLEE CAN BE REIMPRISONED THROUGH AN INFORMAL ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING SHOULD HE BE SUSPECTED OF NEW CRIMINAL ACTIVITY; AND (4) THE PAROLEE IS TO BE SUPERVISED IN THE COMMUNITY. IT IS ARGUED THAT THE FIRST THREE OF THESE FEATURES SHOULD NOT BE RETAINED. THE RELEASE DECISION SHOULD BE GOVERNED BY STANDARDS SPECIFYING THE DURATION OF CONFINEMENT THAT SHOULD APPLY PRESUMPTIVELY TO CATEGORIES OF FELONY. THE PRISONER SHOULD BE NOTIFIED OF THE EXPECTED DATE OF HIS RELEASE UPON OR SHORTLY AFTER SENTENCING. PAROLEES WHO ARE SUSPECTED OF A NEW CRIME SHOULD BE PROSECUTED AS ANY OTHER SUSPECT. CONCLUSIONS REGARDING SUPERVISION OF PAROLEES IN THE COMMUNITY ARE LESS CLEAR-CUT. HOWEVER, WERE SUPERVISION REDUCED OR ELIMINATED, THERE WOULD REMAIN A NEED FOR A SYSTEM OF VOLUNTARY SOCIAL SERVICES FOR PAROLEES. DESPITE THESE CONCLUSIONS, CAUTION IS URGED IN ABOLISHING THE PAROLE BOARD AS THE AGENCY FOR DECIDING RELEASE FROM PRISON. AS THE OREGON CORRECTIONAL SYSTEM HAS DEMONSTRATED, THE PAROLE BOARD CAN BECOME THE VEHICLE FOR SUBSTANTIVE REFORM. ELIMINATING PAROLE BOARDS AND THE 'DUAL-TIME' APPROACH COULD CREATE THE APPEARANCE OF A SHIFT TOWARD LENIENCY EVEN IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY CHANGE IN THE LEVEL OF PUNISHMENT. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE TRANSITION FROM THE EXISTING SENTENCING/PAROLE STRUCTURE TO A SYSTEM OF 'REAL-TIME' SENTENCES WITHOUT PAROLE BE UNDERTAKEN GRADUALLY. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION AND NOTES ARE INCLUDED.