NCJ Number
176652
Journal
Science Volume: 264 (May 6 Issue: Dated: Pages: 791-793
Date Published
1994
Length
3 pages
Annotation
Although State court figures indicate that 46 percent of convicted felons nationwide are imprisoned and 47 percent receive probation, intermediate sanctions fall between the most severe sentence of imprisonment and the least severe sentence of probation.
Abstract
More than 90 percent of all convicted felons receive either the most severe or the least severe penalty. Under proposed schemes, candidates for intermediate sanctions will include some of the felons now receiving minimal probation supervision and some of those currently sentenced to imprisonment. Proponents of intermediate sanctions contend that 15 to 25 percent of felons who currently receive prison sentences can be safely diverted and given intermediate sanctions in the community. The expanded use of intermediate sanctions has a variety of overlapping aims, such as reducing government spending on costly prisons, satisfying the public's desire for punishment through penalties other than imprisonment, and making probation a more credible penalty to the public by making prison a real possibility for any breach of intermediate sanction requirements. To learn more about the use of intermediate sanctions, a survey of convicted adult felons placed on State probation in 1986 was conducted. This survey tracked 12,370 probationers for 3 years from 1986 to 1989. It was found that 91 percent of follow-up subjects had received at least 1 of 12 intermediate sanctions, indicating a graduated punishment system already existed. Sizable numbers of probationers were discharged from probation before having fully complied, suggesting intermediate sanctions were not rigorously enforced. The use of prison diversion is discussed, the concept of placing felons on probation who would otherwise receive prison sentences and subjecting them to rigorously enforced intermediate sanctions. 22 references and 2 tables