NCJ Number
73612
Date Published
1980
Length
52 pages
Annotation
This report examines the infrequent use of restitution and community service work by both juvenile and adult courts in New York and compares it to the more extensive and successful use in other States; legislative and administrative recommendations are made.
Abstract
In 1978, less than 4 percent of the juveniles arrested for property offenses paid restitution through the family court. Moreover, the New York City Family Court has no formal restitution program. This sparse use of restitution contrasts with one recent national survey which found that 70 percent of all juvenile court property cases resulted in a restitution order. In 1978 in New York City, restitution was only ordered in 4 percent of adult property offense cases. Restitution collections through probation departments have increased over 109 percent between 1970 and 1978. However, in high crime areas such as Suffolk and Erie counties, collections decreased between 1977 and 1978. If restitution programs similar to those in Georgia or in Seattle, Wash., were implemented in New York City, over $128.5 million a year could be saved from the $178 million spent annually on incarcerating property offenders. If a statewide intensive supervision probation/restitution program was implemented and residential restitution centers were created, $40 million could be saved from the N.Y. Department of Correctional Services and Division for Youth's operating and capital construction budgets. A presumption of restitution, including a community service work alternative, should be a condition of probation or discharge for all convicted juvenile and adult property offenders. Standard procedures should be established for imposing a restitution sentence, determining the amount, and dealing with the nonpayment. Additional recommendations cover the use of Federal funds and call for collection and reporting procedures for these cases. Tabular data are provided. (Author abstract modified).