NCJ Number
144931
Date Published
1986
Length
574 pages
Annotation
This study analyzes the assumptions critical to the policy-oriented conclusions of Peter Greenwood's 1982 study of patterns of criminal offending, in which he argued that the selective sentencing of frequent-offending robbers could reduce the robbery rate by as much as 20 percent without increasing the prison population.
Abstract
An attempt is made in the current study to correct the flaws in Greenwood's assumptions by reanalyzing a survey of prison inmates conducted by the Rand Corporation in 1978 in the context of previously published findings. The overall aim of this study is to find out more about the criminal population, so that better estimates can be made of the crime-control impact of selective criminal justice actions. The results of this analysis are equally applicable in California, Michigan, and Texas, the three States analyzed. This study concludes that Greenwood's study and similar studies conducted over the past 10 years are correct in concluding that there is potential to control crime by selectively incapacitating habitual offenders for longer periods of time than nonhabitual offenders. The question at issue, however, is whether or not this potential can be achieved, given the limited information about each offender's current behavior and probable future behavior. This study concludes that the variables associated with the frequency, length, and patterns of criminal offending are more complex than Greenwood's assumptions would allow, such that any formula for selective incapacitation would have much less impact than Greenwood assumes. Overall, the study concludes that policies of selectively arresting, prosecuting, and sentencing habitual offenders should be part of a crime-control policy package, but selective sentencing alone will achieve only a marginal reduction in the crime rate. 35 tables, 58 figures, chapter notes, and appended supplementary data