Suffolk (NY) Probation's Pre-trial Services Program

• NCJ Number: 77509
• Author(s): F Straus; J J Golbin
• Date Published: 1980
• Length: 30 pages
• Corporate Author: Suffolk County Probation Dept
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: Report no. 3.

Annotation

This report presents the results of an analysis of the population receiving release-on-recognizance services through the Suffolk County Probation Department (New York).

Abstract

The department makes recommendations based on scores obtained on a risk assessment instrument originally developed during the Manhattan Bail Reform Project in the early 1960's. The analysis was intended to serve as a basis for a planned instrument revalidation. The first part was concerned with an examination of the characteristics of defendants who were determined to be poor risks on the basis of the instrument, but who were released on their own recognizance between July 1, 1979 and November 15, 1979. For the 58 (of 90) whose records were available, 81 percent appeared in court as scheduled; while 19 percent failed to appear. These groups did not differ significantly on the variables of total score, residence, family ties, and employment or school. For the variable prior record, official information was lacking in too many cases to allow for verification and for a determination of significance. However, a significantly higher percentage of poor-risk defendants who appeared as scheduled were charged with felony offenses, as opposed to misdemeanors or violations. While length of residency, age, marital status, children, and home ownership did not distinguish the groups, warrants issued for previous failures to appear and ineligibility for legal aid characterized those who did not appear. The second part involved a similar examination of 68 good-risk defendants who failed to appear between October 1, 1979, and December 20, 1979. Of all variables, warrants issued on the current or prior charges for failure to appear in court seemed to characterize this group most significantly. The report recommends a full-scale statistical validation of the instrument, an integrated information system providing data on defendants on arrest through prosecution, and warning notices prior to the issuing of failure-to-appear warrants. Data tables and a four-item bibliography are included. A sample rating sheet and guidelines are appended.