Chapter 2 How Probation Developed Chronicling Its Past

Chapter 2 How Probation Developed: Chronicling Its Past & Present

Precursors to American Probation v Early legal practice in the United States was distinct from British common law: • • Security for good behavior, good abearance Filing Motion to Quash Sureties v All had the objective of mitigating punishment

Recognizance & Suspended Sentence v Release on recognizance began in 1830 in Commonwealth v. Chase v Suspended sentence: a court order, entered after a verdict, finding, or guilty plea, that suspends or postpones the sentence contingent on the offender’s good behavior

Two Kinds of Suspended Sentences v Suspension of imposition of sentence: when a verdict or plea is reached, but no sentence is pronounced & there is no conviction v Suspension of execution of sentence: the defendant is placed on probation & the conviction remains on the record.

The Power to Suspend Sentence v English common law courts had the power to suspend sentence for a limited period or for a specific purpose v In the U. S. federal courts, the common practice of suspending sentences ended with the Killits decision in 1916 v The Federal Sentencing Reform Act in 1984 recognized probation as a bona fide sentence in the federal system

Founders of Probation v John Augustus is considered the founder of probation in the United States v The first probation law in U. S. was enacted in Massachusetts in 1878 v Matthew Davenport Hill is considered the co-founder of probation, laying its foundation in England

Federal Probation v Historically, federal judges resisted probation legislation v The National Probation Act was passed by Congress in 1925 v The Federal Bureau of Prisons administered the federal probation system from 1930 -1940 v In 1940, administration of probation moved to the Administrative Office of the U. S. Courts v The 1984 Comprehensive Crime Control Act abolished federal parole & all prison releases are under probation supervision

Juvenile Probation & Juvenile Court v From the 1700’s-early 1800’s, children were disciplined by their parents & other adults in the community v Between 1817 -mid 1840’s, “child savers” institutionalized runaway or neglected children v In 1890, “placing out” put some children in foster homes v The Illinois Juvenile Court Act of 1899 established the first juvenile system based on reform & treatment

Juvenile Probation & Juvenile Court, Cont’d. The doctrine of parens patriae governed juvenile court proceedings, based on 4 principles: v v The court appointed a guardian to care for the child Parents of offenders must be held responsible Jail was unsuitable, regardless of offense Removing children from their parents should be avoided

Early Probation Legislation in Other States v New York’s probation law allowed police officers to be probation officers v Other states did not allow police officers to serve as probation officers v Many early probation workers were volunteers because the new laws did not fund salaried positions

Organizational Questions v What branch of government does the probation agency fall under: executive/state or judicial/local? v Is the probation agency combined with parole, or is it a stand alone department? v Does the agency combine adult & juvenile supervision together, or are they separate?

Community Corrections Acts v Community Corrections Acts (CCAs): statewide agreements through which funds are granted to local governments to develop & deliver community correctional sanctions & services v Decentralize correctional sanctions & program design to better reflect community values v Provide for citizen participation v First Community Corrections Act enacted in Minnesota in 1973 v CCAs now exist in 28 states

Changing Concepts of Supervision v The Casework Model: 1900 -1970 • Officer provided therapeutic services to clients to assist them in living productively in the community v Brokerage of Services Model: 1971 -1980 • The officer determines the probationer or parolee’s needs & makes referrals to appropriate community agencies

Changing Concepts of Supervision, Cont’d. v Community • Individual officers specialize in specific treatment areas & develop linkages with community agencies v Justice • • • Resource Management Team: Model of Supervision: 1981 -2000 Escalated system of sanctions based on injury caused by offense Probation considered a separate, distinct sanction with graduated penalties Primarily assists offenders in complying with supervision conditions

Neighborhood-Based Supervision (NBS) 2001 - Present Also known as “community justice” or “broken windows probation” v Elements of NBS: v • • Emphasis on public safety Partnerships with police, treatment providers, & faith-based programs Supervision in the field Strong & consistent enforcement of probation conditions Use of satellite tracking & GIS technology Rational allocation of resources based on offender assessments Relying on performance-based initiatives to measure program effectiveness

Nationwide, Who is on Probation? Probationer demographics have stayed fairly stable over time v About 60% of probationers have a direct probation sentence, 30% have a suspended sentence, 9% have a split sentence v Most probationers have been sentenced for drug or alcohol crime, followed by property crimes v Less than 20% are sentenced for violent crimes v Nationwide, 56% of probationers are white, 30% are African. American, 12% are Hispanic, 2% are Native American or Asian/Pacific Islander v

Casey Anthony Probation v Casey Anthony was sentenced to one year probation for her check fraud conviction in a case that occurred before her murder trial, where she was acquitted in the death of her 2 year old daughter. Because of security concerns, the Florida Department of Corrections will not release the name of her probation officer or the location of the office where Ms. Anthony will report.

Community Corrections Acts v http: //centerforcommunitycorrections. org/? p age_id=78 v See Community Corrections Acts by state, published by the Center for Community Corrections