New User Special Price Expires in

Let's log you in.

Sign in with Facebook


Don't have a StudySoup account? Create one here!


Create a StudySoup account

Be part of our community, it's free to join!

Sign up with Facebook


Create your account
By creating an account you agree to StudySoup's terms and conditions and privacy policy

Already have a StudySoup account? Login here

Corrections Class Notes/Exam Material

by: Tasfia Kamal

Corrections Class Notes/Exam Material Corrections

Marketplace > Rutgers University > Corrections > Corrections Class Notes Exam Material
Tasfia Kamal
GPA 2.96

Preview These Notes for FREE

Get a free preview of these Notes, just enter your email below.

Unlock Preview
Unlock Preview

Preview these materials now for free

Why put in your email? Get access to more of this material and other relevant free materials for your school

View Preview

About this Document

These notes contain everything that have been covered in the course corrections.
Study Guide
corrections, Criminal Justice
50 ?




Popular in

Popular in Department

This 20 page Study Guide was uploaded by Tasfia Kamal on Saturday April 2, 2016. The Study Guide belongs to Corrections at Rutgers University taught by in Spring 2016. Since its upload, it has received 173 views.


Reviews for Corrections Class Notes/Exam Material


Report this Material


What is Karma?


Karma is the currency of StudySoup.

You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!

Date Created: 04/02/16
Corrections  What is “corrections”? ­Nature and scope o Programs, services, facilities, and organizations responsible for the  management of individuals who have been accused or convicted of  criminal offenses o –Corrections represent a particular social institution charged with  enforcing social control through the administration of punishment o Why? To protect society, to promote social cohesion o Over time, functions have included incapacitation, deterrence,  rehabilitation  A systems perspective ­In Western societies the purpose and procedures of criminal law are defined by  three elements: a) Offense, b) Guilt, c) Punishment ­Corrections take different forms at different levels (Local/ State/ Federal),  revolves around different types of sanctions (imprisonment, probation, parole)  and different actors (private, public, community) ­Goals: Fair punishment and community protection and other factors  (interconnectedness, environment, feedback, complexity)  Corrections reflect nature of government and society ­Historical phenomenon: Evolution of offenses, religious influence, torture, and  capital punishment ­Link to evolving notions of “justice” (fairness, equality, due process, etc.) ­Shaped by state policies but also by social forces, crises, resources   What is the sequence of events in the criminal justice system? ­Entry into the system ­Prosecution and pretrial services ­Adjudication ­Sentencing and sanctions ­Corrections  Putting things in perspective ­Today, we spend a lot more money on prisons than we did 30 years ago.   Putting things in perspective ­The United States has 5% of the world’s population but 25% of its prisoners ­The US has the world’s highest incarceration rate in history  The dilemmas of Mass Incarceration  The corrections system ­Characteristics of the corrections system ­Checking numbers and definitions ­Understanding corrections ­Corrections today  Characteristics of the corrections system ­Sustained growth in use of incarceration since mid 70s: o Incarceration rate jumped from 96 to 506 between 1973 and 2008 o Through the early 90s, crime and imprisonment ran in parallel, not  anymore (crime down for 15 years, incarceration continues to rise) o Expansion has not only involved prisons, also parole, probation and other  forms of surveillance ­Higher use of corrections has amplified inequalities: o Female incarceration rate growing faster then men’s o 1 in 3 African American men in their 20s ins now under CRI supervision o Growing inability to manage special populations (older prisoners, etc) ­Higher use of corrections has strained budgets: o Economic expansion supported prison expansion (600% increase since  1970s) o State appropriations for corrections remain strong, despite cuts in other  areas  Checking numbers and definitions ­Incarceration rate= ((Prisoner’s state/fed jurisdiction)/ Resident  population)) x 100 (Prisoners per 100,000 residents) ­Institutional corrections: Jails, prisons, private, other. ­Community corrections: Probation, parole, other. ­Actors: In institutions (guards vs. corrections officers) and in the community  (officers and case managers, program officers)  “street­level bureaucrats”  (Lipsky, 1980) ­Subjects: convicts, offenders, prisoners, clients ­Recidivism: the commission of new offenses/violations by individuals on  active supervision and/or formerly incarcerated/ on supervision  Understanding corrections ­Corrections enforces social control through the administration of punishment. It  reflects the nature of a society and its government and serves the purpose of  protecting the public and promoting order. ­Emilie Durkheim: Crime is normal, punishment should be stable ­Corrections are an expression of formal social control reflected in criminal  laws and procedures (law, guilt, punishment) aimed at carrying out the  criminal sentence ­Four approaches to use/function of punishment: Retribution, Deterrence,  Incapacitation, and Rehabilitation  A systems perspective ­Fragmentation: o Different components of the CRI are somewhat aligned. Courts, Police. o 50 +1 criminal codes, governments, ‘societies’ o Different processes: Sentencing, classification, programming, revocation ­Interconnectedness o Decision in one organization may affect others (probation and prison_ o Feedback logos ­Environment  o Public opinion, $$, laws ­Feedback and complexity  Corrections today ­Current status: size, complexity, and federalism ­Current issues: orientation, funding, bureaucracy, and coordination The History of Corrections  Outline ­Discipline and Punish (1977) ­A roadmap to examine the evolution of corrections ­From the Middle Ages to the American Revolution ­Corrections in America  The execution of Robert­Francois Damiens  Discipline and Punish ­New, ‘modern’ penal style emerged late 1700s/early 1800s o No public executions, no torture as a ‘public spectacle’ o Punishment became hidden part of penal process o Creation of a new bureaucracy ­Corrections as a technology of power o The benefits of the guillotine o Change in intensity: Control moved away from bodies to minds, souls o Change in the meaning of ‘crimes’ and ‘criminals o Discipline and Punish: document sources of power to punish, expressions  of punishment and effects  A roadmap to understand the evolution of corrections ­Like other social institutions, corrections reflect the vision, concerns, and  resources of the broader society (and its government). ­Formal and informal punishments link to written codes and legal procedures  (from private to public). ­Change linked to rise and fall of ideologies, philosophies but also to economic  context  From the Middle Ages to the American Revolution ­Pre­modern societies enforced punishments on the body of the offender  (remember Durkheim, Foucault) o Greece (VII century BC, Drakon) o Rome (IV century BC) ­From lex talionis to secular law (+ church) ­Criminal law aimed at maintain order at different levels of society ­Evolution of forms of punishment  The age of reason and correctional reform ­The revolutions of the 1700s: Rationalism, individualism, social contract and  limits to government/religious interventions ­Basis of modern criminal law (crime, guilt, punishment). Reforms focused on: o Proportionality between crime and punishment (classical school) o Limits to state authority, graduated sanctions (utilitarian’s) o Influence of religious institutions ­Beccaria’s “On Crimes and Punishments” (1764): Punishment is about  preventing crime (deterrence)  impact on codes ­Betham’s ‘Hedonic calculus’ (1796): Punishment needs to alter calculation of  pleasure/pain ­John Howard and the penitentiary (1779): Reform triggered by unsanitary and  unruly conditions in prisons. Focus on labor  Corrections in America ­The Colonial Period ­The creation and evolution of the Penitentiary o Convergence of independence, new vision for corrections o Late 1700s: rise in use of incarceration + hard labor (vs. corporal  punishments) o Penitentiary (1829­1860s): Quaker influence (penance, contemplation,  isolation) but new problems emerged (corruption, insanity, crowding) o The New York congregate system (importance of work, discipline)  (1820s)  Prisons in the South and the West ­Adaptation of PA and NY models to local context (society, government,  economy) ­Greater emphasis on division of society, laws, punishments (ex. ‘black codes’).  The reformatory movement ­1800s: PA/NY models did not work (corporal punishment, poor infrastructure,  crowding) ­Innovations: Mark system based on severity of offense and behavior post  sentence ­1870s: Ideal of behavior change, reformatories, parole  1900s: A changing society and the rise of progressives ­Rothman: Individualized treatment (“Punishment according to the needs of the  offender” vs. “punishment according to the severity of the crime”) ­Positivist school: Human behavior (including crime) is a product of biological,  economic, psychological forces etc. that can be identified through a scientific  method. ­1920s reforms: Probation (alternative to incarceration), indeterminate sentences,  parole  3 modern models of corrections: ­Medical (50s): Crime reflects deficiencies that need to be treated (rehabilitation) ­Community (70s): Focus on offender reintegration. Ration use of prison ­Crime control (80s): Decline of rehabilitation and rise in crime, fear, and public  anxiety  criminal behavior can be controlled via incapacitation, strict supervision  The purpose of Corrections ­The relationships between corrections, crime, and punishment o The rationale for punishments is inked to the etiology of crime o Corrections is a system of institutions aimed at carrying out a criminal  sanction o Criminal sanctions reflect different types of punishment  Four traditional goals of punishment ­Retribution: Punishment is deserved and should be proportional to the crimes  committed. ­Deterrence: Punishment discourages individuals from committing new crimes  (specific/gral. Deterrence) ­Incapacitation: Punishment removes the ability of individuals to commit new  crimes (selective incapacitation) ­Rehabilitation: Punishment restores the ability of convicted offenders to abide  by social rules  Forms of the criminal sanction ­Probation, intermediate sanctions, incarceration, and death ­Judges have discretion to administer sanctions within parameters of penal codes ­Punishments need to be proportional to the crime ­Significant variation within categories: o Incarceration: Jail, prison, boot camp o Restitution, fines, community service, day reporting ­Criminal sanction may involve one or more of these punishments  Sentencing Range­Nondrug Offenses ­Who you are ­Kinds of crimes you have committed in the past  ­Who you are today ­Security Level: 1  Highest offense ­The higher the security level, the lesser the sentence ­Gray: mandatory probation (stay in community) ­White: mandatory incarceration ­Border cells: Judges can impose incarceration or probation  Research on Sentencing and Incarceration ­State criminal codes (laws) are “primary data” ­Secondary data analysis “translates” languages of codes into numbers and figures to measure changes in: o Punitiveness  o Structure o Coverage  Operation of Jails ­Booking area is most critical section of jails due to traffic, uncertainty, data­ gathering. It often includes a “sally port” and holding area. ­Other critical areas: Inmate visitation, medical, commissary, canteen, programs ­Use of specialized staff is needed but not provided everywhere (growing number  of female inmates with MH/SA problems, inmates with sentences> 1 year) o Diversity and language access o Evolving professionalism o Emphasis on law enforcement, not offender management/rehab  Bail ­The court’s problem: Ensure appearance of defendant ­Post cash or use bondsman (fee, usually 10%) ­Issues o People are indigent and cannot afford even 10% o People not showing up o People incarcerated because they are poor o Use of preventive detention ­Innovations: ROR< pre­trial supervision, pre­trial diversion (but also issues such  as net widening)  Net Widening: unintended affect in increasing supervision of individuals that  would normally be free of any supervision  Low level probation, high level probation, prison  Issues in jail Management ­Can the jail help? Jail as a revolving door ­Legal liability and standards ­Operations: crowding, personnel, funding ­Politics and local­state interactions Probation and Intermediate Sanctions  Probation then and now ­Original motivation was to show leniency, humanizing the law o Move away from the “benefit” of the clergy (1200s­1800s) o Emerging forms of “judicial reprieve” (suspended sentences, pardons,  etc.) limited in the US since 1916 (compassionate, med. Commutation) o Principle of recognizance (bail) in 1830s, expanding set of obligations in  the community in lieu of imprisonment (community service, $)  Work by John Augustus and Boston Police Court (1841)  Pre­sentence investigation, caseload, conditions, revocation ­In the 1920s model became more formal, to be specified by criminal codes o Tension law enforcement vs. “humanitarian” models o Medical model 1940­1960, risk management 1970s+  The organization of probation ­Probation comes from direct sentences (60%), and suspended sentences (22%),  some split sentences. The profile of probationers has changed over time (more  issues, more risk, more people) ­Profile: From first­time. Low­level offenders to individuals with longer criminal  histories, more serious offenses, more “risks” ­Bureaucracy: Adult vs. Juvenile, Executive vs. Judiciary, with/without Parole,  Local vs. State ­Unified System: probation and parole are combined in one unified system ­Benefits and harms of running a unified parole system  The dual functions of probation (1) ­Investigative function (Pre­Sentence Investigation, PSI): o Post conviction, partnership with judges, information­gathering, stresses  verification and objectivity recommendation (often) o Informs type of sanction, classification based on assessment of  criminogenic risks and supervision plan (verification/objectivity) o Constraints: Guidelines, multiple goals, plea bargaining o Creates pressure to specialize; Performance easier to evaluate  The dual functions of probation (2) ­Supervision function: o Officer faces “role conflict”. Helping offender vs. enforcing laws (Power vs. authority) POs lack “substantive power” case management approach without “self­determination” o New tools: MI, risk assessments, drug tests o Supervision conditions: standard, punitive, treatment/services  Reporting to PO, reporting address changes, employment  Fines, restitution, community service  Program participation o Informal constraints: Case control, case management structure,  competence  Operational Issues ­What should be the measure of success? o 62% complete probation o 16% incarceration o 14% Unsatisfactory behavior/absconding ­Operational considerations: o Caseload size, attributes of the officer o “Model system” of case management:  Statistical risk/needs assessment  Contact standards  Case planning  Workload accounting  Evidence­based practices ­What works and what doesn’t when predicting recidivism? o Risk principle: Target high risk o Supervision principle: Monitor more high risk o Treatment principle: Address issues that influence risk o Referral principle: Mobilize partners ­Specialized caseloads ­Performance­based supervision  Why intermediate sanctions? ­Need for alternative to probation and prison o Cost of incarceration, may not work for everyone, may make things worse, probation is limited  Improving justice, saving money, preventing crime o But, can we have punishment without incarceration? ­IS: enhanced supervision, enhanced services o Rationale is to have continuum of sanctions, from low control (fines) to  high control (jail) o Increase flexibility, customized solutions ­Issues: What agencies, what offenders, what IS?  Types of Intermediate Sanctions ­Based on notion of a “continuum of sanctions” from low control (fines) to high  control (boot camp)  Judiciary: Pretrial, fines, forfeiture, community service and  restitution   Probation: DRC, Intensive Sup, home confinement, electronic  monitoring  Corrections (parole): Shock incarceration, boot camps  Challenges ­Agencies: IS may be “low priority” is traditional organizations (new ones may  need training) ­Offenders: match with IS is not obvious (resources, criteria, graduation); impact  on individuals vs. impact on systems (recidivism vs. crowding?) ­New widening (unanticipated increase in the fraction of people controlled by  CJS). Without IS, would a less intrusive measure be available?  The broad view and emerging issues ­The “measurement” of intermediate sanction is difficult (different objectives,  simultaneous sanctions)  Principle of interchangeability ­Selection of offenders: Bias, readiness ­Push for “Community Corrections” ­Example of SB 123 in Kansas Incarceration  Background ­Prisons are a distinct technology of punishment ­Changes in the physical layout of prison reflect changes in models of criminal  sanction o Penitentiaries: rural, isolation, few programs, surveillance o “Big houses”: Great security, custody as the primary goal (cell blocks,  yard, shop/industries) o Correctional institutions: More connections to the outside, programs o Current model: Greater fragmentation, pressure to reduce $, reentry ­ Trenton state opened in 1798. Different models, from campus to maximum  security and everything in between. Model is more “stronghold”.  ­Of the more than 8 million people on correctional supervision, about 2.3 million  are in jails and prisons.  ­Changes in bureaucracy o Volume, specialization, private employees o From “guards” to “correctional officers” o Professionalization, unionization ­Changes in prisoner populations o Volume o Racial/ethnic composition, gender, age o Type of correctional clients (more drugs, more sex offenders, more  violent/repeat offenders) o Needs: more individuals with Mental Health/Substance abuse problems o Greater risks: Prison gangs up (Down: Riots, slowdowns, assaults) Institutional Management  Formal Organization -Prisons are unique institutions -A formal approach to the study of prisons as organizations: o Organizations have a set of ends, objectives o Organizations have a division of labor, division of power o Organizations have history -Prisons can be managed: o Compliance through remunerative power (also normative, coercive) o Organizational change (top bottom, bottom up) vs. Resistance -Traditional models vs. new perspectives o Keep them in/in-line/safe/busy/healthy o Risk management- risk containment + risk reductions -Keep in mind definition of street level beaurocrats  Getting the Big Picture -Less-than-lethal violence is most significant challenge to prison management o Prisons may be less deadly now than 20 years ago, but not easier to handle o Some factors are persistent: inmate code Release from Incarceration  Release from the System -77% of inmates are released to parole -19% are released at the expiration of their sentence -Parole conditional release of an offender from incarceration but not from the legal custody of the state o Grace or privilege: The prisoner could be kept incarcerated, but the government extends the privilege of release o Contract of Consent: The government enters into an agreement with the prisoner where the offender agrees to abide by certain conditions o Custody: The offender is still the responsibility of the government after their release. Parole represents an extension of correctional programming into the community  Number of Adults under Parole Supervision, 1980-2006 -Increase in number of people going through parole reflects the number of people in incarceration  Origins of parole -Parole in the US evolved in the 19 century from English, Irish, and Australian practices of: o Conditional pardon o Apprenticeship by indenture o Transportation to another country -The release of prisoners was not based on a theory of punishment or a particular sanctioning goal o Prisoners were released because of:  Overcrowding  Labor shortages  Costs of incarceration -Captain Maconochie was a key figure in the development of parole o He developed a system of rewards based on good conduct, labor, and study o He created a 5 stage classification system  Strict imprisonment  Labor on chain gangs  Freedom within an area  Tickets of leave or parole with conditional pardon  Full liberty -Parole in the United States o New York passed indeterminate sentence laws in 1876 and Elmira Reformatory began releasing prisoners on parole o Beginning in 1910, each federal prison had a parole board responsible for making release decision o By 1925, 46 states had adopted parole  Release Mechanisms -From 1920-1973, all states and the federal government had indeterminate sentencing, authorized discretionary release, supervision after release, and they all this to rehabilitate offenders -In the 1970s, there was the move to determinate sentences because the public believed that the system was soft on crime o By 2002, 16 states had abolished discretionary release o There was a decrease in a parole release o Prisoners now were spending more time incarcerated -5 basic mechanisms for release from prison 1. Discretionary release In the states retaining indeterminate sentences, a parole board determines release within the minimum and maximum terms of the sentence 2. Mandatory release In states with determinate sentences, inmates are released when they have served time equal to the total sentence minus “good time” or a certain percentage of their total sentence 3. Probation release Offenders are released to probation after a short stay in jail 4. Other conditional release-Offenders are placed in the community through furlough, home supervision, halfway houses, and emergency release -Avoid the political sensitivity surrounding the use of discretionary release 5. Expiration release Offenders that are released when they have served their maximum sentence -These offenders are not any form of supervision when they are released -Some prisoners prefer to max out their sentence so that they are not supervised in the community  ESSAY QUESTION ON DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PROBATION AND PAROLE ON EXAM  Organization of Releasing Authority -Consolidated vs. Autonomous -Field Services -Full time vs. part time -Appointment  The Decision to Release -Discretionary Release o Parole Boards release offenders when they believe they are ready -Procedure o Offenders in some states are eligible after they have served their minimum term minus “good credit o In other states, offenders are eligible after once they have served 1/3 or ½ of their maximum sentence -Release Criteria o These factors guide parole boards decisions  Nature of the offense and their attitudes towards it  Prior criminal record  Attitudes towards family members, victim, and authority  Institutional adjustment and participation  History of community adjustment  Physical, mental, and emotional health  Insight into past criminal conduct  Adequacy of parole plan -Even though programs are voluntary, prisoners believe that they need to participate in order to be granted release -The uncertainty concerning release can be demoralizing and lead to problems within facilities -Structuring Parole Decisions o Response to the criticisms that parole board’s decisions are arbitrary o Set up 3 criteria  Whether the offender observed the rules of the institution  The release will not depreciate the seriousness of the crime or disrespect the law  The release will not jeopardize public safety  Impact of Release Mechanisms -The probability of release makes it easier for prosecutors to get plea bargains -Discretionary release mitigates the harshness of the penal codes o States can still appear tougher on crime, but sentences can be adjusted -Discretionary release can help reduce prison populations -A criticism of discretionary release is that is shifts responsibility for judicial decisions from judges to parole boards Trends, Race, Ethnicity, and Immigration Racial Threat societies or communities where there is a group that is empowering, and is a minority group in terms of the number, is smaller than another group, are perceived as a threat.  How did we get here? -General explanations o Punitive turn driven by incapacitation + crime control o Resources, reorganization of the state -Specific explanations o Fear of crime is a “racialized” phenomenon o Minority and racial threat o Changes in policy (for ex. Crack/powder cocaine)  Criminalization vs. Discrimination -Differential criminality o Crime is normal  detection/response is not o Criminality explains a fraction of disproportionality -Discrimination o Differential exposure to factors that lead to criminality: poverty, parental supervision, peers, etc. o Differential CRJ enforcement and prosecution o Differential access to forms of capital o Cumulative discrimination -Racial democracy?  Sheriff Joe -From “America’s toughest Sheriff” to “The most unrepentantly lawless lawman” -Elected six times since 1993 as Sheriff of Maricopa county (1993), 4,000 employees, jurisdiction over Pheonix+ -Court rulings, lawsuits, media reports, and reports by advocacy organizations point to systematic, discriminatory practices, targeted at Latinos/as, regardless of their immigration status (patrols, stops and raids) -What’s punishment? -What’s legal?  Immigration -Links between immigration, race, and ethnicity -Categories of immigrants o Temporary workers o “Expats” o Visa over-stayers -The immigrant paradox: o Crime and victimization o Attitudes toward the police  Immigration and Corrections -Impacts across levels (Federal/State/Local) -Federal System: o Immigrants are fastest growing group (replacing drug offenders), 10% change between 2010-11 o “Illegal entry” and “re-entry” o 80% immigration defendants convicted in Fed courts received a prison sentence (median length=15 months) o Operation Streamline -State/local systems o Jail status checks (secure communities, criminal alien program, 287g) but most people are not “criminals”  Sheriff Joe -From “America’s toughest Sheriff” to “The most unrepentantly lawless lawman” -Elected six times since 1993 as Sheriff of Maricopa county (1993), 4,000 employees, jurisdiction over Phoenix -Court rulings, lawsuits, media reports and reports by advocacy organizations point to systematic, discriminatory practices, targeted at Latinos/as, regardless of their immigration status (patrols, stops, and raids) -What’s punishment? -What’s legal?  Immigration and Corrections -Impacts across levels (Federal/State/Local? -Federal System o Immigrants are fastest growing group (replacing drug offenders?, 10% change between 2010-11 o “Illegal entry” and “re-entry” o 80% immigration defendants convicted in Fed courts received a prison sentence (median-length=15 months) o Operation Streamline -State/local systems o Jail status checks (secure communities, criminal alien program, 287g)  but most are not “criminals” The Use of Isolation  Background -Segregation, solitary confinement and isolation -The American exception: The supermax prison -According to BJS, the number of people in segregation beds increased 40% nationally between 1995 and 2000 (prison population rose by 28% in the same period). As of 2000, more than 80,000 inmates were on segregation (+25k on supermax) -Some evidence suggests that conditions of confinement in segregation units have become increasingly severe with longer stays -Segregation is expensive: Operation cells in supermax facilities are about 50% more expensive than regular calls -Extreme isolation has negative consequences for inmates (mental health, violence, long-term recidivism). Segregation is also tough on staff. -Legal challenges (domestic and abroad) and responses.  System Issues -Classification at prison intake may require that some inmates serve their entire sentence in isolation (max/super-max facilities) -In other facilities, the use of isolation involves the separation of inmates from the general population due to difference issues: o Disciplinary segregation: Sanction for serious violations of DOC rules. Imposed by disciplinary hearing officer. o Administrative detention: The continued presence of an individual in GP is deemed a threat to the security of the institution. This is a non-punitive status imposed by the segregation review officer. o Protective custody: Separation from GP aims to protect inmate due to status or history (prison assault, informants, previous law enforcement) -Main issues: How to select the “right” people, how to deal with them; Monitoring of segregation is more difficult given surge in population; negative impact of straight releases from segregation to the community  The experience of isolation -Permanent confinement (24-24 hrs/day) -Small space (48-90 sq. feet) -Lack of physical/verbal contact (staff, prisoners) -Lack of control, structure, routines, programming -Sensory deprivation (no natural light, noise) -No “privileges” (property, exercise, reduced/no visits, limited meal choices, library, etc.) -Diminished due process (few reviews, unbalanced decision- making)  Impact on Inmates -Effects vary according to type of inmate, duration of confinement and particular conditions -Psychological effects: Anxiety, depression, anger, cognitive disturbances, paranoia, and psychosis the SHU syndrome. -Use of isolation amplifies mental health problems -Suicides occur disproportionately more often in segregation cells than elsewhere in the prison -Impact on staff: Threat of injury, workload, and lack of training The Death Penalty  The debate over capital punishment -Not all justifications for punishment may apply to the death penalty (retribution, deterrence, incapacitation vs. rehabilitation) Utilitarian argument: Death penalty and murder -Supporters o It deters criminals, prevents others from committing new crime o Pay-back for horrendous crimes, reasserts social values o Less expensive than life incarceration -Opponents o No evidence of a deterrence effect o State-sponsored killings are wrong o Discrimination, wrongful convictions  The Death Penalty in America -Executions have been part of history of punishment -Formal executions have declined since 1930s (190/yrà<30/yr). For 9 years executions were stopped pending a Supreme Court decision (1967-1976) -Public opinion largely favors death penalty, although events have generated important shifts (1960s, 1990s) -Subject is hard to examine: Confusion over what part of DP is ok, different forms of Death Penalty (from not in constitution to many executions)  The Death Penalty and the Constitution -Supreme Court decisions – Furman v. Georgia (1972): Death penalty is not applied correctly (fairness and/or cruel punishment) – States created bifurcated system with guilt/sentence split into different proceedings. Also enacted proportionality review. New laws were upheld in Gregg v. Georgia (1976). – McCleskey v. Kemp (1987): Death penalty statuses do not violate equal protection clause. – Atkins v. Virginia (2002): Executions of mentally ill individuals are unconstitutional. [other cases narrowing scope of death penalty include Ring v. Arizona (2002) and Roper v. Simmons (2005)] -Challenges: Execution of mentally ill (competency, coercion), effective counsel, death-qualified juries, offenses, international courts  Death Row Inmates -Approximately 3,300 individuals on death row, 100+ death sentences every year, 25+ executions – Poorly educated men, low-income, deep CRJ involvement – 35+1 states have death penalty, 54% of death row in southern states (65% of executions). -How to measure punitiveness? – Ratio of sentences to arrests? sentences to crimes? Probability of prosecutor asking for death penalty? -Factors influencing chance of death penalty – Race of victim (not race of offender) – Attributes of crime  Exam 2 Review: Key Ideas -Concepts: o Prisons: Inmate balance vs. Administrative control o Racial threat theory (or hypothesis) o Community justice vs. Criminal Justice -Glossary: o Chain of command, span of control, boundary violations o Principle of least eligibility, criminogenic needs, cognitive skill building o Discretionary release 1 -Multiple choice, 3 open ended, 1 long answer Tasfia Kamal 3/16/15 Professor Rengifo Corrections Documentary Assignment The documentary “The Farm” was created in 1998 at Louisiana. The documentary tells some of their Inmates’ life story, how they got there and what they are doing now to make it better and get out of there as soon as possible. One of the inmate’s name is George Crawford. He just entered the system and got sentenced for 37 years. He is 22 years old and accused and convicted of first degree murder. He is scared that he will never get out of jail. He is scared to not be able to see his loved ones again. He thinks he didn’t have a fair trial; hence, he ended up on jail for a longer term than what he deserves. When his mother came to visit him at the jail, she started tearing up saying money would have solved everything. Only if they had enough money, his son wouldn’t have been in jail anymore. Now his family is trying to raise about $3000 to pay for his trial transcripts. Because without them he cannot file for an appeal. He is scared for the whole process. Who wouldn’t be? Because if his family can’t manage the entire amount, he will stay in prison for rest of his life. In the documentary it says, George is an ideal example of kind of people that enters the system. He is young black male who entered the system and probably has to stay here for rest of his life. But he can try to get better. He can use this opportunity to learn more and make his life better by getting out of jail early. In documentary, it shows that he is talking to the instructors about what he should do to stay focused and make this process easier for him. Another inmate’s name is Vincent, who entered the system 2o years before the documentary was created. He entered the system when he was 24 years old and was facing 38 years prison sentence. He was charged for aggravated rape and he thinks he didn’t have fair trial. He didn’t have enough money to afford a good lawyer; hence, he is stuck in the system. He was on parole and tried to restart his case but it got denied. The Supreme Court denied his appeal. He basically can’t do anything about this anymore. He says he dreams about being independent and getting out of the prison. He talked to one of the supervisors who tells him that no one is going to take a look at his case because it already been too long. All he can do is to help the prison and behave well so that he can get out of it earlier than what he’s supposed to. These two inmates have a lot in common. They both are facing long term sentence and both think they didn’t get fair trial because of their economic situation. They also believe that there was a little bit of racism involved. They both are working on getting out of the prison as soon as possible. They want independence and want to prove that they can do better. The only difference is George just entered the system so he has more chances of getting out early. However, Vincent has been inside of prison for 20 years already. Thus, he has less chances of getting out of prison after those 20 years. The documentary was created around 1998; so it was created approximately 17 years ago from now. A lot could have changed in those 17 years. However, it’s pretty sad that a lot of the things are just as same as 1998. In the documentary a lot of people did not receive fair trail; as a result, they ended up in prison for long term. People today also don’t get fair chances for their cases to be looked at. People at such young age enters the system and end up wasting their entire life behind the bars and can’t get out to have a better life and contribute to the society. Two instructors were talking about having difficult times inside of the prison because of racism. That situation might not be as bad as 20 or 40 years from now. But it is still kind of visible in every prison in United States. Also the black to white inmates’ ratio is also the same as it was in 1998. In 2010, federal report stated that majority of the prisons hold about 70%-80% of black and Hispanic population and about 20 % of white population. Today’s prisons do have better programs available for the inmates than they did at 1998. There are more people involved now to help the inmates leave the prison early and be successful when they get out of the prison. States are putting more money in building these systems than they ever did. However, the outcome is not as effective as they thought it would be. The reason behind this is either the inmates get distracted or don’t take the system seriously. Some of the factors are same as it was in 1998; but a lot of the things have been changed since and they have changed mostly in a positive way.


Buy Material

Are you sure you want to buy this material for

50 Karma

Buy Material

BOOM! Enjoy Your Free Notes!

We've added these Notes to your profile, click here to view them now.


You're already Subscribed!

Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'

Why people love StudySoup

Jim McGreen Ohio University

"Knowing I can count on the Elite Notetaker in my class allows me to focus on what the professor is saying instead of just scribbling notes the whole time and falling behind."

Anthony Lee UC Santa Barbara

"I bought an awesome study guide, which helped me get an A in my Math 34B class this quarter!"

Steve Martinelli UC Los Angeles

"There's no way I would have passed my Organic Chemistry class this semester without the notes and study guides I got from StudySoup."

Parker Thompson 500 Startups

"It's a great way for students to improve their educational experience and it seemed like a product that everybody wants, so all the people participating are winning."

Become an Elite Notetaker and start selling your notes online!

Refund Policy


All subscriptions to StudySoup are paid in full at the time of subscribing. To change your credit card information or to cancel your subscription, go to "Edit Settings". All credit card information will be available there. If you should decide to cancel your subscription, it will continue to be valid until the next payment period, as all payments for the current period were made in advance. For special circumstances, please email


StudySoup has more than 1 million course-specific study resources to help students study smarter. If you’re having trouble finding what you’re looking for, our customer support team can help you find what you need! Feel free to contact them here:

Recurring Subscriptions: If you have canceled your recurring subscription on the day of renewal and have not downloaded any documents, you may request a refund by submitting an email to

Satisfaction Guarantee: If you’re not satisfied with your subscription, you can contact us for further help. Contact must be made within 3 business days of your subscription purchase and your refund request will be subject for review.

Please Note: Refunds can never be provided more than 30 days after the initial purchase date regardless of your activity on the site.