U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Determining Your Client's Likelihood of Success Under Community Supervision and Improving the Odds for a Non-Prison Sentence

NCJ Number
240169
Author(s)
Denise C. Barrett
Date Published
May 2009
Length
18 pages
Annotation
This paper discusses some of the ways a defense attorney can determine a client's likelihood of success under community supervision, identifies those areas where a client needs additional support to improve the likelihood of success, and suggests ways to persuade a judge that prison is a greater than necessary punishment for a client.
Abstract
A discussion of the assessment of recidivism risk first profiles the Risk Prediction Index (RPI), which measures seven variables related to the likelihood that an offender will be re-arrested or have supervision revoked. The variables measured are the offender's age at the start of supervision; the number of arrests before the instant offense; employment status, history of illegal drug use or alcohol abuse; prior history of absconding from supervision; whether the offender has a college degree; and whether the offender was living with a spouse and/or children at the start of supervision. In addressing other way of assessing a client's risk of recidivism, the paper discusses age, gender, educational and vocational skills, employment, first or near-first offender; and marital status. A client's success in community living depends upon a strong foundation across several domains: cognitive ability, education, employment, residence, family, health and sobriety, criminal justice compliance, and social/civic connections. Each of these factors is discussed in terms of the risk for reoffending. Guidance is also provided defense attorneys on persuading the judge to impose a sentencing alternative to incarceration. The attorney is advised to work within the sentencing guidelines while presenting a critical analysis of the history and basis of the various guidelines, particularly whether they are based on empirical evidence, past practice, national experience, or otherwise reflect sound policy judgments. 25 notes