American Corrections: Probation

American Corrections: Probation
Student's Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course Name and Number
Lecturer's Name
Assignment Due Date
American Corrections: Probation
Probation is a court order that requires probation officers to place a criminal defendant under their control, care, and supervision instead of imprisonment, provided that the probationer maintains specific standards of conduct (Bonczar & Maruschak, 2013). For a court to grant probation, the wrongdoer must promise to observe and obey the supervision conditions imposed by the court. General probation conditions are given to every probationer irrespective of their status. Some of these conditions include: obey all laws, report to a probation officer, do not associate with known felons, possess a firearm or leave court jurisdiction without prior approval, submit to searches as ordered, as well as notify the probation officer of any change in movement or location (Hilgendorf, 2017).
The sentencing court may also impose additional conditions to respond to the offenders' risk to the community and their rehabilitative needs (Doherty, 2015). These conditions may require the probationer to remain confined to their house, submit to electronic monitoring, pay court costs, restitution and damages, comply with the specific curfew, and participate in intervention programs like drug abuse, mental health, educational and vocational programs (Freebook, 2017). The sentencing court retains the authority to monitor community offenders, modify supervision conditions, and revoke the offender's probationary status based on their behaviors while on probation (Kaeble, 2020). Interestingly, probationers are highly motivated to abide by the court's wishes because violation of probation rules may lead to re-incarceration.
Probation officers play a significant role in ensuring that the offender meets the court's provisions and, if necessary, informs the court of any violation. As such, probation officers serve as both helpers and rule enforcers. If the probationer complies with all the conditions, the probation term will be complete when the sentence expires. Probation officers also have the power to file a motion court to end probation if the individual meets all the court's conditions. In the US, the average probation period is 22 months (Kaeble, 2020). The good news is that over 68% of the probationers complete their probation sentence (Kaeble, 2020).
If the offender violates probation requirements, the supervising officer must address the misconduct with the probationer. The court allows the probation officer to respond to these situations. Officers often have the freedom to decide on the instances that guarantee a stern warning and those that warrant the offender's recapture for a formalized court hearing (Luong & Wormith, 2013). During the revocation process, the judge works with the probation officer, prosecutor, the probationer, and the probationer's defense council to determine the appropriate course of action.
At this point, offenders risk serving their original sentence in prison, having additional supervision conditions imposed upon them, or extending their probationary term (Luong & Wormith, 2013). In some cases, the probation term is unsatisfactorily terminated, and the offenders may complete their remaining sentence in custody. Probationers taken back to jail as a result of such revocations make up almost 50% of the new state prison admissions (Warren, 2017). This scenario has also increased the inmate population in the US.
Purpose of the Study
This study aimed to examine the role of the probation system in the United States' correctional system. The study also intended to investigate the relationship between probation and incarceration. In this context, the study determined whether or not probation reduces recidivism in the US. Additionally, the study purported to explore the conditions or requirements of probation and the consequences of violating these conditions.
Research Questions
The following research questions guided the study.
* Does probation in the United States protect the country and its citizens from other criminal behaviors?
* Is probation an effective tool in reducing recidivism?
* What is the association between the different probation sentences and revocation?
* What are the conditions or requirements of probation and the consequences of violating them?
Literature Review
History of Probation
The general probation characteristics are based on the practices in eighteenth-century England. This time saw a suspension of sentences by judges in exchange for a particular period of good conduct. Once the felons proved they could live in society without committing crimes, they formally requested the pardon crown. In the US, probation can be traced back to 1891 with John Augustus, a wealthy shoemaker who lived in Boston (Hilgendorf, 2017). He is often credited as the father of probation.
Augustus, a restraint member of the temperance movement that fought against evils of alcohol, came up with this idea after witnessing a court charge a man with common drunkenness (Hilgendorf, 2017). The man told Augustus that he would quit drinking to be saved from a correctional facility. Augustus persuaded the court to suspend the man's sentence for three weeks and release him into his custody (Hilgendorf, 2017). After the period of supervision, the man proved to the court that he had reformed completely. Convinced of the change, the court dropped the case against the man and told him to pay a fine only.
Augustus termed this practice probation, the Latin word for 'prove' or 'to test' (Hilgendorf, 2017). He continued to supervise the lawbreakers for a short period and reported their progress and behavior with the court. Consistent with the original English practice, Augustus held that the primary goal of social laws was to prevent crime (Phillips, 2013). Therefore, sanctions ought to reform criminals instead of punishing them. Augustus also tailored the terms and conditions of probations to provide a rehabilitative change, reform offenders, and prevent future crimes (Hilgendorf, 2017).
Between 1841 and 1858, Augustus posted bail for almost 2,000 people, primarily minor offenders and alcoholics who could not pay their fines (Hilgendorf, 2017). Augustus helped these offenders secure employment and track their progress toward change when they were later brought to court for sentencing. It is unsurprising that Augustus' home state, Massachusetts became the first state to implement a probation law in 1878(Phillips, 2013). By the 1950s, all the 50 states and the federal government had enacted probation laws (Hilgendorf, 2017).
From its introduction, probation occurred as a way of helping lawbreakers, which was primarily backed by rehabilitation philosophy (Rudes & Viglione, 2013). Law enforcement agencies saw its use as a prospect to redirect the offenders from detention and give them a second chance. By living in society, the offenders would easily make restitution, keep their jobs, support dependents, and participate in intervention programs. No one challenged public support for probation until the early 1970s when this practice came under attack. Robert Martinson's (1974, p. 25) review of the correctional treatment literature stated, "with few and isolated exceptions; rehabilitative efforts reported so far have not had any appreciable effect on recidivism." The inference that "nothing works" gave the rehabilitative ideal a devastating blow (Hilgendorf, 2017).
During this 'get tough' period, correctional administrators and policymakers found it hard to sustain rehabilitative plans because probation was discredited. Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, many federal, state, and local jurisdictions adopted a series of punitive sentencing policies (Warren, 2017). However, these policy changes increased the number of offenders in prison drastically. They also increased the number of offenders under probation. For instance, over one million adult probationers in the US participated in crime in the 1980s (Freebook, 2017). By the beginning of the 2000s, this number escalated to four million (Hilgendorf, 2017). The rising crime rates led to crime control policy becoming a salient issue, with proponents of law and order calling for punitive punishments.
The 'get tough period' also experienced a fundamental shift in the probation function. Probation agencies began to downplay the role of officers as social workers who assisted in introducing probationers to community services and intensifying the controls over offenders. Although the first fifteen decades of probation focused on rehabilitating and aiding offenders to leave an everyday life, these changes made probation officers concentrate on law enforcement aspects of their job, emphasizing strict enforcement of probation conditions (Rudes & Viglione, 2013). This strategy assumed that technical violations of probation requirements serve as grounds for criminal behavior. Therefore, this austere strategy would prevent delinquents from committing felonies.
Modern Perspectives and Trends
Studies show over 6.9 million adult convicts in the US are under some form of correctional supervision (Trusts, 2018). According to Hilgendorf (2017), probation is the most frequently used method of sentencing those with minor offenses, with probationers making up approximately 56% of the correctional population and about 80% of the community supervision population (Tatman & Kreamer, 2014). There has been a steady decline in the total correctional population over the past years. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the number of adults on probation in the US decreased from 4,399,000 at year-end 2018 to 4 357,700 at year-end 2019(Kaeble, 2020). This 0.9% decline was solely driven by a decrease in probationers, who made up the majority (80%) of the community supervision population (Kaeble, 2020). During this time, probationers dropped from 3,540,000 to 3,492,900, representing a 1.3% decrease (Kaeble, 2020).
The same trend occurs in the juvenile justice system. Here, close to 64% of delinquent cases and around 56% of the adjudicated crimes status lead to probation disposition as the harshest sanction ordered by the court (Steinmetz & Henderson, 2016). Currently, there are over 50,000 juvenile probationers in the US, representing an almost 30% probation decline since the late 1990s (Kaeble, 2020). Despite the extensive use of probation, there is little evidence that this practice effectively prevents or reduces recidivism.
The present research shows that over 2,000 independent probation agencies exist in the US. These agencies operate under different state and federal laws (Clear, Reisig, & Cole, 2018). There are six separate systems under the umbrella of probation. They include federal probation, state probation, country probation, municipal probation, juvenile probation, and state combined probation and parole (Steen & Opsal, 2017). These systems are available in each state in multiple numbers, and they operate concurrently. They are administered by a central agency, various local agencies, or both. The executive or judiciary can also deliver the probation. A probation agency issued by the executive seems to be the most extensive correctional system or an independent system (Warren, 2017). Those administered by the judiciary work for the court system. In both cases, the agency ensures that the stakeholders comply with the probation rules.
Probation agencies are also investigators in the court. Under the criminal court's direction, probation officers complete presentence investigation (PSI) to inform the sentencing court about the probationer and the facts surrounding their case (Trusts, 2018). A PSI includes the offender's background information, criminal history, personality and family conditions, offense situations, and a disposition recommendation (Bonczar & Maruschak, 2013).
Probation Revocations
As previously stated, a probation decree allows for the offender's supervision in society instead of imprisonment. All probation sentences have rules that probationers must obey. Failure to do so can lead to the revocation of the offender's sentence. If probation is revoked, a judge has alternative options depending on the level of violation. If the offense is a misdemeanor, a judge can sentence the individual to carry on with their probation sentence. The judge can implement stringent supervision measures (Hilgendorf, 2017). If the violation is more severe or frequent, a judge might rescind probation and convict the person. Most revocations are for technical violations like testing positive for alcohol and drugs compared to committing new crimes while under supervision.
Specific attributes of offenders also determine the probation's success or failure. As age increases, there are low odds of failing on probation, indicating that younger wrongdoers are less likely to complete probation. Also, Hilgendorf (2017) found that African-Americans and males had minimum chances of completing probation. Those without a history of drug abuse were less likely to revoke probation for committing a violation. Additionally, Luong and Wormith (2013) associated higher education level, stable address, and financial stability with lower chances of failing on probation. Crime type and revocation have a mixed relationship. Doherty (2015) found that individuals who committed property crimes had higher chances of revoking, while Hilgendorf (2017) found that those who committed more severe crimes had increased revocation rates.
In their study, Steen and Opsal (2017) reported the connection between parole violations and offender attributes. The sample consisted of criminals leaving parole to understand predicators of success at a personal level. Concerning rac...