Presentation by: Andrew Clark Director of the Institute for the Study of Crime Justice and the Institute for Municipal

Presentation Transcript

Outline of Connecticut Correctional Re-section and Recidivism Statistics Presentation by: Andrew Clark Director of the Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice and the Institute for Municipal and Regional Policy at CCSU Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice Central Connecticut State University

Prison Population Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice Central Connecticut State University

Prison Population CT's jail populace expanded 242% from 1986 to 2008. This drove the state to attempt a progression of activities to stem the enduring development in the quantity of individuals detained. Some of these activities included expanded subsidizing for DOC and CSSD. This expanded financing improved projects and administrations that permitted more detainees to be discharged to group supervision or helped them to effectively stay in the group. Foundation for the Study of Crime & Justice Central Connecticut State University

Common Misconceptions More individuals live in Connecticut just 11% Increase More CT inhabitants are of prime wrongdoing committing 12% Decrease age (18-24 yrs old) More individuals are being arrested 10% Decrease More individuals are being captured just 10% Increase for medication offenses More fierce violations are being 30% Decrease committed Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice Central Connecticut State University

Common Misconceptions Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice Central Connecticut State University

Accused versus Sentenced Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice Central Connecticut State University

Accused versus Sentenced DOC houses both charged guilty parties who are anticipating trial and sentenced wrongdoers. While the blamed jail populace has more quick consequences for the general jail populace, the critical increment in the jail populace is basically because of increments in the sentenced populace. Establishment for the Study of Crime & Justice Central Connecticut State University

Recidivism in Connecticut 2001 Prepared by: Legislative Program Review and Investigations Committee Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice Central Connecticut State University

Recidivism 2001 Conducted by: the Program Review Committee Definition: New criminal movement by a man after a criminal conviction that brought about either detainment or another endorse (i.e., probation, diversionary sentence, or fine). Procedure: Three measures were utilized: re-capture for another crime or lawful offense; reconviction on those new charges; and re-detainment or sentence to another court-forced authorize, for example, probation, a diversionary program, or a fine. They analyzed re-capture, reconviction, and sentencing information for all indicted criminals released from jail or sentenced to probation from 1997-2000. Foundation for the Study of Crime & Justice Central Connecticut State University

Recidivism 2001 Findings: Within 3 yrs of release, 70% were rearrested at any rate once for another wrongdoing. Half of the released prisoners were re indicted another wrongdoing. Lawful offense detainees had altogether higher rates of re-capture, reconviction, and re-imprisonment than crime probationers. Guys had essentially higher recidivism rates than females. Youthful wrongdoers will probably reoffend than more seasoned prisoners. Age, race, and sexual orientation were noteworthy indicators of rehash criminal action. Reason and Recommendation Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice Central Connecticut State University

Annual Report 2007 & 2008 Connecticut Recidivism Studies Prepared By: Office of Policy & Management Criminal Justice Policy and Planning Division & Central Connecticut State University Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice Central Connecticut State University

Recidivism 2007 & 2008 Conducted by: the ISCJ under OPM Findings: guilty parties discharged to post-discharge supervision were less inclined to come back to jail. Guilty parties discharged with no group supervision will probably be captured, sentenced, and detained for another offense. Wrongdoers discharged end of sentence with no post-discharge supervision had the most noteworthy recidivism rate: 56% were rearrested, 39% were indicted, and 21% gotten another jail sentence. Organization for the Study of Crime & Justice Central Connecticut State University

Annual Report 2009 Connecticut Recidivism Study Prepared By: Office of Policy & Management Criminal Justice Policy and Planning Division Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice Central Connecticut State University

Recidivism 2009 Conducted by: OPM Methodology: the review followed 16,486 sentenced detainees for 3-yrs taking after their release from jail or discharge to a group program in 2004. Utilizing information gave by the DOC, CSSD and the DPS, the review caught any resulting captures, readmissions to jail, feelings and re-imprisonments for new offenses for every wrongdoer in the accomplice. Establishment for the Study of Crime & Justice Central Connecticut State University

Recidivism 2009 Findings: 67% of wrongdoers were captured for new offense (new capture) 56% of guilty parties were imprisoned (any re-detainment) 55.6% were indicted another offense (new conviction) 36.7% of guilty parties got another jail sentence for another offense. Establishment for the Study of Crime & Justice Central Connecticut State University

Timeline of Significant CJ Initiatives 1981 Supervised Home Release (SHR) was made which created Indeterminate Sentencing. Parole was abrogated for those right now serving a determinate sentence. "Great time" was decreased from 15 to 12 days a month. 1983 Sentence length expanded by 25% 1986 To oblige the state's developing jail population the DOC started its extension extend, creating new offices and additionally growing existing ones. Organization for the Study of Crime & Justice Central Connecticut State University

Timeline 1987 The General Assembly instituted required minimum sentencing laws for medication deal offenses. 1990 DOC offices encountered a genuine congestion issue. Around then, SHR program eliminate starts; parole was reestablished for all prisoners serving a sentence of over 2 years. 1991 "Time served" expanded by 25% for court imposed sentences 1992 " Time served" expanded by 40% for court imposed sentences Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice Central Connecticut State University

Timeline 1993 P.A. 93-219 set up the Board of Parole which now had optional discharge and supervision specialist over detainees who got a sentence of over 2 years. 1995 "Truth in Sentencing"- time served was expanded to 85% for genuine brutal guilty parties. 1996 Prison development venture was finished. DOC added 12 new detainment facilities and remodeled 13 existing facilities to build limit Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice Central Connecticut State University

Timeline 1999 DOC contracted with the VA DOC to exchange 484 inmates from CT to a most extreme security jail 2001 P.A. 01-99 approved judges to withdraw "for good cause" from required least sentences for certain medicate offenses 2003 Building Bridges: From Conviction to Employment CT's Justice Reinvestment Initiative was displayed and issues identifying with reentry were examined. The creation of extra group redress programs turned into the essential concentration of these discussions. Establishment for the Study of Crime & Justice Central Connecticut State University

Timeline 2003 The Board of Parole and the Board of Pardons were converged into DOC. This expanded DOC authorization to exchange an extra 2,000 inmates for an aggregate out-of-state contract of 2,500 beds for monetary years 2004 and 2005 (PA 03-6). 2004 P.A. 04-324 An Act Concerning Prison Overcrowding ordered another wrongdoer reentry strategy in light of the equity reinvestment display. This contained numerous activities to help control the state's jail packing issue. One of its major objectives was to diminish the jail populace by 20%. Foundation for the Study of Crime & Justice Central Connecticut State University

Timeline 2004 In July, Governor Rell requested the DOC to: Return all prisoners exchanged out-of-state back to CT. Build up a far reaching wrongdoer reentry system expected to control jail congestion and help guilty parties as they move from jail to the group while keeping up open security and supporting casualties' rights (PA 04-324). 2005 By November, every one of the 500 out-of-state detainees were returned to CT. $13 million was put into DOC and CSSD for activities laid out in the comprehensive guilty party reentry system (PA 04- 216). Organization for the Study of Crime & Justice Central Connecticut State University

Timeline 2006 July 1 st , the Criminal Justice Policy & Planning Division was made inside OPM and entrusted with developing an arrangement to advance a more successful and cohesive state criminal equity framework (PA 05-249). 2007 The Connecticut Sentencing Task Force was created (PA 06-193) viable to audit CT's criminal equity and sentencing approaches and laws; and make suggestions to make an all the more simply, effective and productive arrangement of criminal sentencing . Sources: P.A. 04-234 Compliance Project : Program Review and Investigations Staff, 01/12/06. Connecticut Correctional Population Projections Study . The Office of Policy and Management, Criminal Justice Policy and Planning Division. Foundation for the Study of Crime & Justice Central Connecticut State University

Justice Reinvestment In 2003, Rep. Dyson