Loading…

SUSPENDED SENTENCES AND FREESTANDING PROBATION ORDERS IN U.S. GUIDELINES SYSTEMS: A SURVEY AND ASSESSMENT

Sentences to probation and other community-based sentences require backup sanctions to encourage compliance with the conditions of probation and respond to violations of those conditions. The most severe backup sanction in felony cases in the United States is revocation of release and commitment to...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	Law and contemporary problems 2019-01, Vol.82 (1), p.51
Main Author:	Frase, Richard S
Format:	Article
Language:	English
Subjects:	Compliance Criminal sentences Ex-convicts Felony Imprisonment Laws, regulations and rules Offenders Offenses Parole & probation Polls & surveys Prisons Probation Probation orders Probation service Revocation Sanctions States Suspended sentences Violations
Online Access:	Get full text
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

cited_by
cites
container_end_page
container_issue	1
container_start_page	51
container_title	Law and contemporary problems
container_volume	82
creator	Frase, Richard S
description	Sentences to probation and other community-based sentences require backup sanctions to encourage compliance with the conditions of probation and respond to violations of those conditions. The most severe backup sanction in felony cases in the United States is revocation of release and commitment to prison. But such revocations have been a major contributor to mass incarceration; moreover, such revocations can result in offenders whose crimes do not justify a prison sentence being sent to prison—the problem of “net-widening.” Legal systems have taken a variety of approaches in structuring backup sanctions for probation violations, particularly custodial sanctions. This article surveys and critiques two kinds of suspended prison sentences frequently used as backup sanctions in U.S. state and federal guidelines systems, and a third option that employs more limited custodial backup sanctions.
format	article
fullrecord	<record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2268681665</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A581621202</galeid><sourcerecordid>A581621202</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-g240t-4b67427a58c82c017c9a100b5203ed436189574422bc8852a85acc325432c63e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkGFLwzAQhosoOKf_IeBXO9JL06Z-q2s2C1s3mlbYp5JmWe3YWl22_29QwQm7g7vjeN734K6cgRf51AUCcO0MMAbiRh4Lbp07Y7bYRhjigdOKUix5lvAECZ4VPBtzgeIsQZOcc1HYKc2maJkvXuIiXWRokSc8FyjNUDkSIzQt04TP0syKxEoUfC6eUYxEmb_x1bdNLAQXYm6t752bjdwZ_fDbh0454cX41Z0tpuk4nrkN-Pjo-nUQ-hBKyhQDhb1QRdLDuKaAiV77JPBYREPfB6gVYxQko1IpAtQnoAKiydB5_PH9OPSfJ22O1bY_HTp7sgIIWMC8IKB_VCN3umq7TX88SLVvjapiahHwwH5s6LgXqEZ3-iB3fac3rV3_40cXeJtrvW_VRcHTmaA-mbbTxhbTNu9H08iTMef4FwYlg5k</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2268681665</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>SUSPENDED SENTENCES AND FREESTANDING PROBATION ORDERS IN U.S. GUIDELINES SYSTEMS: A SURVEY AND ASSESSMENT</title><source>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</source><source>Nexis UK</source><source>JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection【Remote access available】</source><source>PAIS Index</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><creator>Frase, Richard S</creator><creatorcontrib>Frase, Richard S</creatorcontrib><description>Sentences to probation and other community-based sentences require backup sanctions to encourage compliance with the conditions of probation and respond to violations of those conditions. The most severe backup sanction in felony cases in the United States is revocation of release and commitment to prison. But such revocations have been a major contributor to mass incarceration; moreover, such revocations can result in offenders whose crimes do not justify a prison sentence being sent to prison—the problem of “net-widening.” Legal systems have taken a variety of approaches in structuring backup sanctions for probation violations, particularly custodial sanctions. This article surveys and critiques two kinds of suspended prison sentences frequently used as backup sanctions in U.S. state and federal guidelines systems, and a third option that employs more limited custodial backup sanctions.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0023-9186</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1945-2322</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Durham: Duke University, School of Law</publisher><subject>Compliance ; Criminal sentences ; Ex-convicts ; Felony ; Imprisonment ; Laws, regulations and rules ; Offenders ; Offenses ; Parole & probation ; Polls & surveys ; Prisons ; Probation ; Probation orders ; Probation service ; Revocation ; Sanctions ; States ; Suspended sentences ; Violations</subject><ispartof>Law and contemporary problems, 2019-01, Vol.82 (1), p.51</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2019 Duke University, School of Law</rights><rights>Copyright Duke University School of Law 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27864,33221</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Frase, Richard S</creatorcontrib><title>SUSPENDED SENTENCES AND FREESTANDING PROBATION ORDERS IN U.S. GUIDELINES SYSTEMS: A SURVEY AND ASSESSMENT</title><title>Law and contemporary problems</title><description>Sentences to probation and other community-based sentences require backup sanctions to encourage compliance with the conditions of probation and respond to violations of those conditions. The most severe backup sanction in felony cases in the United States is revocation of release and commitment to prison. But such revocations have been a major contributor to mass incarceration; moreover, such revocations can result in offenders whose crimes do not justify a prison sentence being sent to prison—the problem of “net-widening.” Legal systems have taken a variety of approaches in structuring backup sanctions for probation violations, particularly custodial sanctions. This article surveys and critiques two kinds of suspended prison sentences frequently used as backup sanctions in U.S. state and federal guidelines systems, and a third option that employs more limited custodial backup sanctions.</description><subject>Compliance</subject><subject>Criminal sentences</subject><subject>Ex-convicts</subject><subject>Felony</subject><subject>Imprisonment</subject><subject>Laws, regulations and rules</subject><subject>Offenders</subject><subject>Offenses</subject><subject>Parole & probation</subject><subject>Polls & surveys</subject><subject>Prisons</subject><subject>Probation</subject><subject>Probation orders</subject><subject>Probation service</subject><subject>Revocation</subject><subject>Sanctions</subject><subject>States</subject><subject>Suspended sentences</subject><subject>Violations</subject><issn>0023-9186</issn><issn>1945-2322</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>8BJ</sourceid><recordid>eNptkGFLwzAQhosoOKf_IeBXO9JL06Z-q2s2C1s3mlbYp5JmWe3YWl22_29QwQm7g7vjeN734K6cgRf51AUCcO0MMAbiRh4Lbp07Y7bYRhjigdOKUix5lvAECZ4VPBtzgeIsQZOcc1HYKc2maJkvXuIiXWRokSc8FyjNUDkSIzQt04TP0syKxEoUfC6eUYxEmb_x1bdNLAQXYm6t752bjdwZ_fDbh0454cX41Z0tpuk4nrkN-Pjo-nUQ-hBKyhQDhb1QRdLDuKaAiV77JPBYREPfB6gVYxQko1IpAtQnoAKiydB5_PH9OPSfJ22O1bY_HTp7sgIIWMC8IKB_VCN3umq7TX88SLVvjapiahHwwH5s6LgXqEZ3-iB3fac3rV3_40cXeJtrvW_VRcHTmaA-mbbTxhbTNu9H08iTMef4FwYlg5k</recordid><startdate>20190101</startdate><enddate>20190101</enddate><creator>Frase, Richard S</creator><general>Duke University, School of Law</general><general>Duke University School of Law</general><scope>N95</scope><scope>XI7</scope><scope>ILT</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20190101</creationdate><title>SUSPENDED SENTENCES AND FREESTANDING PROBATION ORDERS IN U.S. GUIDELINES SYSTEMS: A SURVEY AND ASSESSMENT</title><author>Frase, Richard S</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-g240t-4b67427a58c82c017c9a100b5203ed436189574422bc8852a85acc325432c63e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Compliance</topic><topic>Criminal sentences</topic><topic>Ex-convicts</topic><topic>Felony</topic><topic>Imprisonment</topic><topic>Laws, regulations and rules</topic><topic>Offenders</topic><topic>Offenses</topic><topic>Parole & probation</topic><topic>Polls & surveys</topic><topic>Prisons</topic><topic>Probation</topic><topic>Probation orders</topic><topic>Probation service</topic><topic>Revocation</topic><topic>Sanctions</topic><topic>States</topic><topic>Suspended sentences</topic><topic>Violations</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Frase, Richard S</creatorcontrib><collection>Gale Business Insights</collection><collection>Business Insights: Essentials</collection><collection>LegalTrac (Gale OneFile) - Law</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Law and contemporary problems</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Frase, Richard S</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>SUSPENDED SENTENCES AND FREESTANDING PROBATION ORDERS IN U.S. GUIDELINES SYSTEMS: A SURVEY AND ASSESSMENT</atitle><jtitle>Law and contemporary problems</jtitle><date>2019-01-01</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>82</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>51</spage><pages>51-</pages><issn>0023-9186</issn><eissn>1945-2322</eissn><abstract>Sentences to probation and other community-based sentences require backup sanctions to encourage compliance with the conditions of probation and respond to violations of those conditions. The most severe backup sanction in felony cases in the United States is revocation of release and commitment to prison. But such revocations have been a major contributor to mass incarceration; moreover, such revocations can result in offenders whose crimes do not justify a prison sentence being sent to prison—the problem of “net-widening.” Legal systems have taken a variety of approaches in structuring backup sanctions for probation violations, particularly custodial sanctions. This article surveys and critiques two kinds of suspended prison sentences frequently used as backup sanctions in U.S. state and federal guidelines systems, and a third option that employs more limited custodial backup sanctions.</abstract><cop>Durham</cop><pub>Duke University, School of Law</pub></addata></record>
fulltext	fulltext
identifier	ISSN: 0023-9186
ispartof	Law and contemporary problems, 2019-01, Vol.82 (1), p.51
issn	0023-9186 1945-2322
language	eng
recordid	cdi_proquest_journals_2268681665
source	International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); Nexis UK; JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection【Remote access available】; PAIS Index; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts
subjects	Compliance Criminal sentences Ex-convicts Felony Imprisonment Laws, regulations and rules Offenders Offenses Parole & probation Polls & surveys Prisons Probation Probation orders Probation service Revocation Sanctions States Suspended sentences Violations
title	SUSPENDED SENTENCES AND FREESTANDING PROBATION ORDERS IN U.S. GUIDELINES SYSTEMS: A SURVEY AND ASSESSMENT
url	http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-14T12%3A09%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=SUSPENDED%20SENTENCES%20AND%20FREESTANDING%20PROBATION%20ORDERS%20IN%20U.S.%20GUIDELINES%20SYSTEMS:%20A%20SURVEY%20AND%20ASSESSMENT&rft.jtitle=Law%20and%20contemporary%20problems&rft.au=Frase,%20Richard%20S&rft.date=2019-01-01&rft.volume=82&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=51&rft.pages=51-&rft.issn=0023-9186&rft.eissn=1945-2322&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA581621202%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-g240t-4b67427a58c82c017c9a100b5203ed436189574422bc8852a85acc325432c63e3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2268681665&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A581621202&rfr_iscdi=true