Chapter 9

1. Chapter 9 Early Release, Parole Programs, and Parole Revocation

2. Introduction • With the exception of life imprisonment and the death penalty, most offenders incarcerated are eventually released back to their communities • Parole is most frequently conditional • There is also considerable diversity among programs for parolees • Some may need to be supervised intensively while others may only need to report similar to standard probation

3. Pre-Release Programs • Pre-release • Any action that results in jail or prison inmates being granted a temporary leave is pre-release • Usually these are granted for meeting with prospective employers or working at jobs on a part-time basis, studying or taking courses, or visiting families • Pre-release programs are available to both male and female inmates • These programs enable prisoners to make a smoother transition back into the community

4. Pre-Release Programs • Work release • Also called work furlough, day parole, or day pass • Any program that allows inmates to work in the community under limited supervision • Designed to ease inmates back into the community by permitting them short leaves from prison

5. Pre-Release Programs • Goals and functions of work release programs • Community reintegration • Promotion of inmate self-respect • Repayment of debts to victims and society • Provision of support for self and dependents

6. Pre-Release Programs • Study release programs • Essentially the same as work release but for the express purpose of securing educational goals • Several types of study release include: • Adult basic education • High school or GED • Technical of vocational education • College

7. Pre-Release Programs • Furlough programs • A furlough is an authorized, unescorted leave from confinement granted for specific purposes ad for designated time periods • The aim is to assist the offender in becoming reintegrated into society • In 2005 there were about 20,000 inmates who participated in over 200,000 furloughs • The prime beneficiaries of the furloughs are the prisoners themselves

8. Pre-Release Programs • Functions of furlough programs • Offender rehabilitation and reintegration • Development of self-esteem and self-worth • Opportunities to pursue vocational/educational programs • Aiding parole boards in determining whether an offender is ready to be released

9. Standard Parole With Conditions • Parole eligible/earned release offenders • Crimes committed on or before June 30, 1995 • Offenders required to serve 25 percent of their sentence • Eligible for parole after 25 percent served • Sex offenders, habitual offenders, or offenders with life sentences are not eligible

10. Standard Parole With Conditions • Parole Conditions • Indicates what parolees must and must not do • For those with needs, they may have special provisions for community treatment • Obey all laws • Not leave jurisdiction without permission • Will not purchase, possess or own a firearm • Not purchase, possess, use any narcotic drug or other controlled substance

11. Discretionary and Mandatory Parole • Discretionary parole • Parole board must determine whether inmate is suitable to be paroled • Several reasons to grant or deny • Seriousness of offense • Number of offenses committed • Psychological/psychiatric history • Community opposition • Escape or escape attempts • Crimes committed while incarcerated

12. Discretionary and Mandatory Parole • Mandatory parole • Automatic release of offender from prison • Parole boards normally do not vote on mandatory parole • Parole boars may however impose additional post-incarcerative supervision

13. Intensive Supervised Parole • Also called shock parole • The inmate has served three or four months and is shocked with what it is like to be incarcerated • The use of house arrest, electronic monitoring, or other programs may be part of one’s conditional early release from prison

14. Intensive Supervised Parole • Conditions of intensive supervision program • Obey laws of the United States • Report to court or ISP officer • Participate in medical or psychological programs • Not have any possession of firearms • Comply with curfew • Submit at any time to a search of my person, places, or things

15. Halfway Houses and Community Residential Centers • Halfway houses defined • Either publicly or privately operated facilities staffed by professional, paraprofessionals or volunteers to assist parolees in making the transition from prison to community • Provide food, clothing, temporary living, employment assistance, and limited counselling • In 2005, 43 states and the federal government operated halfway houses for parolees

16. Halfway Houses and Community Residential Centers • Halfway-in and halfway-out houses • Halfway-out houses are designed to serve the immediate needs of parolees • Halfway-in houses provide services catering to probationers in need of limited confinement

17. Halfway Houses and Community Residential Centers • Philosophy and functions of halfway houses • Parolee rehabilitation • Provisions for food and shelter • Job placement, vocational guidance • Client specific treatments • Alleviating jail and prison overcrowding • Supplementing supervisory functions of probation and parole agencies • Monitoring those with special program conditions

18. Halfway Houses and Community Residential Centers • Strengths and weaknesses of halfway houses • Effective in preventing criminal behaviour • Neither increases nor decreases property values • Assist clients in finding employment but not maintaining it • Provide for the basic needs of clients • Cost no more and probably less than incarceration but more than straight parole

19. Other Parole Conditions • Parolees are subject to several other conditions • Participate in group counselling • Vocational/educational training • Obtain employment • Fines • Community service • Restitution

20. Parole Boards and Early-Release Decision Making • Functions of parole boards • Evaluate prison inmates who are eligible for parole • Convene to determine whether a parolee’s parole should be revoked • Evaluate juveniles to determine release from detention • Grant pardons or commutation of sentences to prisoners

21. Parole Boards and Early-Release Decision Making • Parole board standards • Nature and circumstances of offenses • Inmate’s prior record • Inmate attitude toward family members, the victim, and authority • Institutional adjustment of inmates • Employment history and work skills • Physical, mental ,and emotional conditions • Insight into causes of criminal behaviour in the past • Efforts to find solutions to personal problems

22. Parole Boards and Early-Release Decision Making • Parole board decision making and inmate control • Influenced by many factors including prison overcrowding • Cases that parole boards must review • Property offenders and others, even murder, robbery, assault, and rape • Cases that parole boards do not have to review • Where offenders have been sentenced to life-without-parole or death

23. Salient Factor Scores and Predicting Parolee Success on Parole • Salient factor score designed to assist parole board members to make fair, objective, and just parole decisions • Federal Bureau of Prisons devised the Salient Factor Score 81 (SFS 81) consisting of six criteria which are outlined on the next slide…

24. Salient Factor Scores and Predicting Parolee Success on Parole • Federal Bureau of Prisons devised the Salient Factor Score 81 (SFS 81) consisting of six criteria • Priors • Prior commitments of more than 30 days • Age at current offense • Recent commitment free period • Probation/parole/confinement/escape status violator • Heroin/opiate dependence

25. The Process of Parole Revocation • Two stage proceeding • First stage involves offender appearance before the parole board to answer for allegations • If parole board determines offender is guilty, second stage is to decide punishment

26. Landmark Cases and Selected Issues • Morrissey v. Brewer (1972) • Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole v. Scott (1998) • Pennsylvania Department of Corrections v. Yeskey (1998)

27. Morrissey v Brewer (1972) Three Key Elements to this case: • Though parole revocation does not call for the full rights due a defendant in a criminal proceeding, a parolee's liberty involves significant values within the protection of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and termination of that liberty requires an informal hearing to give assurance that the finding of a parole violation is based on verified facts to support the revocation.

28. Morrissey v Brewer (1972) Three Key Elements to this case: 2. Due process requires a reasonably prompt informal inquiry conducted by an impartial hearing officer near the place of the alleged parole violation or arrest to determine if there is reasonable grounds to believe that the arrested parolee has violated a parole condition.

29. Morrissey v Brewer (1972) Three Key Elements to this case: 3. At the revocation hearing, which must be conducted reasonably soon after the parolee's arrest, the minimum due process requirements are: • (a) written notice of the claimed violations of parole; • (b) disclosure to the parolee of evidence against him; • (c) opportunity to be heard in person and to present witnesses and documentary evidence;

30. Morrissey v Brewer (1972) Three Key Elements to this case: 3. At the revocation hearing, which must be conducted reasonably soon after the parolee's arrest, the minimum due process requirements are: • (d) the right to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses (unless the hearing officer specifically finds good cause for not allowing confrontation); • (e) a "neutral and detached" hearing body such as a traditional parole board, members of which need not be judicial officers or lawyers; and

31. Morrissey v Brewer (1972) Three Key Elements to this case: • At the revocation hearing, which must be conducted reasonably soon after the parolee's arrest, the minimum due process requirements are: (f) a written statement by the fact-finders as to the evidence relied on and reasons for revoking parole

32. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole v Scott (1998) • A condition of Scott's Pennsylvania parole was that he refrain from owning or possessing weapons. Based on evidence that he had violated this and other such conditions, parole officers entered his home and found firearms, a bow, and arrows. • At his parole violation hearing, Scott objected to the introduction of this evidence on the ground that the search was unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment. The hearing examiner rejected the challenge and admitted the evidence. As a result, the parole board found sufficient evidence to support the charges and recommitted Scott to Prison. • Scott’s Appeals ascended to the US Supreme Court

33. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole v Scott (1998) • The US Supreme Court held that a Parolee’s 4th Ammendment Rights do not apply in parole revocation hearings. • The exclusionary rule does not bar the introduction at parole revocation hearings of evidence seized in violation of parolees' Fourth Amendment rights. • The State's use of such evidence does not itself violate the Constitution.

34. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections v. Yeskey (1998) • Yeskey was sentenced to 18 to 36 months in a Pennsylvania correctional facility, and was recommended for placement in a Motivational Boot Camp for first-time offenders, the successful completion of which would have led to his parole in just six months. • When he was refused admission because of his medical history of hypertension, he sued Pennsylvania’s Department of Corrections and several officials, alleging that the exclusion violated the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), Title II of which prohibits a “public entity” from discriminating against a “qualified individual with a disability” on account of that disability.

35. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections v. Yeskey (1998) • The US Supreme Court held that the American’s with Disabilities Act applied to inmates in State Prisons.