Probation Revocation

Probation revocation is an event in which the court, after finding that one or more probation violations have been proven, rescinds an individual’s probation sentence and executes a jail or prison sentence. Probation is a community-based sanction for criminal behavior, often represented as an alternative to incarceration. A person who is placed on probation serves a defined period in the community, during which the individual is subject to the supervision of a probation officer and must comply with and complete multiple conditions of probation. Probation conditions are requirements an individual is ordered to follow or complete during the period of probation. Conditions can include administrative requirements, such as reporting regularly to one’s probation officer; public safety requirements, such as no contact with the victim; and required programming or services, such as substance abuse treatment. If an individual fails to comply with or complete any of the conditions of probation, the probation officer can allege a probation violation to the court, detailing the noncompliant behavior. There are two main types of probation violations: new crimes and technical violations. When an individual commits a new offense while serving a term of probation, the offense can serve both as the basis for a probation violation and as a charge in a new criminal case. Violations of probation conditions that do not involve new criminal behavior are commonly referred to as “technical violations.” With the recognition of mass incarceration in the United States, attention has more recently been paid to the parallel growth of mass probation and the contribution of probation revocations to prison and jail populations. The Council of State Governments estimates that in 2017, 45 percent of prison admissions were due to probation and parole violations. Thus, more research and attention is being paid to determining how to reduce probation revocations. This article identifies points of discretion leading to probation revocation, discusses issues in defining probation outcomes, summarizes common predictors of probation revocation and recidivism, and discusses the impact of the form and intensity of probation on probation outcomes.

Modeling Repeat DUI Offender Probation Outcomes Using the Wisconsin Risk Need Assessment

This multiyear study of felony driving while intoxicated (DWI) probationers explores the efficacy of the Wisconsin Risk Need Assessment tool along with sociodemographic factors as measures of probation outcomes. To date, few studies have explored the relationship between risk assessment data and technical violations as well as subsequent arrests of individuals on probation. The sample for this study consists of 596 chronic DWI offenders on community supervision in one county who either had been rearrested for a new offense, violated a technical condition of their probation, or committed no violations within the first 5 years of community supervision. The findings are that older defendants and those who had more dependents were more likely to have committed a technical violation compared with the other two groups. Those rearrested for a new offense were slightly younger compared with the other two groups, less likely to be employed and younger at the age of first adjudication of guilt. This study highlights the limited overall utility of the Wisconsin tool in determining probation outcomes and that static factors may be as important as dynamic factors when developing a supervision strategy for chronic DWI offenders.

The Role of Fines and Fees on Probation Outcomes

Individuals on probation are commonly assessed fines and fees. These monetary sanctions serve different purposes. Fines are primarily used for more punitive purposes, whereas fees are often used to recover the costs of services provided. Regardless of ability to pay, monetary sanction payments are often required as a probation condition. Nonpayment therefore can result in violations and potentially revocations. However, little is known about how fines and fees operate specifically within probation. This current study explored legal and extralegal factors that influence the total amount of fines and fees assessed in individual cases, as well as the influence of fines and fees on probation revocations. The implications of the findings concentrate on ways to improve probation policies as well as probation officer’s practices as they relate to the collection and enforcement of monetary sanctions.

Examining the Influence of Financial Assistance and Employment Services on the Criminal Justice Outcomes of Women on Probation

Although low income is common across the U.S. probation population, women offenders experience it more than men. However, despite the connection between income and probation outcomes, limited research has been conducted on programs that could improve the financial circumstances of female probationers. This study examined the influence on probation outcomes of receiving government financial assistance programs and employment services. The findings indicated that participants who received Social Security Disability Insurance more often were less likely to become incarcerated. Implications include expanding cash assistance programs to provide more substantial monthly incomes for women probationers, particularly those with disabilities, in order to increase financial stability and improve criminal justice outcomes.

Racial Bias and LSI-R Assessments in Probation Sentencing and Outcomes

Risk assessments are now implemented in correctional settings across the United States as an evidence-based strategy to inform sentencing and supervision decisions. Despite growing research examining racial bias in the predictive validity of risk assessments, few studies have investigated racial bias in the context of judicial decision-making. We investigated the interactive contributions of race and Level of Service Inventory–Revised (LSI-R) risk assessments in predicting sentence length and probation outcomes in 11,792 Black and White probationers. Results showed White probationers at low-risk levels received longer sentences relative to Black probationers classified at the same risk levels. However, there were few differences at higher risk levels and no evidence of racial bias in the predictive accuracy of LSI-R assessments for other probation outcomes. Findings highlight the need for prospective and carefully controlled investigations into whether risk assessments improve the fairness and accuracy of sentencing and other risk management decisions.