MINNESOTA SENTENCING GUIDELINES COMMISSION MEETING OUTCOMES: FIRST- AND SECOND-DEGREE CONTROLLED...

MINNESOTA SENTENCING GUIDELINES COMMISSION MEETING

OUTCOMES:

FIRST- AND SECOND-DEGREE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE

OFFENDERS

April 18, 2013

24/18/2013 MN Sentencing Guidelines Commission

WHY ARE WE STUDYING OUTCOMES?

HIGH DEPARTURE RATES

3

DEPARTURE RATES OVER TIME:FIRST- AND SECOND-DEGREE DRUG OFFENDERS

SENTENCED 2009-2011

4/18/2013

1st Degree 2nd Degree

Presumptive Prison (Presumptive Time)

253 493

Presumptive Prison (Less Prison Time)

158 158

Mitigated Disposition 316 430

5%

15%

25%

35%

45%

55%

65%

75%

85%

95%

35%

46%

22%15%

44%

40%

MN Sentencing Guidelines Commission

4

DEPARTURE RATES BY CRIMINAL HISTORY SCORE (CHS):FIRST- AND SECOND-DEGREE OFFENDERS

(2009-2011 COMBINED DATA)

4/18/2013

CHS 0 CHS 1 CHS 2 CHS 3 CHS 4 CHS 5 CHS 6+ Total

Prison (Presumptive Time)

229 103 105 111 65 46 87 746

Prison (Less Time) 54 64 48 45 41 24 40 316

Mitigated Disposition 479 119 61 39 22 13 13 746

5%

15%

25%

35%

45%

55%

65%

75%

85%

95%

30% 36%49%

57% 51% 55% 62%

41%

7%

22%

22%23% 32% 29%

29%

18%

63%

42%29%

20% 17% 16% 9%

41%

MN Sentencing Guidelines Commission


WHO DID WE STUDY AND WHAT DID WE COMPARE?

6

PEOPLE CONVICTED OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE FIRST- OR SECOND-DEGREE

Probation (N=965)

Sentenced to Probation Jan. 2007 to Dec. 2009(Downward Departure)

+ Local Confinement (Up to 365 Days)

= New Targeted Misd, GM, Felony Conv. Within 3-Years?

Prison (N=1,224)


Example: 10/1/2008Stay of Execution for 48 Months

Example: 365 days of local time as part of probation sentence

Example: Track until 10/1/2011+(2/3 of 365

days)=6/1/2012

Released from PrisonJan. 2007 to Dec. 2009

(Initial Commit)

= New Targeted Misd, GM, Felony Conv. within 3-

Years?

Example: 10/1/2008Released from Prison after serving 48-Month sentence

Example: Track until 10/1/2011

7

COMPARISONS AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Questions we set out to answer:1. Are first- and second-degree controlled substance offenders

who are put on probation (given mitigated dispositional departures) different than those who receive prison?

2. How successful are first- and second-degree controlled substance offenders who receive probation compared to those who receive prison? (Success measured by reconviction rates and revocation rates.)


• Age• Race• Gender• Region/District

• Criminal History

• LSI-R Score• New Convictions• Drug Type • Sale vs. Possession

Compare Probationers and Released Prisoners:

8

DEPARTURES – CASES IN STUDY:POSITION OF PROSECUTOR

(AS CITED BY THE COURT)Plea Agreement Rate and Position of

Prosecutor


• Probation (Dispositional)• 38% Plea Agreement• + 5% Prosecutor Recommend • + 10% Prosecutor Not Object• = 54% Combined• Prosecutor Objected –15%• Unknown – 32%

• Prison (Durational)• 63% Plea Agreement• + 2% Prosecutor Agreed• + 3% Prosecutor Not Object• = 67% Combined• Prosecutor Objected – 5%• Unknown – 28%

Departure Rates

Probation Prison0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

100%

62%

38%

Mitigated Disposi-tion

Presumptive Prison (Less Time)

Presumptive Prison (Presumptive Time)

9

DEPARTURES – CASES IN STUDY:MOST FREQUENTLY CITED REASONS

FOR DEPARTURE

Mitigated Dispositions• 71%- Amenable to Probation • 59%-Amenable to Treatment• 35%- Shows Remorse/Accepts Responsibility• 14%-Recommended by Court Services• 10%-Allow for long term supervision/compliance w

conditions• 6%-offender played minor or passive role

Mitigated Durations• 31%-Shows Remorse/Accepts Responsibility• 10%-offender played minor or passive role• 6%-Crime less onerous than usual• 5%-Save Resources/Pled early/Judicial Efficiency


10

STUDYING DEMOGRAPHICS

• Question 1:• Are first- and second-degree controlled substance

offenders who are put on probation (given mitigated dispositional departures) different than those who receive prison?

4/18/2013MN Sentencing Guidelines

Commission

11

DISTRIBUTION BY RACE & ETHNICITY, AGE, AND GENDER

Race & Ethnicity

Probation Prison0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

63 59

20 20

3 3

11 163 3

White Black Am. Indian

Hispanic Asian

Age Gender


Probation Prison

7591

259

Male Female

Probation Prison

19 12

2020

2221

21 29

15 154 3

<18 18-21 22-2526-30 31-40 41-50

12

Probation

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

20

6

26

47

Hennepin RamseyOther Metro Greater MN

Prison

15

10

11

64

4/18/2013MN Sentencing Guidelines Commission

DISTRIBUTION BY REGION

13

DISTRIBUTION BY CRIMINAL HISTORY SCORE (CHS) PERCENTAGE

Probation

No, 58

4

16

9

53 2 2 Criminal History

Score

0.5 1 2 3 4 5 6+

Any Eligible Criminal History?

Prison

No, 31

5

17

16

12

8

3 7

Criminal History Score

Any Eligible Criminal History?


14

DISTRIBUTION BY DRUG TYPE AND SALE VS. POSSESSION


Drug Type

Probation Prison0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

44%

35%

48%

61%

1% 1%7%

4%

Cocaine Meth Marj. Other/Unknown

Sale vs. Possession

Probation Prison0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

42% 40%

53%46%

5%

14%

Sale PossessionManuf. Meth

15

DISTRIBUTION BY LSI-R SCORE AND LEVEL

Probation Avg.=26 “Moderate”

Prison=27 “Moderate”


Proba-tion

Prison0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

10.53.3

26.824.6

42.549.1

17.6 17.2

2.6 2.5

HighMed-HighModerateLow-Mod-erateLow

• 5 Levels:• Low = 0-13;• Low-Moderate = 14-23;• Moderate = 24-33;• Medium-High = 34-40; and• High = 41-54.

Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R) Scores and

Levels

• 54 Questions & 10 Domains: • Criminal History,

Education/Employment, Financial, Family/Marital, Accommodations, Leisure/Recreation, Companions, Alcohol/Drug Problems, Emotional/Personal, Attitudes/Orientation

16

COMPARING AVERAGE LSI-R DOMAIN SCORES

“THE BIG FOUR”


Probation Prison0

1

2

3

4

5

4.45

2.8 2.9

21.31.3 1.5

Criminal His-tory Max=10Companions Max=5Emotional/ Personal Max=5Attitudes/Orientation Max=4

• 10 Domains: • Criminal History*• Education/Employment• Financial • Family/Marital• Accommodations• Leisure/Recreation• Companions* • Alcohol/Drug Problems• Emotional/Personal*• Attitudes/Orientation*

* “The Big Four” are considered highly predictive of risk.

17

LSI-R LEVEL BY CRIMINAL HISTORY SCORE

Probation

CH

S 0

CH

S .5

CH

S 1

CH

S 2

CH

S 3

CH

S 4

CH

S 5 CH

Tot

al

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

156 4 5 4 3 5 11

30

1526 24 24 27

10

27

39

5849 46

3849

40

50

43

1518 15 23

24

21

4040

18

1 3 5 19 5 10

3

High

Med-High

Moderate

Low-Mod

Low

Prison

CH

S 0

CH

S .5

CH

S 1

CH

S 2

CH

S 3

CH

s 4

CH

S 5

CH

S 6

+Tot

al

82 2 1 1 1 2 2 3

33

30 25 24 2418 12 14

25

4758

56 53 4952

4448

51

11 917 19 23 26

3230

18

1 2 2 3 3 410 6 3


18

WHAT DID WE LEARN FROM THE DEMOGRAPHICS?

• Question 1: • Are first- and second-degree controlled substance offenders

who are put on probation (given mitigated dispositional departures) different than those who receive prison?

• Answers – The 2 groups are only slightly different: • More probationers than prisoners had CHS of less than 2 (78% vs. 64%).• More prisoners than probationers were from Greater MN (64% vs. 47%).• Probationers were more likely to be a “Low” or “Low-

Moderate” on the LSI-R Scale. (37% vs. 28%).


19

STUDYING NEW CONVICTIONS AND REVOCATIONS

• Question 2:• How successful are first- and second-degree controlled

substance offenders who receive probation compared to those who receive prison? (Success measured by reconviction rates and revocation rates.)


Commission

20

NEW CONVICTION RATES

Probation

79.5%

20.5%

New Conviction

NoYes

Prison

73.4%

26.6%

New Conviction


21

NUMBER OF NEW CONVICTIONS (OFFENDERS W/ NEW CONVICTION ONLY)

Probation

Series10%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

76

18

52

FiveFourThreeTwoOne

Prison

Series10%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

72

18

721


22

NEW CONVICTION RATES BY SALE VS. POSSESSION

Probation

Sale Possession Manuf. Meth.

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

82 78 75

18 22 25

YesNo

Prison

Sale Possession Manuf. Meth.

7670

80

2431

20


23

NEW CONVICTION RATES BY CRIMINAL HISTORY SCORE

Probation

CH

S 0

CH

S .5

CH

S 1

CH

S 2

CH

S 3

CH

S 4

CH

S 5

CH

S 6+

Tota

l

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

82 8275 79 76 73 71 76 80

18 1825 21 24 27 29 24 21

YesNo

Prison

CH

S 0

CH

S .5

CH

S 1

CH

S 2

CH

S 3

CH

S 4

CH

S 5

CH

S 6+

Tota

l

86 86

72 7461 62

5260

73

14 14

28 2639 38

4840

27


24

NEW CONVICTION RATES BY LSI-R LEVEL

Probation

Low

Low-M

od

Mod

erat

e

Med

-Hig

hHig

hTo

tal

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

91 84 7870 64

79

9 16 2230 36

21

YesNo

Prison

Low

Low-M

od

Mod

erat

e

Med

-Hig

hHig

hTo

tal

88 8469 66

53

73

13 1631 34

47

27


25

NEW CONVICTIONS BY MOST SERIOUS OFFENSE LEVEL

Probation

No, 80%

6%4%

10%

Most Serious Conviction LevelNew Conviction?

Prison

No, 73%

6%4%

17%

Target. Misd. GM Felony

New Conviction?Most Serious

Conviction Level


26

NEW CONVICTIONS BY MOST SERIOUS OFFENSE TYPE

Probation

No, 80%

4%3%

5%9%

Person Property Drug Other

New Conviction? Offense Type

Prison

No, 73%

5%3%

10%8%

New Conviction? Offense Type


27

MOST SERIOUS NEW CONVICTION LEVEL BY LSI-R LEVEL

Probation

Low

Low-M

od

Mod

erat

e

Med

-Hig

hHig

hTo

tal

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

9184 78

70 6479

75

67

6

26 12

2027

1155

3

9

4

FelonyGMTarg. Mis.None

Prison

88 8469 66

53

73

85

7 6

3

6

3

2

53

3

4

3 919 24

40

18


28

PROBATIONERS ONLY:HOW MANY WERE REVOKED OR

HAD A NEW CONVICTION?

No, 73%

New Conv. Only, 16%

Revoked-New Conv., 5%

Revoked-No New Conv., 6%

Probationers Revoked or New Conviction?


Commission

NEW CONVICTION RATES BY CRIMINAL HISTORY & LSI-R LEVEL

CHS 0-0.5

Low/Lmod Moderate High/Hmod0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

89 8978 83

6878

11 1122 17

3222

No Conviction New ConvictionProbation:

Prison: No Conviction

CHS 1-2 CHS 3-6

4/18/2013 MN Sentencing Guidelines Commission 30

Low/Lmod Moderate High/Hmod

77 71 71

56

7359

23 2929

44

2741

Low/Lmod Moderate High/Hmod

79 8679

68 67 66

2114

2132 33 34

New Conviction

34

WHAT DID WE LEARN FROM NEW CONVICTIONS AND

REVOCATIONS?• Question 2: • How successful are first- and second-degree controlled

substance offenders who receive probation compared to those who receive prison? (Success measured by reconviction rates and revocation rates.)

• Answers: • The majority of both groups have no new conviction. • The new conviction rate for probationers is lower than for

prisoners (21% vs. 27%).• When new convictions and revocations are combined as a

measure, 27% of probationers were not successful.


35

WHAT DID WE LEARN FROM NEW CONVICTIONS AND

REVOCATIONS?• Answers (Cont.): • For both groups, new conviction rates increase as CHS

increase and as LSI-R Level increases.• Within CHS, new conviction rates increase as LSI-R Level

increases. This is more pronounced for prisoners.


MINNESOTA SENTENCING GUIDELINES COMMISSION MEETING OUTCOMES: FIRST- AND SECOND-DEGREE CONTROLLED...

Documents

Transcript of MINNESOTA SENTENCING GUIDELINES COMMISSION MEETING OUTCOMES: FIRST- AND SECOND-DEGREE CONTROLLED...