There Is Still Much To Do: Criminal Justice Reform In Vermont

8/19/2019 There Is Still Much To Do: Criminal Justice Reform In Vermont

1/35

There Is Still Much To Do:

Criminal Justice Reform In Vermont

A report by Ben Simpson of the Bennington College Incarceration Task Force

1


2/35

Abstract:

The Bennington College Incarceration Task Force (BCIT) has two organizing

principles First! "ermont! as the rest of the nation! incarcerates too many people Secon#!

e$i#ence%base# policies can re#&ce the incarcerate# pop&lation while protecting! or

enhancing p&blic safety These principles are the basis for this report an# o&r policy

recommen#ations to re#&ce incarceration in "ermont 'e hope this report will be &sef&l

for "ermonts policymakers! practitioners in state go$ernment an# a#$ocates to combat

o$er%incarceration an# increase p&blic safety for all "ermonters

This $ersion of the report a##resses #ri$ing while intoicate# crimes an# the

concerns with! an# responses to! pretrial #etention

*


3/35

Introduction+$er the last fo&r #eca#es! America has embarke# on a large%scale eperiment of

incarceration! increasing o&r rate fo&r%fol# since the early 1,-.s1 'ith only /0 of the

worl#s pop&lation! the nite# States hol#s a 2&arter of the worl#s prison pop&lation (see

fig&re 1) +n any gi$en #ay! o$er ** million Americans are behin# bars an# more than

1../ million Americans ha$e some type of criminal or police recor# on file* There is no

historical or contemporary prece#ent for a state imprisoning so many of its s&b3ects

Figure 1: Committee on Causes and Consequences of High Rates of Incarceration and others, The Growth of

Incarceration in the United States: E!"oring Causes and Consequences#

The rapi# growth of the American prison pop&lation is pre#ominately #&e to policy

choices by state go$ernments The 4ational Aca#emy of Sciences report on 5The 6rowth

1 Committee on Ca&ses an# Conse2&ences of 7igh 8ates of Incarceration an# others! The Growth of Incarceration in the United States:: E!"oring Causes and Consequences, 99

* See Committee on Ca&ses an# Conse2&ences of 7igh 8ates of Incarceration an# others! The Growth of Incarceration in the United States:: E!"oring Causes and Consequences, 9 an# S :epartment of;&stice! Sur$e% of State Crimina" Histor% Information S%stems, &'1&: ( Crimina" )ustice Information

*o"ic% Re!ort#

9


4/35

of Incarceration in the nite# States< =ploring Ca&ses an# Conse2&ences> cites fi$e

#ifferent factors that ha$e contrib&te# to this epansion in incarceration! all b&t two of

them a #irect res&lt of policy planning by legislators an# eec&ti$es<

1 An increase in the &se of incarceration as a policy response #irecte# towar#s

&n#esirable beha$ior in society* Increasing se$erity of p&nishment! as seen in lengthy prison sentences!

partic&larly since the 1,,.s9 The rising crime rates in the 1,-.s an# 1,?.s@ The 5war on #r&gs>/ Changes in the 5pre$ailing attites towar# crime an# criminals that le#

prosec&tors! 3ges! an# parole an# other correctional officials to #eal more

harshly with> those con$icte# of crimes9

S&b3ecti$e analyses from a#$ocates ha$e long pointe# to #iminishing ret&rns from the

American eperiment with mass incarceration@ an# more recent ob3ecti$e empirical

analysis of o$er a #eca#e of #ata has s&pporte# this claim A Brennan Center for ;&stice

report fin#s that 5increase# incarceration ha# no statistically significant effect on

re#&cing $iolent crime an# ha# a small effect less than 10 on re#&cing property crime

in the 1,,.s an# the *...s Crimes responsi$eness to incarceration has #ecrease#

#ramatically o$er time &t simply! this report fin#s that! at c&rrent le$els! incarceration is

no longer as effecti$e a crime%re#&cing tool as it once was Dore incarceration #oes not

always lea# to less crime>/

9 Committee on Ca&ses an# Conse2&ences of 7igh 8ates of Incarceration an# others! The Growth of Incarceration in the United States:: E!"oring Causes and Consequences, -.

@ Da&er! Eing an# o&ng! Incarceration and Crime: ( Com!"e Re"ationshi! , G/ 8oe#er an# others! H'hat Ca&se# the Crime :eclineH **

@


5/35

The combination of &n#&ly long sentences! prison con#itions! an# crippling collateral

conse2&encesG ha$e le# to high reci#i$ism rates across the co&ntry beca&se these factors

are in%themsel$es contrib&te to criminality The con#itions people con$icte# of crimes are

s&b3ecte# to re#&ce an 5e%offen#ers employment opport&nities! lowers their wages! an#

tears apart marital bon#s an# family cohesion! making it #iffic&lt to li$e a con$entional

Jpro%social life after imprisonment>- +ne often cite# estimate shows that G/ million

Americans eperience 3ob insec&rity #&e to a past criminal con$iction?

The S eperiment in incarceration has pro#&ce# h&ge fiscal press&res!

partic&larly for the states After a#3&sting for inflation! 5states combine# corrections

spen#ing from 1,?. to *.., increase# by 3&st o$er @.. percent>, "ermont has also seen

&ns&stainable growth in criminal 3&stice spen#ing Since *..G! the "ermont :epartment

of Corrections bget has increase# by an a$erage of K@0 each year! cons&ming tens of

millions of tapayer #ollars (see fig&re *)1. Beca&se of these fiscal press&res!

#iminishing p&blic safety ret&rns an# moral costs there is a growing consens&s that

Americas eperiment with mass incarceration has faile# #espite #eep i#eological an#

political #ifferences

G 5ersons con$icte# of a crime are generally epose# to a n&mber of legal penalties an# #isabilities thatremain with them long after they ha$e f&lly ser$e# the sentence impose# by the co&rt These so%calle#Jcollateral conse2&ences of con$iction take many forms an# $ary wi#ely from 3&ris#iction to 3&ris#ictionIn a##ition to permanent changes in an in#i$i#&als legal stat&s as a res&lt of con$iction! the stigma of acriminal con$iction brings into play more s&btle an# wi#e%ranging forms of #iscrimination an# shaming>

From< Lo$e! Re"ief From the Co""atera" Consequences of a Crimina" Con$iction: ( State+%+State ResourceGuide#

- 'estern! *unishment and Inequa"it% in (merica# as fo&n# in Barker! H=plaining the 6reat AmericanCrime :ecline< A 8e$iew of Bl&mstein an# 'allman! 6ol#berger an# 8osenfel#! an# Mimring!H @,?%,

? 8o#rig&ez an# =msellem! HDillion 5nee# 4ot Apply>< The Case for 8eforming Criminal Backgro&n#Checks for =mploymentH

, Committee on Ca&ses an# Conse2&ences of 7igh 8ates of Incarceration an# others! The Growth of Incarceration in the United States:: E!"oring Causes and Consequences, 91/

1. "ermont :ept of Corrections! 5F *.1/ Bget resentation> @-

/


6/35

Figure &: (uthor with data from -ermont .e!t# of Corrections, /F0 &'1 2udget *resentation3 45#

:&e to the sheer $ol&me of incarceration in the nite# States! the prison pop&lation

can be re#&ce# with no a#$erse effect on p&blic safety For eample! states s&ch as

California an# 4ew ork! which ha$e re#&ce# their incarceration rates by o$er *.0 on

a$erage! ha$e seen large re#&ctions in their $iolent crime rates #&ring the same perio#11

'hile this may not be a ca&sal relationship! that is! the #ecline in prison pop&lations may

not be #irectly linke# with the #ecline in crime! it sho&l# be clear that these #ata cannot

show a ca&sal link between #eclining prison pop&lations an# increase# crime1*

11 Da&er! 6han#noosh an# ro3ect! HFewer risoners! Less Crime< A Tale of Three StatesH1* For eample! from 1,,@%*.1*! the / states with the largest #ecreases in their imprisonment rate (4ework! 4ew ;ersey! California! Darylan#! So&th Carolina) ha# higher #ecreases in their crime rate (@/0 ona$erage) than the / states ('isconsin! +regon! I#aho! 4orth :akota! 'est "irginia) with the largestincrease in their prison pop&lation! with an a$erage of a *-0 #ecrease in crime rates :ata from< The ewCharitable Tr&sts! Hrison an# Crime< A Comple LinkH

G


7/35

Figure 6: (uthor with data from -ermont .e!t# of Corrections, 7Facts and Figures, &'147, #

Figure 4: (uthor with data from -ermont .e!t# of Corrections .ata Request and United States .e!artment of )ustice,

Crime in the United States, &'11#

-


8/35

Incarceration and Corrections in -ermont

"ermont! like the rest of the co&ntry! has also greatly increase# the n&mber of

people &n#er state s&per$ision since the 1,-.s (see fig&res 9 an# @)19 The :+C still

s&per$ises o$er 1.!... "ermonters an# o&r incarceration rate has increase# by G0 since

*..@1@ 'hile "ermont has alrea#y &n#ertaken s&bstantial efforts to impro$e crime

pre$ention an# re%entry ser$ices! the state still s&ffers from a reci#i$ism problem! with

nearly half of release# inmates reoffen#ing within three years (See fig&re /)

1/

Figure : (uthor with data from -ermont .e!t# of Corrections, 7Facts and Figures, &'147, 18

Its important to remember that most reci#i$ism #oes not necessarily constit&te a

#anger to p&blic safety +$er ?-0 of probation an# G.0 of parole $iolations are not #&e

to new crimes b&t technical $iolations of con#itions! incling acti$ities that wo&l# be

legal if the person was not on probation or parole1G +ften! harsh collateral conse2&ences

19 "ermont :ept of Corrections! HFacts an# Fig&res! *.1@!H /1@ Ibi#! - an# @ respecti$ely1/ Ibi#! 1G-1G Ibi#! ?9%?@

?


9/35

s&ch as barriers to employment an# ho&sing contrib&te to a person $iolating con#itions or

reoffen#ing1-

"ermont has hea#e# many reform efforts Since 6o$ernor Sh&mlin anno&nce# the

5war on reci#i$ism> in *.1.! important legislation! a#ministrati$e efforts! an# eec&ti$e

actions! ha$e le# to a s&bstantial impro$ement in "ermonts criminal 3&stice system1?

'ith the passage of the 5'ar on 8eci#i$ism Act> an# earlier ;&stice 8ein$estment

Initiati$es in *.11 an# *..?! "ermont has re#&ce# its prison pop&lation growth! create#

alternati$es to incarceration! an# has generate# millions of #ollars in sa$ings for effecti$e

programming that combats reci#i$ism

1,

This past session the 6o$ernor signe# an

eec&ti$e or#er to JBan the Bo! an# Senator Benning has passe# a bill to epan#

ep&ngements*. These efforts ha$e helpe# more "ermonters get back on track! fin# 3obs!

an# become pro#&cti$e members of their comm&nities B&t! as the ;oint Legislati$e

;&stice +$ersight Committee pointe# o&t in their *.19 Ann&al 8eport! 5there is still m&ch

to #o>*1 This report sets o&t to carry on that work

Goa"s and 9ethods

This Bennington College Incarceration Task Force (BCIT) report has two #istinct

p&rposes First! it will collect #ata an# analysis concerning the c&rrent state of

incarceration in the nite# States an# "ermont in a central location in the format of a

1- 6o$ernor eter Sh&mlin! H6o$ Sh&mlin Signs =ec&ti$e +r#er to JBan the Bo! 7ighlights=p&ngement BillH An#! Logan! HInformal Collateral Conse2&encesH

1? Schwarzfeil#! HDaking It Co&nt< 'hat olicymakers =$erywhere Can Learn From "ermonts=perience Impro$ing 7ow They Tracke# 8eci#i$ismH

1, For eamples! see< 5The 'ar on 8eci#i$ism Act> ("T S1.?! *.11)N La "igne an# others! H;&stice8ein$estment Initiati$e State Assessment 8eportHN ;&stice Center! HIncreasing &blic Safety O 6eneratingSa$ings< +ptions for "ermont olicymakersH An# ;oint Legislati$e Corrections +$ersight Committee!HAnn&al 8eport of the Corrections +$ersight Committee!H 1@

*. See< 6o$ernor eter Sh&mlin! H6o$ Sh&mlin Signs =ec&ti$e +r#er to JBan the Bo! 7ighlights=p&ngement BillH An#! "ermont S11/! Act 9G! (*.1/)

*1 ;oint Legislati$e Corrections +$ersight Committee! HAnn&al 8eport of the Corrections +$ersightCommitteeH

,


10/35

narrati$e re$iew It will also present an# analyze #ata regar#ing policies that can be &se#

to sim&ltaneo&sly re#&ce the incarcerate# pop&lation while protecting or e$en enhancing

p&blic safety 'e hope this collection of #ata on the c&rrent sit&ation an# re$iew of

c&rrent state programming will be &sef&l for "ermonts policymakers! practitioners in

state go$ernment an# a#$ocates for their own initiati$es to combat o$er%incarceration an#

increase p&blic safety

Secon#! this report will make specific! e$i#ence%base# recommen#ations to

"ermont policymakers an# state agencies The BCIT will engage with stakehol#ers

regar#ing these recommen#ations an# a#$ocate for them thro&gho&t the coming year The

recommen#ations containe# here only constit&te one way to go abo&t #esigning

e$i#ence%base# policy responses to "ermonts o$er%incarceration problem 'e epect o&r

recommen#ations will e$ol$e as the BCIT engages with stakehol#ers an# the #ebates in

Stateho&se conference rooms

In the ser$ice of these goals! this report will be organize# by policy area! with a

literat&re re$iew of selecte# e$i#ence%base# criminal 3&stice reform policies followe# by

specific recommen#ations for "ermonts policy%makers! practitioners an# a#$ocates

The literat&re re$iews will rely as often as it is possible on systematic re$iews of

the scientific literat&re S&ch re$iews are recognize# as the best 2&ality scientific

e$i#ence a$ailable As =$ans (*.1.) eplains! 5systematic re$iews aim to s&mmarize

fin#ings from in#i$i#&al sties &sing systematic metho#s to appraise critically the

2&ality of the sties an# to select those appropriate for the s&mmary to a$oi# bias an# to

increase the likelihoo# that the s&mmarize# e$i#ence is close to the tr&th>** The S

re$enti$e Ser$ices Task Force of the Centers for :isease Control an# re$ention

** =$ans! H=$i#ence%Base# 8e$iews an# Deta%AnalysisH

1.


11/35

con#&cts systematic re$iews to 5help ens&re thoro&gh an# &nbiase# i#entification of the

rele$ant literat&re>*9

Section Bibliography

Barker! "anessa H=plaining the 6reat American Crime :ecline< A 8e$iew of Bl&mstein an#

'allman! 6ol#berger an# 8osenfel#! an# MimringH aw ; Socia" Inquir% 9/! no * (*.1.)< @?,%/1G

Committee on Ca&ses an# Conse2&ences of 7igh 8ates of Incarceration! 4ational 8esearch

Co&ncil! :i$ision of Beha$ioral an# Social Sciences an# =#&cation! an# Committee on Law an# ;&stice

The Growth of Incarceration in the United States:: E!"oring Causes and Consequences# =#ite# by ;eremy

Tra$is! Br&ce 'estern an# Ste$e 8e#b&rn 4ational Aca#emies ress! (*.1@)

:&rose! Datthew 8! Aleia : Cooper! an# 7owar# 4 Sny#er H8eci#i$ism of risoners 8elease#

in 9. States in *../< atterns From *../ to *.1.H 0U Schoo" of aw (*.1/)

Schwarzfeil#! Datthew HDaking It Co&nt< 'hat olicymakers =$erywhere Can Learn From

"ermonts =perience Impro$ing 7ow They Tracke# 8eci#i$ismH )ustice Center, Counci" of State

Go$ernments (*.1*)

*9 7arris an# others! HC&rrent Detho#s of the S re$enti$e Ser$ices Task Force< A 8e$iew of therocess!H 1

11


12/35

The ew Charitable Tr&sts Hrison an# Crime< A Comple LinkH *u"ic Safet% *erformance

*ro=ect (*.1@)

nite# States :epartment of ;&stice! Fe#eral B&rea& of In$estigation Crime in the United States,

&'11# September *.1*

S :epartment of ;&stice Sur$e% of State Crimina" Histor% Information S%stems, &'1&: (

Crimina" )ustice Information *o"ic% Re!ort# S :epartment of ;&stice +ffice of ;&stice rograms B&rea&

of ;&stice Statistics! ;an&ary! *.1@

"ermont :ept of Corrections HFacts an# Fig&res! *.1@H (nnua" Re!orts, -T .?C (*.1@)

"ermont :ept of Corrections! 5F *.1/ Bget resentation> Fisca" 0ear &'1 Go$ernor@s

2udget *resentation (*.1@)

'estern! Br&ce *unishment and Inequa"it% in (merica# 8&ssell Sage Fo&n#ation! (*..G)

1*


13/35

Driving Under the Influence

:ri$ing &n#er the infl&ence of a #r&g (:I) prosec&tions an# reci#i$ism are

significant contrib&tors to "ermonts prison pop&lation A "ermont Crime 8esearch

6ro&p report on felony sentencing from *..1 to *..G i#entifie# 5:'I 9P>! three or more

con$ictions of :I! as the most common final charge for both men an# women in

"ermont*@ From *.1* to Day of *.1/! a total of /!-@1 :I con$ictions ha$e been

han#e# #own by "ermonts co&rts 9?? of those con$ictions were :I 9 or :I 9P! a

felony con$iction +$er ,/0 of the :I 9 (P) con$icts spen# a me#ian of 1 year in

prison*/ re$enting e$en a small fraction of these criminal cases with re#&ctions in :Is

an# :I reci#i$ism wo&l# create cost sa$ings for the state an# increase p&blic safety

Intoicate# #ri$ers are a $ery serio&s p&blic health risk 4ationally! #ri$ers

intoicate# by alcohol acco&nt for 910 of all fatal crashes That is an a$erage of one :I

ca&se# #ri$ing fatality e$ery /* min&tes :I relate# crashes are estimate# to ha$e cost

the nite# States Q@,? billion in *.1.*G 8o&ghly 1 in / ki#s kille# in car crashes

in$ol$es an alcohol%impaire# #ri$er*-

In "ermont! the c&rrent 9%year a$erage of fatalities in crashes in$ol$ing a #ri$er or

motorcycle ri#er with a bloo# alcohol content (BAC) of .? an# abo$e is 1,*? In the most

recent #ata a$ailable for "ermont! the ratio of :I relate# #eaths to o$erall $ehicle #eaths

falls to 3&st slightly more than 1 o&t of e$ery @ fatal $ehicle crashes*, This is higher than

*@ A#ler an# +wen! HFelony Sentencing in "ermont *..1%*..G !H /*/ Crime 8esearch 6ro&p! H"ermont State 'i#e Sentencing Statistics *.1*%Day *.1/H*G 47TSA! HAlcohol%Impaire# :ri$ing (:+T 7S ?1* 1.*)!H 1*- R&inlan! Sh&lts an# 8#! HChil# assenger :eaths In$ol$ing Alcohol%impaire# :ri$ersH*? 6o$ernors 7ighway Safety rogram! H6o$ernors 7ighway Safety rogram< Ann&al 8eport *.1@!H 1/*, 47TSA! HAlcohol%Impaire# :ri$ing (:+T 7S ?1* 1.*)!H -

19


14/35

the *..- to *.11 time perio# where impaire# #ri$ers acco&nte# for 1-0 of all fatal

crashes in the state9.

:&ring the legislati$e session of 1,,- to 1,,? the "ermont legislat&re was attempting

to re#&ce reci#i$ism for those con$icte# of :I while increasing safety on "ermonts

roa#s :&ring the #eliberations on Act 11- the legislat&re came to two concl&sions that

are germane for this analysis<

1 5There is no cre#ible e$i#ence that legislation that increases :I penalties has

any meas&rable effect on the inci#ence of :I an# :I%relate# fatalities>* 5"ermonts eisting :I laws are alrea#y some of the to&ghest in the co&ntry

:espite these to&gh laws! many persons who are arreste# an# con$icte# of :I

contin&e to #rink an# #ri$e>91

:espite their fin#ings in 1,,-%?! the legislat&re contin&e# to strengthen :I penalties

in the face of :Is terrible social costs Act 4o /G (7*G@! of the *.11%* session)

create# pres&mpti$e man#atory minim&ms for m&ltiple :I offen#ers!9* an# ma#e it

against the law to knowingly pro$i#e a $ehicle to a person &n#er the infl&ence of a #r&g99

Figure 8: -ermont .e!t# of Hea"th, 7-ermont 2eha$iora" RisA Factor Sur$ei""ance S%stem: &'1& .ata Summar%7, 41#

9. 6o$ernors 7ighway Safety rogram! H6o$ernors 7ighway Safety rogram< 7ighway Safety lan*.1@!H 1*G

91 "ermont Center for ;&stice 8esearch! 2ureau of )ustice Statistics Fina" Re!ort, 19* The co&rt m&st ser$e a con$icte# m&ltiple :I offen#er with these minim&ms &nless the co&rt fin#sthat s&ch a sentence will not ser$e the interests of 3&stice an# p&blic safety Legislati$e Co&ncil! HAct 4o/G (7*G@) Crimes an# Criminal roce#&resN Dotor "ehiclesN ;iciaryN LaborH

99 Ibi#

1@


15/35

The a$ailable e$i#ence s&ggests that this emphasis on enforcement is not re#&cing the

n&mber of #r&nk #ri$ing e$ents in the state The n&mber of "ermonters a#mitting to

ha$ing ha# too many #rinks an# then #ri$ing has remaine# $irt&ally the same o$er the

past #eca#e (see fig&re G)9@ +$erall :I arrests ha$e slightly #ecline# o$er the past half%

#eca#e!9/ along with a *.0 #rop in :I mis#emeanor filings with "ermont co&rts since

*..,9G This #ecline in :I prosec&tion is probably not linke# to a tr&e change in the

beha$ior of :I offen#ers A Crime 8esearch 6ro&p sty fo&n# that :I arrests $ary

greatly year%by%year! e$en while the s&r$ey #ata on :I beha$ior ha$e remaine# the

same Therefore! the report concles that this $ariation in the n&mbers of people being

charge# with :I is most likely a reflection of $ariances in enforcement! not the targete#

beha$ior (#ri$ing while intoicate#)9- The BCIT knows of no #ata that wo&l# prompt a

reassessment of that concl&sion In short< enforcement patterns! not tr&e re#&ctions in

:I is the #ri$er of :I arrests an# prosec&tions

Ignition inter"ocA de$ices BII.

II:s are small han#hel# #e$ices similar to police breathalyzers They are wire# into a car

with a tamper%proof mo#&le in the engine bay The #ri$er m&st preform a breath test that

shows a BAC le$el9? below a pre%#etermine# limit (.* grams per #eciliter in "ermont

9@ "ermont :epartment of 7ealth! H"ermont Beha$ioral 8isk Factor S&r$eillance System< *.1* :ataS&mmary!H @1

9/ 6o$ernors 7ighway Safety rogram! H6o$ernors 7ighway Safety rogram< Ann&al 8eport *.1@!H *99G 4o A&thor 8ecor#e#! H"ermont ;iciary Ann&al Statistical 8eport for F *.1@H9- "ermont Center for ;&stice 8esearch! 2ureau of )ustice Statistics Fina" Re!ort#9? These #e$ices act&ally test breath alcohol concentration (BrAC)! b&t for the sake of simplicity! thisreport will &se the more common BAC meas&re thro&gho&t the tet

1/


16/35

r&les9,) before the car can be starte# The #ri$er m&st also re%test #&ring the operation of

the $ehicle "ermont r&les re2&ire re%tests at ran#om inter$als from fi$e to fifteen min&tes

#&ring operation@. The 4ational 7ighway Traffic Safety A#ministration (47TSA)@1 an#

the state of "ermont@* ha$e set stan#ar#s for I::s Accor#ing to these stan#ar#s an#

r&les! the #e$ices m&st be e2&ippe# with cameras! anti%tamper mechanisms! 6S! an#

other sec&rity feat&res These feat&res make it nearly impossible to circ&m$ent the #e$ice

an# #ri$e while intoicate# or ha$e another person #o the test in the offen#ers place@9

These r&les an# stan#ar#s also re2&ire the #e$ice man&fact&rers to collect #ata on

the #ate an# time of &se of the II: e2&ippe# $ehicleN attempts at tampering with the

#e$iceN the #ate! time an# BAC for each breath sample pro$i#e#N the #ate an# time of any

fail&res to pro$i#e samplesN an# ser$ice inter$als for the #e$ice itself@@ :&ring a

man#atory 9.%#ay ser$ice check by certifie# II: $en#ors! these #ata m&st be collecte#

an# place# in the &sers file Any e$i#ence of tampering! a fail&re to re%test! or BAC o$er

.* m&st be reporte# by the $en#or to the Commissioner of Dotor "ehicles an# the

"ermont :epartment of Corrections within *@ ho&rs@/

C&rrently! the biggest fail&re of II: programs is not the technical ability of the

#e$ices! the 47TSA states &ne2&i$ocally that Hinterlocks work as inten#e#H base# on the

9, "ermont :epartment of Dotor "ehicles! HIgnition Interlock rogram 8&les!H 1@. Ibi#! /@1 Dichael! HDo#el Specifications for Breath Alcohol Ignition Interlock :e$ices (BAII:s)H@* "ermont :epartment of Dotor "ehicles! HIgnition Interlock rogram 8&les!H *@9 Dayer! Ignition Inter"ocAs + eed to Dnow: ( Too"Ait for *o"ic%maAers, Highwa% Safet%

*rofessiona"s, and (d$ocates, G

@@ "ermont :epartment of Dotor "ehicles! HIgnition Interlock rogram 8&les!H /%G@/ Ibi#! ,%1.

1G


17/35


18/35

systematic meta%analyses represent a consens&s of the scientific comm&nity

#emonstrating that II:s are effecti$e

There are some problems with II:s The first an# most concerning is the #ata on

post%II: installation reci#i$ism All of the meta%analysesUre$iews cite# in the paragraph

abo$e show no re#&ction in reci#i$ism once the #e$ice is remo$e#/* Beca&se meta%

analyses are consi#ere# the gol# stan#ar# of e$i#ence! policymakers sho&l# operate &n#er

the ass&mption that II: &sage will not res&lt in post%II: remo$al #eclines in #rinking an#

#ri$ing

7owe$er! there are @ sties that show a long%term! post II: remo$al #ecline in

:I reci#i$ism/9 +ne s&ch sty from California fo&n# a post%remo$al #ecrease! b&t #i#

not separately estimate the II:s specific effect! re#&cing the $iability of the claim that II:

&sage was ca&sally linke# to long%term re#&ctions in reci#i$ism

+ne Swe#ish sty showe# that II:s linke# with intensi$e alcohol treatment

eliminate# long%term reci#i$ism in 1-1 participants/@ This s&ggests that cogniti$e

beha$ioral therapy combine# with the &se of II:s may reinforce the long%term

effecti$eness of both inter$entions The #ata collecte# by II:s can be &se# by cogniti$e

beha$ioral therapists! or :I co&rt personnel! to track their patients habits an# inform

their treatment protocols// In a##ition! the II:s create incenti$es for people with alcohol

problems to maintain their sobriety< if offen#ers want to be able to #ri$e! they m&st

abstain This incenti$e co&l# help reinforce abstinence from #rinking an#! if paire# with

/* Casano$a%owell an# others! H=$al&ation of State Ignition Interlock rograms< Interlock se AnalysesFrom *? States! *..G*.11 (8eport 4o :+T 7S ?1* 1@/) !H 9

/9 Diller an# others! H=ffecti$eness of Inter$entions for Con$icte# :I +ffen#ers in 8e#&cing8eci#i$ism< A Systematic 8e$iew of the eer%re$iewe# Scientific Literat&re!H 1?

/@ =l#er an# others! H=ffecti$eness of Ignition Interlocks for re$enting Alcohol%impaire# :ri$ing an#Alcohol%relate# Crashes< A Comm&nity 6&i#e Systematic 8e$iew!H 9G-

// Ibi#! 9-.

1?


19/35

effecti$e treatment co&l# help create long%term beha$ioral change an# f&rther increase

p&blic health benefits of II: &sage/G B&t more research is nee#e# to in$estigate this link

with high 2&ality e$i#ence/-

'hile these sties cannot be consi#ere# high%2&ality e$i#ence! their #ata an#

concl&sions sho&l# be consi#ere# in crafting policies that can be teste# at the state le$el

in or#er to assess the efficacy of s&ch programming These state%base# tests contrib&te to

the base of e$i#ence that can be &se# in f&t&re assessments of II:s long%term effects on

#rinking beha$ior "ermont co&l# contrib&te to this effort by creating a pilot program

linking II: &sage with cogniti$e beha$ioral therapy an# tasking the Crime 8esearch

6ro&p with a program o&tcome sty =$en if "ermont is not willing to epen# the

reso&rces on s&ch a program pilot! II:s are still a significant contrib&tion to p&blic safety

an# the state sho&l# increase their &sage

The secon# ma3or concern is that offen#ers may claim to not own a car! thereby

a$oi#ing man#atory installation of an II:! or #ri$e another persons car that #oes not ha$e

a #e$ice installe# olicymakers ha$e a few responses to this problem "ermont can

create incenti$es to &se II:s s&ch as shorter license s&spension or re#&ce# fines an# fees

Co&rts can increase follow%&p an# monitoring +r! the legislat&re can create a##itional

sanctions a co&rt can le$y against a person con$icte# of :I that choose to not install the

#e$ice/? A combination of these policy elements sho&l# be consi#ere# by the legislat&re

in collaboration with stakehol#ers

/G Ibi#! 9-1/- Casano$a%owell an# others! H=$al&ation of State Ignition Interlock rograms< Interlock se AnalysesFrom *? States! *..G*.11 (8eport 4o :+T 7S ?1* 1@/) !H 9

/? Sprattler! HIgnition Interlocks%%'hat o& 4ee# to Enow< A Toolkit for olicymakers! 7ighway Safetyrofessionals! an# A#$ocates!H *1

1,


20/35

-ermont@s II. *rogram

:&e to the #esign of "ermonts II: program! there is relati$ely little &ptake of the

#e$ices "ermonts II: program is $ol&ntary! complicate# an# epensi$e These factors

work against II: &ptake by in#i$i#&al :I offen#ers an# re#&ce the positi$e p&blic

health impact these #e$ices create The offen#er m&st wait for a specific perio# of time

#&ring their license s&spension before being eligible for II: instillation an# the granting

of a restricte# #ri$ers license (8:L! a re2&irement for the II: program) A first time

offen#er m&st wait 9. #ays post license s&spensionN a *n# time offen#er m&st wait ,. #ays

an# a 9

r#

time offen#er m&st wait a f&ll year before being eligible

/,

In a##ition to the

waiting perio#! the 8:L process costs a total of Q1-9..G. The offen#er m&st also absorb

all costs associate# with II: 5installation! p&rchasing or leasing! remo$al! calibrating!

#ata retrie$al! ser$icing an# any other fees charge# by the installerUman&fact&rer>G1 The

Coor#inator for 'in#sor Co&ntys :I Treatment Co&rt Stephanie Clark reporte# that

installation fees range from Q1@.%*?. in "ermontG* 8:L processing at the :D" an# the

installation cost for an II: e2&al a total start%&p cost for an offen#er of Q919%@/9 This

#oes not incle the monthly ser$icing an# #ata checks These costs an# waiting perio#s

constit&te consi#erable barriers for increase# II: &sage in "ermont! partic&larly for those

of lower socioeconomic stat&s Strengthening the f&n# for in#igent offen#ers will be

co$ere# below

/, *9 "SA V1*./(a)(*)! V1*./(m)! V1*.G(a)! V1*.? an# V1*1GG. "ermont :epartment of Dotor "ehicles! H"ermont Ignition Interlock rogram Fre2&ently Aske#R&estionsH

G1 Ibi#G* hone call with Stephanie Clark! Coor#inator 'in#sor Co&nty :I Treatment :ocket on +ctober *?th *.1/

*.


21/35

"ermonts Crime 8esearch 6ro&p points to instillation as a 5potential #ownsi#e>

for the implementation of a more s&bstantial II: program in "ermont beca&se

5generally companies ha$e contracts with bo stores like Best B&y which makes it har#

in "ermont to feasibly &se them 8esi#ents in "ermont might ha$e to #ri$e many ho&rs to

reach a bo store! potentially e$en o&t of state>G9 This concern is misplace#N II:s are

alrea#y a$ailable in "ermont from three #ifferent $en#orsG@ Collecti$ely! these three

$en#ors ha$e 1/ installation locations across the stateG/ Dost of these locations are a&to

repair shops! car #ealerships! or a&tomoti$e electronics stores There is no nee# for access

to big bo stores! tho&gh the problems of access! partic&larly for people with restricte#

licenses or those lacking the financial reso&rces for tra$el an# install costs are real

concerns

There are a few co&nter%points to these cost concerns< first! increasing the #eman#

for II: $en#ors! II:s installers an# an increase# client base for companies pro$i#ing

monitoring will #ri$e #own costs for in#i$i#&al :I offen#ers an# $en#ors F&rther!

increasing &se of II:s will #ri$e #own reci#i$ism for :I! a $ery common an# costly

problem with se$ere p&blic health conse2&ences 8e#&ctions in reci#i$ism may create

sa$ings that the state can re%in$est in the II: program an# other criminal 3&stice

programming Some of these f&n#s co&l# be &se# to s&pport the f&n#ing mechanism for

the in#igent! f&n# #ata collection an# monitoring in$estments in the :epartment of Dotor

"ehicles! an# f&n# Crime 8esearch 6ro&p assessments of the II: program or other trials

G9 The "ermont Center for ;&stice 8esearch! .ri$ing Under the Inf"uence .ri$ing


22/35

S&ch f&n#s may be nee#e# to epan# the II: program In its *.19 =ffecti$eness

Sty the "ermont :epartment of Dotor "ehicles ("T :D") state# that 5mo#ification

of c&rrent stat&tes to man#ate the &se of ignition interlock #e$ices wo&l# s&rely increase

the n&mbers of those enrolle# in the II: programN howe$er! a s&bstanti$e change s&ch

as this wo&l# place an &n#&e h&man reso&rces b&r#en on the :epartment>GG In their *.1*

report on II: &sage! the "T :D" #etaile# the staffing re2&irements for II: #ata analysis

For each batch of @.. participants in the II: program! the "T :D" nee#s one f&lltime

#ata processor an# one a##itional employee for application processing an# program

monitoring

G-

As of *.19! the "ermont II: program ha# 3&st o$er @.. participants!

maing o&t the last reporte# staffing allocation by the :epartmentG?

Recommendations

These recommen#ations will repeate#ly call for stakehol#er engagement by the

legislat&re to fin# policy options that will be s&pporte# by the broa#est coalition possible

These stakehol#ers incle! b&t are not limite# to<

GG I#e! H:epartmental Demoran#&m< Act 4o 1*G K An Act 8elating to the Sty an# 8ecommen#ation of Ignition Interlock :e$ice Legislation =ffecti$eness Sty!H 9

G- I#e! H:epartmental Demoran#&m< Act 4o 1*G K An Act 8elating to the Sty an# 8ecommen#ation of Ignition Interlock :e$ice Legislation 8eport =$al&ating the Ignition Interlock :e$ice ilot ro3ect!H *

G? Dothers Against :r&nk :ri$ing! HIgnition Interlocks< =$ery State! for =$ery Con$icte# :r&nk :ri$erH

**


23/35

• State highway safety offices

• Law enforcement officials! Law enforcement liaisons

• ;ges

• State licensing agencies

• rosec&tors

• :efense attorneys

• robation personnel

• Traffic safety reso&rce prosec&tors

• ;icial o&treach liaisons

• Toicology laboratory a&thorities

• Alcohol an# #r&g treatment personnel

• Ignition interlock $en#orsG,

=ngaging these stakehol#ers will be essential to get the greatest 5b&y%in> for the

programming changes an# will increase their o$erall effecti$eness It will also help

legislators #esign changes that #o not #amage ongoing efforts or #&plicate programming!

an# will limit &ninten#e# conse2&ences for state agencies

The most important consi#eration for policymakers< how #oes the state increase

the &se of II:s A 47TSA analysis of II: &sage in the states from *..G%11 has shown

that 3&ris#ictions that re2&ire II: instillation for all offen#ers! incling first%time

offen#ers! 5s&bstantially increase interlock &se>-. an# thereby ha$e better p&blic health

an# safety o&tcomes "ermont legislators sho&l# consi#er s&ch a re2&irement as the gol#

stan#ar# of I:: policy-1

Altho&gh! #&e to the concerns #etaile# abo$e! s&ch a re2&irement may be

&nrealistic in the "ermont contet As an alternati$e! the legislat&re co&l# create

a##itional sanctions a co&rt can le$y against a person con$icte# of :I! &nless they

G, Sprattler! HIgnition Interlocks%%'hat o& 4ee# to Enow< A Toolkit for olicymakers! 7ighway Safetyrofessionals! an# A#$ocates!H 1.

-. Casano$a%owell an# others! H=$al&ation of State Ignition Interlock rograms< Interlock se AnalysesFrom *? States! *..G*.11 (8eport 4o :+T 7S ?1* 1@/) !H *,

-1 See< Dothers Against :r&nk :ri$ing! HIgnition Interlocks< =$ery State! for =$ery Con$icte# :r&nk:ri$erH An#! 4ational 7ighway Traffic Safety A#ministration! 9ode" Guide"ine for State Ignition

Inter"ocA *rograms# BRe!ort >o# .?T HS 11 #

*9


24/35

choose to install a #e$ice These policy #esign options sho&l# be #ebate# in the

legislat&re with as many stakehol#ers as possible

The legislat&re sho&l# also consi#er creating a mechanism for early release from a

:I relate# sentence if the person is willing to install an II: an# atten# cogniti$e

beha$ioral therapy This co&l# generate imme#iate cost%sa$ings that wo&l# then be

f&nnele# into the II: program! following the ;&stice 8ein$estment mo#el This

rein$estment strategy co&l# bri#ge the fiscal gap in the "T :D"s monitoring program

an# create the reso&rces nee#e# to scale%&p the program It wo&l# also increase the p&blic

health benefits of the II: program an# re#&ce :I reci#i$ism! a long%term goal of the

legislat&re The legislat&re sho&l# #isc&ss this option with rele$ant stakehol#ers to ga&ge

s&pport for s&ch a proposal The legislat&re sho&l# also re2&est a ;oint Fiscal +ffice sty

on possible cost sa$ings from #ecrease# :I reci#i$ism o$er time &sing the estimates of

re#&ctions in reci#i$ism from the meta%analyses re$iewe# abo$e an# incle a cost

assessment of the early release proposal

F&n#ing for in#igent offen#ers is a har# fiscal problem! b&t 9. states ha$e

#esigne# programs for the in#igent! incling "ermont-* In a *.11 report the "T :D"

i#entifie# @ ways f&n#s co&l# be raise# for an in#igent f&n#<

-* Dothers Against :r&nk :ri$ing! HFirst%Time +ffen#er Ignition Interlock Laws!H 1

*@


25/35

• Charge a larger fee for restricte# #i$ers licenses (8:Ls) from those with

means

• Charge 8:L renewal fee

• Charge 8:L application fee

• Charge II: installer licensing fee-9

In a##ition to these @ f&n#ing so&rces! the legislat&re sho&l# also consi#er a rein$estment

strategy for creating f&n#ing for the in#igent 'hile "ermont #oes ha$e a in#igent f&n#!

those f&n#s are only a$ailable 5&pon receipt of proof of installation of an interlock the

co&rt may or#er that the fine of an in#igent person con#itionally be re#&ce# by one%half

to #efray the costs of the interlock>-@ 'hile le$eling a fine an# allowing some of the fine

to be wa$e# by the co&rt co&l# be an effecti$e mechanism for incenti$izing those who

co&l# affor# an II: to get one! it will not be effecti$e for those who cannot affor# the II:

instillation an# 8:L process in the first place Legislators sho&l# consi#er changing the

in#igent f&n#ing str&ct&re to incle a more pro%acti$e mechanism! s&ch as paying for the

in#igent persons 8:L an# II: fees o&tright! or assisting in payment! while maintaining

the threat of co&rt impose# fines for non%compliance

Besi#es the f&n#ing mechanism! creating a way to assess eligibility for in#igent

assistance is a serio&s policy #ilemma A *.1@ 47TSA report cites 9 eamples of

in#igence assessment mechanisms<

-9 I#e! H:epartmental Demoran#&m< Act 4o 1*G K An Act 8elating to the Sty an# 8ecommen#ation of Ignition Interlock :e$ice Legislation 8eport on the Sty! Implementation lanning! 8eporting an#8ecommen#ations!H 1%*

-@ Dothers Against :r&nk :ri$ing! HFirst%Time +ffen#er Ignition Interlock Laws!H @9

*/


26/35

• 5roof of enrollment in one or more p&blic assistance programs (4D)

• Financial :isclos&re 8eport Forms itemizing so&rces of income an# epenses

(4)

• 6ross income as a percentage of the Fe#eral po$erty g&i#elines (C+)> -/

In or#er to sa$e on a#ministrati$e costs an# for ease of application to the program!

we recommen# the legislat&re a#opt the proof of enrollment in p&blic assistance

programming as the meas&re &se# to e$al&ate eligibility for in#igent assistance an# make

the e$al&ation a stan#ar# part of II: application at the "T :D"

Section BibliographyA#ler! 8obin! an# ;oan +wen HFelony Sentencing in "ermont *..1%*..G H -ermont Center for

)ustice Research

Beirness! :o&glas ;! an# a&l 8 Dar2&es HAlcohol Ignition Interlock rogramsH Traffic In=ur% *re$ention /! no 9 (*..@)< *,,%9.?

Casano$a%owell! T! ; 7e#l&n#! ' Leaf! an# ; Tison H=$al&ation of State Ignition Interlock

rograms< Interlock se Analyses From *? States! *..G*.11 (8eport 4o :+T 7S ?1* 1@/) H >ationa"

Highwa% Traffic Safet% (dministration ; Centers for .isease Contro" and *re$ention (*.1/)Crime 8esearch 6ro&p H"ermont State 'i#e Sentencing Statistics *.1*%Day *.1/H ! Day! *.1/=l#er! 8an#y '! 8obert "oas! :o&g Beirness! 8&th A Sh&lts! :a$i# A Sleet! ;ames L 4ichols!

8ichar# Compton! an# Task Force on Comm&nity re$enti$e Ser$ices H=ffecti$eness of Ignition Interlocks

for re$enting Alcohol%impaire# :ri$ing an# Alcohol%relate# Crashes< A Comm&nity 6&i#e Systematic

8e$iewH (merican )ourna" of *re$enti$e 9edicine @.! no 9 (*.11)< 9G*%9-G6o$ernors 7ighway Safety rogram H6o$ernors 7ighway Safety rogram< Ann&al 8eport

*.1@H .e!artment of *u"ic Safet% 6o$ernors 7ighway Safety rogram H6o$ernors 7ighway Safety rogram< 7ighway Safety

lan *.1@H .e!artment of *u"ic Safet% I#e! 8obert H:epartmental Demoran#&m< Act 4o 1*G K An Act 8elating to the Sty an#

8ecommen#ation of Ignition Interlock :e$ice Legislation =ffecti$eness StyH (genc% of Trans!ortation,

.e!artment of 9otor -ehic"es (*.19) WWW H:epartmental Demoran#&m< Act 4o 1*G K An Act 8elating to the Sty an#

8ecommen#ation of Ignition Interlock :e$ice Legislation 8eport =$al&ating the Ignition Interlock :e$ice

ilot ro3ectH (genc% of Trans!ortation, .e!artment of 9otor -ehic"es (*.1*) WWW H:epartmental Demoran#&m< Act 4o 1*G K An Act 8elating to the Sty an#

8ecommen#ation of Ignition Interlock :e$ice Legislation 8eport on the Sty! Implementation lanning!

8eporting an# 8ecommen#ationsH (genc% of Trans!ortation, .e!artment of 9otor -ehic"es (*.11)Legislati$e Co&ncil HAct 4o /G (7*G@) Crimes an# criminal proce#&resN motor $ehiclesN

3iciaryN laborH Summar% of (ct Dayer! 8 Ignition Interlocks % 'hat o& 4ee# to Enow< A Toolkit for olicymakers! 7ighway

Safety rofessionals! an# A#$ocates * e# 4ational 7ighway Traffic Safety A#ministration ! Febr&ary!

*.1@Dichael! ;effrey HDo#el Specifications for Breath Alcohol Ignition Interlock :e$ices (BAII:s)H

>ationa" Highwa% Traffic Safet% (dministration (*.1/)

-/ Sprattler! HIgnition Interlocks%%'hat o& 4ee# to Enow< A Toolkit for olicymakers! 7ighway Safetyrofessionals! an# A#$ocates!H 1G

*G


27/35

Diller! eter 6! Ashlee C&rtis! An#ers SXn#erl&n#! An#rew :ay! an# 4ic :roste H=ffecti$eness of

Inter$entions for Con$icte# :I +ffen#ers in 8e#&cing 8eci#i$ism< A Systematic 8e$iew of the eer%

re$iewe# Scientific Literat&reH The (merican =ourna" of drug and a"coho" ause @1! no 1 (*.1@)< 1G%*,Dothers Against :r&nk :ri$ing HFirst%Time +ffen#er Ignition Interlock LawsH 9others (gainst

.runA .ri$ing >ationa" ?ffice (*.1/) WWW HIgnition Interlocks< =$ery State! for =$ery Con$icte# :r&nk :ri$erH 9others (gainst

.runA .ri$ing >ationa" ?ffice (*.1/) 4ational 7ighway Traffic Safety A#ministration Do#el 6&i#eline for State Ignition Interlock

rograms (8eport 4o :+T 7S ?11 ?/,) 'ashington! :C! :ecember! *.19 YYYYYY HAlcohol%Impaire# :ri$ing (:+T 7S ?1* 1.*)H Traffic Safet% Facts: &'16 .ata 4o A&thor 8ecor#e# H"ermont ;iciary Ann&al Statistical 8eport for F *.1@H )udicia"

Communit% Court Statistics and Re!ortsR&inlan! Eyran! 8&th A Sh&lts! an# 8ose A 8# HChil# assenger :eaths In$ol$ing Alcohol%

impaire# :ri$ersH *ediatrics 199! no G (*.1@)< ,GG%,-*Sprattler! Earen HIgnition Interlocks%%'hat o& 4ee# to Enow< A Toolkit for olicymakers! 7ighway

Safety rofessionals! an# A#$ocatesH Re!ort .?T HS ?11 (*..,)< ??9The "ermont Center for ;&stice 8esearch :ri$ing n#er the Infl&ence :ri$ing 'hile Intoicate#

Literat&re 8e$iew Febr&ary! *.1@

YYYYY 2ureau of )ustice Statistics Fina" Re!ort# 4o$ember 9.! *..,"ermont :epartment of 7ealth H"ermont Beha$ioral 8isk Factor S&r$eillance System< *.1* :ata

S&mmaryH -ermont 2eha$iora" RisA Factor Sur$ei""ance S%stem"ermont :epartment of Dotor "ehicles HIgnition Interlock :e$ice Dan&fact&rers H -ermont

.e!artment of 9otor -ehic"es, (genc% of Trans!ortation (*.1@) WWW HIgnition Interlock rogram 8&lesH "ermont :epartment of Dotor "ehicles! Agency of

Transportation WWW H"ermont Ignition Interlock rogram Fre2&ently Aske# R&estionsH .e!artment of 9otor

-ehic"es, (genc% of Trans!ortation'illis! Charlene! Sean Lybran#! an# 4icholas Bellamy HAlcohol Ignition Interlock rogrammes

for 8e#&cing :rink :ri$ing 8eci#i$ismH Cochrane .ataase S%st Re$ @ (*..@)

*-


28/35

retrial Detention

The a$ailable e$i#ence s&ggests that as it is &se# now! pretrial #etention is a net

negati$e for "ermonts criminal 3&stice system Its o$er&se harms p&blic safety!

comm&nities! an# the #efen#ant =cessi$e #etention takes &p be#%space in "ermonts

mae# o&t prison system an# can help eplain why "ermont has sent h&n#re#s of inmates

to o&t%of%state for%profit prisons 7istorically &n2&estione# policies! s&ch as bail!

#iscriminate against the poor while not increasing p&blic safety or re#&cing #efen#ants

fail&re to appear (FTA) at their co&rt #ate This section of the report will gi$e an appraisal

of "ermonts pretrial #etention pop&lation! present the most c&rrent research on pretrial

#etention! an# en# with policy recommen#ations for "ermonts legislators

"ermonts pretrial #etention pop&lation consists of people who are hel# pen#ing

trial! many of whom cannot affor# bail!-G an# those hel# for $iolating the con#itions of

release &n#er bail! probation! or parole programs-- Since *..@! the a$erage #aily pretrial

pop&lation has hel# between 9/. an# @.. with ? o&t of the last @9 2&arters #ipping below

9/. an# ? abo$e @..-? That is abo&t 1G%1,0 o&t of "ermonts total incarcerate#

pop&lation as of fiscal year! *.1@-, nlike the rest of the co&ntry! "ermont has an

integrate# prison system There are no local 3ails to ho&se people awaiting trial or

awaiting probation or parole hearings For e$ery be# taken &p by a pretrial #efen#ant!

who is technically pres&me# innocent! a be# for a con$icte# criminal is forfeite# This

has a #irect effect on the nee# for "ermont to sen# prisoners o&t of state The fiscal year!

-G 6oswami! HDore :efen#ants Taking p Be#s in "ermont ;ails H-- ;oint Legislati$e Corrections +$ersight Committee! HAnn&al 8eport of the Corrections +$ersightCommittee!H *%@

-? "ermont :epartment of Corrections! HF *.1 Bget resentation!H 11-, A&thors calc&lation base# on n&mbers in the Ibi#! 11

*?


29/35

*.1G contract for o&t of state prison be#s with the for%profit 6=+ 6ro&p prison company

is epecte# to cost the state abo&t Q-* million?.

Figure 5: -ermont .e!t# of Corrections, 7Facts and Figures, &'147, &#

:espite the repeate# concerns epresse# by the ;oint Legislati$e ;&stice +$ersight

Committee! "ermont has not been able to s&bstantially re#&ce its pretrial #etention

pop&lation?1 It is politically an# morally #iffic&lt for lawmakers or other state officials to

release potentially #angero&s people from prison This is partic&larly tr&e in the aftermath

of a serio&s crime For instance! the ;oint Legislati$e ;&stice +$ersight Committee points

to a br&tal *..? killing of a yo&ng girl as a contrib&tor to the increasing #etention

?. 7ewitt! H+&t%of%state risoners 7ea#e# to DichiganH?1 See ;oint Legislati$e Corrections +$ersight Committee! HAnn&al 8eport of the Corrections +$ersightCommittee!H * an# ;oint Legislati$e Corrections +$ersight Committee! HAnn&al 8eport of the Corrections+$ersight Committee!H 9

*,


30/35

pop&lation?* The #ata cannot s&pport that claim?9 b&t its citation by policymakers is

ill&minating Lawmakers constit&ents want to be safe Lawmakers want to keep

#angero&s people off the streets There is always the possibility! an# in the long r&n! the

ine$itability that some release# people will h&rt others (4ationally! abo&t 9*0 of felony

#efen#ants commit a crime or FTA when release# from pretrial #etention?@) Beca&se of

this common interest between the go$erne# an# go$ernors! an# the fear of releasing

pretrial #efen#ants! it is still the norm for legislators! 3ges! an# the p&blic to err on the

si#e of ecessi$e pretrial #etention in the to&gh on crime era B&t! to&gh on crime is not

the same as smart on crime

Harms of *retria" .etention

'hen a person is #etaine# awaiting trial! they are often &nable to maintain family

an# comm&nity contacts or employment ?/ Family contacts an# comm&nity connections

are highly correlate# with #ecrease# criminality in release# pop&lations?G ;ob #isr&ption

ca&se# by pretrial #etention can lea# to economic r&in for the poor an# most marginalize#

in society?- The negati$e effect on employment lasts beyon# the perio# of act&al

imprisonment as those hel# in pretrial #etention are less likely to fin# a 3ob after

a#3ication as well??

?* ;oint Legislati$e Corrections +$ersight Committee! HAnn&al 8eport of the Corrections +$ersightCommittee!H *

?9 "ermonts #etention pop&lation spike# in 1,,G! hitting the @.. mark in *..*! G years before the *..?m&r#er This s&ggests that the #ri$er of #etention is not the crime cite# by the ;oint Legislati$e ;&stice+$ersight Committee

?@ Danns! HLiberty Takings< A Framework for Compensating retrial :etainees!H **?/ S&bramanian an# others! HIncarcerations Front :oor< The Dis&se of ;ails in America!H 1/?G Danns! HLiberty Takings< A Framework for Compensating retrial :etainees!H *G?- Initiati$e! The Socioeconomic Im!act of *retria" .etention, *-?? Le$in an# Criminology! Eamining the Efficac% of *retria" Re"ease Conditions, Sanctions andScreening with State Court *rocessing Statistics .ataseries, *

9.


31/35

The economic pain ca&se# by #etention has a partic&larly negati$e effect on

p&blic safety The 4 has fo&n# that re#&ce# income is associate# with an increase in

crime in a large cross%co&ntry analysis o&th an# male &nemployment play a partic&lar

roll in this association?, =mployment is a metho# of social control an# #ecreases

criminality! b&il#s self%esteem! an# reinforces con$entional! as oppose# to criminal

beha$ior ,. =mployment is also positi$ely associate# with lower rates of FTA in pretrial

pop&lations,1 It follows from these fin#ings that in#i$i#&als who s&ffer from re#&ce#

income beca&se of pretrial #etention linke# &nemployment wo&l# be more likely to t&rn

to crime when they are e$ent&ally release#! as o$er ,.0 of "ermonts incarcerate#

pop&lation will e$ent&ally be,*

There is a significant amo&nt of e$i#ence showing that #efen#ants hel# in pretrial

#etention ha$e worse o&tcomes for their criminal cases! no matter the e$i#ence against

them! prior con$ictions! or e$en the serio&sness of the charge,9 This lea#s to more

imprisonment an# harsher sentences for low an# me#i&m risk in#i$i#&als if they are hel#

#espite p&blic safety concerns! for instance lacking the f&n#s for bail 'e know that

going to prison increases criminal beha$ior an# s&b3ecting these #efen#ants to "ermonts

prisons before they are e$en con$icte# of a crime lea#s to more criminal beha$ior o$erall

This theoretical concl&sion is born o&t by some eperimental #ata :etainees that

were assesse# as low%risk by the $ali#ate# Eent&cky retrial 8isk Assessment were @.0

?, Dalby! :a$is an# Statistics! 9onitoring the Im!act of Economic Crisis on Crime, 9G

,. "isher! 'interfiel# an# Coggeshall! H=%offen#er =mployment rograms an# 8eci#i$ism< A Deta%analysis!H *,/%G

,1 Bechtel! Lowenkamp an# 7olsinger! HI#entifying the re#ictors of retrial Fail&re< A Deta%analysis!H G%-

,* Calc&late# by s&btracting the percentage of people ser$ing effecti$e life sentences from the rest of theincarcerate# pop&lation! which incles #etainees

,9 S&mmary of research from the B&rea& of ;&stice Assistance cite# in epin! H*.1*%*.19 olicy aper=$i#ence%Base# retrial 8elease!H / an# Danns! HLiberty Takings< A Framework for Compensatingretrial :etainees!H *G%-

91


32/35

more likely to commit new crimes before trial if hel# for *%9 #ays as compare# to their

co&nterparts who were hel# for less than *@ ho&rs Those hel# for ?%1@ #ays #&ring

pretrial #etention were /10 more likely to reci#i$ate within * years of completing a

criminal con$iction than those hel# for less than *@ ho&rs,@

These are negati$e! b&t &nfort&nately necessary si#e effects of #etention for those

hel# for p&blic safety concerns B&t when #etention practices are not targete# specifically

towar#s offen#ers that pose a serio&s risk to p&blic safety! as c&rrently practice# in

"ermont! this o&tcome is &nnecessary an# nee#lessly #estr&cti$e Taken together! the

research re$iewe# abo$e s&ggests that &nnecessary pretrial #etention lea#s to #isr&ptions

in employment an# the economic health of a #efen#ant an# their family! a rise in post%

con$iction reci#i$ism! increase# FTA! rearrests an# other negati$e o&tcomes

This re$iew of the negati$e impacts of pretrial #etention is not to say "ermont

sho&l# open the floo#gates Some people nee# to be in prison The i#ea is to be smart on

crimeN lock%&p those who nee# to be kept from society for safetyN #o not lock%&p those

who are low or me#i&m risk to society! which act&ally increases criminality in those

pop&lations! thereby increasing the #anger to society in the long r&n The following

policy recommen#ations will go some way towar#s a##ressing these concerns

Recommendations

There are no easy answers for "ermonts pre%trial #etention problem The interaction

between 3ges! prosec&tors an# legislati$e re2&irements is a complicate# one that cannot

easily be #eciphere# B&t! there are a few clear ways forwar#

,@ Lowenkamp! "an4ostran# an# 7olsinger! HThe 7i##en Cost of retrial :etentionsH

9*


33/35

First! the ;&stice Committees sho&l# contin&e to assess an# re$iew the 'in#ham

Co&nty =lectronic Donitoring ilot ro3ect The ;oint Fiscal +ffice (;F+) an# the Crime

8esearch 6ro&p ha$e been con#&cting an assessment of the program The ;F+ cites two

goals of the program! increase# p&blic safety an# cost sa$ings for the :+C In the same

preliminary financial analysis! the ;F+ concles that! 5there is reason to belie$e the

ilot ro3ect can achie$e both of these goals>,/ If the final analysis from the Crime

8esearch 6ro&p shows similar res&lts! the electronic monitoring program sho&l# be

eten#e# to the rest of the state This epansion sho&l# foc&s on high%risk offen#ers! an#

not the general #etention pop&lation

Secon#! "ermonts legislators sho&l# consi#er remo$ing monetary bail Donetary

bail is an anachronism that #oes not ser$e the p&blic interest It #oes not #eter FTA for

low%risk offen#ers an# p&nishes those who are too poor to affor# the le$y set by the

co&rt,G In the wor#s of Dary hillips! 5the only #ifference between the ones who are hel#

in 3ail awaiting trial an# the ones who are release# is W still W the amo&nt of money in

their pockets>,- The Conference of State Co&rt A#ministrators has state# with the

5greatest #egrees of confi#ence> that releasing low%risk #etainees from :+C c&sto#y will

not ha$e a negati$e effect on p&blic safety,? "ermont stat&te alrea#y allows co&rts to hol#

people consi#ere# a risk to p&blic safety witho&t bail! this sho&l# be the basis for hol#ing

people in pretrial #etention! not how m&ch money they ha$e

The BCIT will contin&e to work on these policies an# will release a more

complete report with specific recommen#ations for "ermonts legislators an# a#$ocates

,/ La$ery! 5=lectronic Donitoring< reliminary Analysis of Donetary Benefits an# Costs> 1,G hillips! 57ow release type affects fail&re to appear>,- (Ibi#),? epin! H*.1*%*.19 olicy aper =$i#ence%Base# retrial 8eleaseH

99


34/35

'e ha$e no ill&sion that the pretrial #etention pop&lation problem is an easy one an#

hope this report is a contrib&tion towar#s the #iffic&lt policy #ebates that will contin&e in

the state

Section Bibliography

Bechtel! Eristin! Christopher T Lowenkamp! an# Ale 7olsinger HI#entifying the re#ictors of

retrial Fail&re< A Deta%analysisH Fed# *roation -/ (*.11)< -?

6oswami! 4eal HDore #efen#ants taking &p be#s in "ermont 3ails H The Times (rgus

7ewitt! =lizabeth H+&t%of%state prisoners hea#e# to DichiganH -T.igger ! Day 1,! *.1/

+pen Society ;&stice Initiati$e The Socioeconomic Im!act of *retria" .etention# 4ew ork< +pen

Society Fo&n#ations! *.1.

;oint Legislati$e Corrections +$ersight Committee HAnn&al 8eport of the Corrections +$ersight

CommitteeH(*.1.) WWW HAnn&al 8eport of the Corrections +$ersight CommitteeH(*.1*)

WWW HAnn&al 8eport of the Corrections +$ersight CommitteeH(*.19)

La$ery! 4athan 5=lectronic Donitoring< reliminary Analysis of Donetary Benefits an# Costs>

-ermont egis"ati$e )oint Fisca" ?ffice# Iss&e Brief ;&ne /! *.1@

Le$in! :a$i# ;osh&a! an# Atlanta Criminology Eamining the Efficac% of *retria" Re"ease

Conditions, Sanctions and Screening with State Court *rocessing Statistics .ataseries# ;I! retrial ;&stice

Instit&te! *..-

Lowenkamp! Christopher! Darie "an4ostran#! an# Alean#er 7olsinger HThe 7i##en Cost of

retrial :etentionsH The aura and )ohn (rno"d Foundation 1G (*.19)

Dalby! Ste$en! hilip :a$is! an# an# an# S&r$eys Statistics 9onitoring the Im!act of Economic

Crisis on Crime# "ienna< nite# 4ations +ffice on :r&gs an# Crime (*.1*)

http


35/35

Conclusion

It appears that America is beginning to kick its habit of o$er%incarceration The

moment&m is on the si#e of reform an# rehabilitation As the resi#ent sai#! America is

at its best when it is 5a nation of secon# chances> The same sho&l#! an# can be tr&e of

"ermont 'e hope this report! an# o&r ongoing a#$ocacy! will help "ermonts criminal

3&stice comm&nity #own this roa# of meaningf&l! e$i#ence%base# reform

There Is Still Much To Do: Criminal Justice Reform In Vermont

Documents

Transcript of There Is Still Much To Do: Criminal Justice Reform In Vermont