Virginia Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2013 Report June 10, 2013

Virginia Sentencing GuidelinesPreliminary FY2013 Report

June 10, 2013

FY 2013 - Cases Coded and Keyed

2

JAN 607 607FEB 1 1

MAR 1 1APR 4 4

MAY 0 0JUN 0 0JUL 1886 1886

AUG 2114 2114SEP 1952 1952OCT 2114 2114NOV 1765 1765DEC 1397 1397

TOTAL 11228 613 11841*

*11,553 certified for compliance analysis

Preliminary FY2013 ReportGuideline Worksheets Keyed as of 05/31/2013

(n=11,553)

3

Preliminary FY2013 Report:General Compliance

Preliminary FY2013 ReportJudicial Agreement

with Guideline Recommendations

General Compliance:

The degree to which judges agree with the overall guidelines recommendation.

5

N=11,553

Preliminary FY2013 Report Judicial Agreement

with Type of Recommended Disposition

Dispositional Compliance:

The degree to which judges agree with the type of sanction recommended.

6

N=11,553

Preliminary FY2013 Report Judicial Agreement with Sentence Length

Durational Compliance:

The degree to which judges agree with the sentence length in cases in which defendants are recommended for jail/prison and receive at least one day incarceration.

Median 9 months

belowmidpoint

7

N=7,856

Preliminary FY2013 Report:Departure Reasons

Aggravation (n=1130)

•Plea agreement 292 (18%**)

•Flagrancy of offense/facts of case 156 (14%**)•Severity/type of prior record 141 (13%**)

•Multiple counts involved in event 70 (6%**)•Poor rehabilitation potential 67 (6%**)

•SG Recommendation too low 58 (5%**)

•Recommendation of jury 54 (5%**)

•Sentenced to alternative 49 (4%**)

n=264 (23%) missing a departure reason

Mitigation (n=1347)

•Plea agreement 490 (37%*)•Sentenced to alternative 118 (9%*)•Judicial discretion 107 (8%*)•Cooperated with Authorities 107 (8%*)•Facts of the case 91 (7%*)

•Recommendation of CA 89 (7%*)

•Court Proceeding: Serve sentence in other case 81 (6%*)•No or limited prior record 61 (3%*)

n=304 (23%) missing a departure reason

Preliminary FY2013 ReportMost Frequently Cited Departure Reasons

* Of mitigating cases requiring departure reason ** Of aggravating cases requiring departure reasons9

Preliminary FY2013 Report:Compliance by Circuit

Circuit Name Circuit Compliance Mitigation Aggravation Number of Cases

Chesapeake 1 79.9% 8.7% 11.3% 538

Virginia Beach 2 83.8% 9.6% 6.5% 612

Portsmouth 3 71.3% 16.2% 12.5% 272

Norfolk 4 80.1% 13.1% 6.8% 443

Suffolk Area 5 83.5% 7.3% 9.2% 260

Sussex Area 6 82.4% 10.0% 7.6% 170

Newport News 7 79.4% 11.7% 8.9% 316

Hampton 8 76.1% 18.3% 5.5% 218

Williamsburg Area 9 79.1% 8.0% 12.9% 287

South Boston Area 10 76.8% 12.8% 10.4% 289

Petersburg Area 11 78.9% 13.5% 7.6% 171

Chesterfield Area 12 80.5% 11.1% 8.4% 523

Richmond City 13 71.4% 21.4% 7.2% 669

Henrico 14 74.7% 12.9% 12.4% 427

Fredericksburg Area 15 74.9% 8.7% 16.4% 677

Charlottesville Area 16 72.7% 15.0% 12.2% 319

Arlington Area 17 72.5% 12.4% 15.2% 178

Alexandria 18 79.6% 14.5% 5.9% 152

Fairfax 19 77.7% 12.2% 10.1% 565

Loudoun Area 20 88.4% 5.5% 6.1% 310

Martinsville Area 21 78.4% 16.8% 4.8% 167

Danville Area 22 73.9% 6.9% 19.2% 276

Roanoke Area 23 75.0% 15.0% 10.0% 448

Lynchburg Area 24 77.5% 14.6% 7.9% 467

Staunton Area 25 76.0% 15.7% 8.3% 363

Harrisonburg Area 26 81.8% 9.8% 8.4% 716

Radford Area 27 87.5% 6.3% 6.3% 559

Bristol Area 28 85.6% 7.9% 6.5% 278

Buchanan Area 29 71.1% 10.5% 18.4% 381

Lee Area 30 73.4% 11.8% 14.8% 169

Prince William Area 31 86.9% 6.9% 6.3% 320

Preliminary FY2013Preliminary FY2013

Most cases received:

-Circuit 26 (Harrisonburg Area)

-Circuit 15 (Fredericksburg Area)

-Circuit 13 (Richmond)

11






Highest compliance:-Circuit 20 (Loudoun Area) 88.4%-Circuit 27 (Radford Area) 87.5%Lowest compliance:-Circuit 29 (Buchanan Area) 71.1%Circuit 3 (Portsmouth) 71.3%Circuit 13 (Richmond) 71.4%

12


Chesapeake 1 79.9% 8.7% 11.3% 538

Virginia Beach 2 83.8% 9.6% 6.5% 612

Portsmouth 3 71.3% 16.2% 12.5% 272

Norfolk 4 80.1% 13.1% 6.8% 443

Suffolk Area 5 83.5% 7.3% 9.2% 260

Sussex Area 6 82.4% 10.0% 7.6% 170

Newport News 7 79.4% 11.7% 8.9% 316

Hampton 8 76.1% 18.3% 5.5% 218



Petersburg Area 11 78.9% 13.5% 7.6% 171


Richmond City 13 71.4% 21.4% 7.2% 669

Henrico 14 74.7% 12.9% 12.4% 427



Arlington Area 17 72.5% 12.4% 15.2% 178

Alexandria 18 79.6% 14.5% 5.9% 152

Fairfax 19 77.7% 12.2% 10.1% 565

Loudoun Area 20 88.4% 5.5% 6.1% 310


Danville Area 22 73.9% 6.9% 19.2% 276

Roanoke Area 23 75.0% 15.0% 10.0% 448

Lynchburg Area 24 77.5% 14.6% 7.9% 467

Staunton Area 25 76.0% 15.7% 8.3% 363


Radford Area 27 87.5% 6.3% 6.3% 559

Bristol Area 28 85.6% 7.9% 6.5% 278

Buchanan Area 29 71.1% 10.5% 18.4% 381

Lee Area 30 73.4% 11.8% 14.8% 169

Prince William Area 31 86.9% 6.9% 6.3% 320


Chesapeake 1 79.9% 8.7% 11.3% 538

Virginia Beach 2 83.8% 9.6% 6.5% 612

Portsmouth 3 71.3% 16.2% 12.5% 272

Norfolk 4 80.1% 13.1% 6.8% 443

Suffolk Area 5 83.5% 7.3% 9.2% 260

Sussex Area 6 82.4% 10.0% 7.6% 170

Newport News 7 79.4% 11.7% 8.9% 316

Hampton 8 76.1% 18.3% 5.5% 218



Petersburg Area 11 78.9% 13.5% 7.6% 171


Richmond City 13 71.4% 21.4% 7.2% 669

Henrico 14 74.7% 12.9% 12.4% 427



Arlington Area 17 72.5% 12.4% 15.2% 178

Alexandria 18 79.6% 14.5% 5.9% 152

Fairfax 19 77.7% 12.2% 10.1% 565

Loudoun Area 20 88.4% 5.5% 6.1% 310


Danville Area 22 73.9% 6.9% 19.2% 276

Roanoke Area 23 75.0% 15.0% 10.0% 448

Lynchburg Area 24 77.5% 14.6% 7.9% 467

Staunton Area 25 76.0% 15.7% 8.3% 363


Radford Area 27 87.5% 6.3% 6.3% 559

Bristol Area 28 85.6% 7.9% 6.5% 278

Buchanan Area 29 71.1% 10.5% 18.4% 381

Lee Area 30 73.4% 11.8% 14.8% 169

Prince William Area 31 86.9% 6.9% 6.3% 320 13






Highest compliance:-Circuit 20 (Loudoun Area) 88.4%-Circuit 27 (Radford Area) 87.5%Lowest compliance:-Circuit 29 (Buchanan Area) 71.1%Circuit 3 (Portsmouth) 71.3%Circuit 13 (Richmond) 71.4%

Highest aggravation:-Circuit 22 (Danville Area) 19.2%Highest mitigation:-Circuit 13 (Richmond City) 21.4%

Preliminary FY2013 Report:Compliance by Offense Type

Preliminary FY2013 ReportCompliance by Type of Offense

15

1,082 2,774 718 3,115 818 238 402 268 686 117 276 567 368 75 49

1,082 2,774 718 3,115 818 238 402 268 686 117 276 567 368 75 49

Preliminary FY2013 ReportCompliance by Type of Offense

16

Highest Mitigation RatesRobbery (22.3%) n=82

Most frequent departure reasons: Plea agreement Cooperation with authorities CA/Joint recommendation

Kidnapping (20.4%) n=10 Most frequent departure reasons:

Plea agreement Offender’s health CA/Joint recommendation

Highest Aggravation Rate Murder (21.4%) n=11

Most frequent departure reasons: Flagrancy of the offense Vulnerability of victim Jury recommendation

Rape (20.0%) n=13 Most frequent departure reasons:

Flagrancy of the offense Vulnerability of victim Recommendation of jury

Preliminary FY2013 Report:Nonviolent Offender

Risk Assessment

Preliminary FY2013 ReportNonviolent Risk Assessment

Risk assessment applies in drug, fraud, & larceny cases

Offender must meet eligibility criteria

− Recommended for incarceration− No current or violent felony conviction− Did not distribute an ounce or more of cocaine − Not convicted of crime requiring mandatory

minimum term of incarceration

Purpose: To recommend alternative sanctions for offenders who are statistically less likely to recidivate

Type of alternative at discretion of judge

18

Nonviolent OffenderRisk Assessment

19

1 0

7 1 4

20

Preliminary FY2013 ReportNonviolent Offenders Eligible for Risk Assessment

by Type of Offense

21

7,689 Drug, Fraud & Larceny Cases - 4,601 Excluded: Ineligible, Errors, 1260 Missing 3,088 Analyzed

Preliminary FY2013 Nonviolent Offenders Eligible for Risk Assessment

Fraud

Larceny

All Risk Cases 8%

8%

8%

Drug 7%

23%

11%

37%

28%

62%

75%

51%

56%

7%

6%

4%

9%

3,088

1,141

496

1,451

Offense Mitigation

Compliance

AggravationNumberof CasesAlternative Traditional

85%

86%

88%

84%

22

Recommended and Received an Alternative 22.8% n= 703

Recommended and Incarcerated 30.4% n= 937

Not Recommended and Received Alternative 12.4% n= 382

Not Recommended and Incarcerated 34.5% n= 1,065

Preliminary FY2013 Nonviolent Offenders Eligible for Risk Assessment

23

Preliminary FY2013 ReportMost Frequent Sanctions Imposed in Risk Assessment Cases

Recommended for and Receiving Alternative Sanctions

Median 7 months

24

Preliminary FY2013 Report:Sex Offender Risk Assessment

SEX OFFENDER RISK ASSESSMENT

Preliminary FY2013 ReportSex Offender Risk Assessment

27

Level 3

50%

Level 2

100%

Level 1

300%

Preliminary FY2013 Report Sex Offender Risk Assessment Outcomes

* Excludes Other Sexual Assault cases missing risk assessment and cases in which risk assessment is not applicable (e.g., child pornography and child solicitation offenses)

** Excludes Rape cases missing risk assessment

29

Preliminary FY2013 Report Compliance Rates by Risk Level for Rape Offenders

(n=74*)

Very High Risk

High Risk

Moderate Risk 0%

27%

0%

No Level 20%

81%

53%

100%

51%

13%

7%

0%

---

6%

13%

0%

29%

16

15

2

41

Risk Level Mitigation

Compliance

AggravationNumber of CasesTraditional Adjusted

94%

60%

100%

30

51%

Preliminary FY2013 ReportCompliance Rates by Risk Level for Other Other Sexual Assault Offenders

(n=173*)

Very High Risk

High Risk

Moderate Risk 7%

11%

0%

No Level 11%

74%

56%

0%

59%

12%

33%

0%

---

7%

0%

0%

30%

42

18

0

113

Risk Level Mitigation

Compliance

AggravationNumberof CasesTraditional Adjusted

86%

89%

0%

* Excludes Other Sexual Assault cases missing risk assessment and cases in which risk assessment is not applicable (e.g., child pornography and child solicitation offenses) 31

59%

Preliminary FY2013 Report:Jury Sentencing

Parole System

FY1986 – Preliminary FY2013Percentage of Guidelines Cases Adjudicated by Jury Trials

Parole System versus Truth-in-Sentencing System

Truth-in-Sentencing

33

Fiscal Year

Preliminary FY2013 Report Jury Recommendation vs. Non-Jury Sentencing

Median departure 2 years and 9 months

above high end of guidelines range

34

Preliminary FY2013 Report:Additions/Changes to the

Guidelines Effective July 1, 2013

35

36

New Guidelines Offenses (FY2013) Compliance Mitigation Aggravation

§ 18.2-51.4(A): DWI results in permanent impairment 40.0% (n=2) 20.0% (n=1) 40.0% (n=2)

§ 18.2-272(A): Third offense in 10 years after forfeiture of license 69.2% (n=9) 23.1% (n=3) 7.7% (n=1)

§ 18.2-248(C): Third or subsequent distribution of Schedule I/II drug 70.0% (n=21) 10.0% (n=3) 20.0% (n=6)

§ 18.2-248(C1): Manufacture methamphetamines 82.8% (n=24) 13.8% (n=4) 3.4% (n=1)

Preliminary FY2013 ReportAdditions/Changes to the Guidelines Effective July 1, 2013

Virginia Sentencing GuidelinesPreliminary FY2013 Report

June 10, 2013

Sentencing Revocation Reports &Probation Violation Guidelines (FY2012)

Sentencing Revocation Report is completed for all cases involving felony violations of:

•Probation

•Post-release terms administered by the court

•Good behavior

•Suspended sentence

•Community-based programs

New Law Violation:

Condition 1

Technical Violations:

Conditions 2 – 11 & Special Conditions

4

Sentencing Revocation Reports Received for Technical and New Law Violations

FY1998 - FY2012 (Preliminary)

Note: FY12 includes cases received by September 1, 2012

53%

47%

Sentencing Revocation Reports Received

by Judicial CircuitFY2012 (Preliminary)

Highest Number Received

•Circuit 4 - Norfolk

•Circuit 29 - Buchanan Area

•Circuit 15 – Fredericksburg Area

Circuit Area Number1 Chesapeake 4862 Virginia Beach 2283 Portsmouth 2574 Norfolk 8875 Suffolk Area 3346 Sussex Area 697 Newport News 2658 Hampton 3469 Williamsburg Area 291

10 South Boston Area 21611 Petersburg Area 9612 Chesterfield Area 34913 Richmond City 31814 Henrico 43115 Fredericksburg Area 65616 Charlottesville Area 26817 Arlington 12618 Alexandria 19719 Fairfax 56720 Loudoun Area 21921 Martinsville Area 15922 Danville Area 47923 Roanoke Area 33224 Lynchburg Area 40125 Staunton Area 32126 Harrisonburg Area 55027 Radford Area 56628 Bristol Area 38829 Buchanan Area 72830 Lee Area 13131 Prince William Area 193

Total 10,854** Includes all forms received, including those found not in violation or missing information

Sentencing Revocation Reports ReceivedDispositions for Technical and New Law Violations

FY2012 (Preliminary)

Actual Disposition Received

Probation Jail <= 12 mos. Prison >= 1yr.

NEW LAW VIOLATOR1124 (21%)2348 (43%) 1937 (36%)

TECHNICAL VIOLATOR 1155 (24%)2521 (52%) 1176 (24%)

TOTAL* 2279 (22%) 4869 (48%) 3113 (30%)

*The disposition was missing in 249 cases

6

7

Sentencing Revocation Reports ReceivedNew Law Violations by Type of New Crime


Cases = 5,536The disposition was missing in 127 cases

8

VCC ID Frequency Percent

Missing 512 9.2A1 1 .0A2 3 .1A3 4 .1A5 3 .1A6 7 .1A9 16 .3C4 1 .0C6 3 .1C9 16 .3F2 11 .2F3 51 .9F4 42 .8F5 491 8.9F6 802 14.5F9 1080 19.5I9 23 .4M1 1962 35.4M2 65 1.2M3 13 .2M4 157 2.8M9 150 2.7S9 123 2.2

Total 5536 100.0

Sentencing Revocation Reports ReceivedNew Law Violations by Type of New Crime


Felonies

Misdemeanors

Traffic Infractions

Type Not Clear

9

Sentencing Revocation Reports Received by Type of Violation and Sanction Received


Probation

Jail

Prison

Median 6 mos.

Median 6 mos.Median 5 mos.

Median 1.75 yrs. Median 1.7 yrs.

Median 2.0 yrs.

10

* Cases are not included in compliance analysis if the guidelines do not apply (the case involves a parole-eligible offense, first offender violation, misdemeanor original offense, or the offender was not on supervised probation), if the guidelines forms were incomplete, or if outdated forms were prepared.

Sentencing Revocation Reports Received FY2012 (Preliminary)

Violator Type Unknown

167Found Not in

Violation178

Probation Violation Guidelines Cases – “Technicals”by Type of Original Offense


11

12

Types of Violations Cited in Probation Violation Guidelines Cases – “Technicals”


Percentages do not total 100% because there may be multiple violations cited for each defendant

Financial 48%Substance abuse treatment 23%Alternative programs 9%Sex offender restrictions 5%

FY2008-2012 WorksheetFY2006-FY2007 Worksheet

New factors were added

Existing factors were adjusted

Point values were increased

14

N = 4,643 N = 5,584N = 4,860 N = 5,067 N = 4,216

Probation Violation Guidelines – “Technicals” Compliance and Direction of Departures

FY2005 – FY2012 (Preliminary)

N = 4,705 N = 4,323

RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION

ACTUAL DISPOSITION

ProbationJail up to 12 Months

Prison 1 Year or More

Probation 45.0% 42.7% 12.3%Jail up to 12 Months 17.5% 66.9% 15.7%Prison 1 Year or More 18.2% 36.1% 45.7%

52

Probation Violation Guidelines Dispositional Compliance and Direction of DeparturesFY2012 (Preliminary)

Probation Violation Guidelines Most Frequently Cited Departure ReasonsFY2012 (Preliminary)

Mitigation (25.1%)

Most frequently cited: No Reason

(48.7%) Sentenced to Alternative

(7.1%) Judicial Discretion

(6.0%) Recommendation of CA

(4.3%)

Aggravation (24.1%)

Most frequently cited: No Reason

(45.2%) 2nd or subsequent revocation

(8.2%) Poor rehabilitation potential

(4.8%) Fail to follow instructions

(4.8%)

15

Sentencing Revocation Reports &Probation Violation Guidelines (FY2012)

Virginia Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2013 Report June 10, 2013

Documents

Transcript of Virginia Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2013 Report June 10, 2013