Podcast: "Judge Lynn Toler on Probation and Prison".
1) Discuss 3 key points that Judge Toler communicated and whether or not you agree with her positions.
A. Sentencing: Judge Toler explains to the listener how tough it is to send a defendant to jail. She states she has to follows sentencing guidelines on the federal level and common pleas when sentencing a defendant and also she has to explain why she has made that specific sentencing decision. She feels confortable making the sentencing because she says that by the time the defendant is in front of her that defendant has already seen the probation department. Which they have already done their research in regards to the defendant’s addictions, background, mental illness, environment, past record and their education level. Based on their research she could determine the appropriate sentence for the defendants weather it would be jail, probation or prison but her decision is fairly limited. She also points out that people don’t recognize that they have a lot of limits as judges. I do agree with Judge Toler sentencing procedure because
…show more content…
Re-entry Programs: Chideya says that currently there is more money from the private and federal levels going into these programs. But the system is lacking programs to follow up with the defendant once a re-entry program is in place. Judge Toler agrees that there is a problem once the defendant goes back to the community. Because it seems the system just put the defendant’s addiction or problem on hold while they were incarcerated and defendant goes back to do the same thing all over again. She also believes that there should be more money and tools for the system to get involved with the defendant’s recovery. I strongly agree with the Judge Toler because I also think the judicial system should be more involved in these re-entry programs. By them doing follow ups and keeping track of their day to day life will be able to stop from them going back to prison or
Rehabilitation also involves programs in prisons that have the goal of helping offenders return back to society (Goff, 2014, p.20). Prisons have also put in place programs to assist inmates, “the goal of these release programs are to ease the transition of offenders from the institution into the community while simultaneously promoting stable employment after release” (Cullen & Jonson, 2011, p.309). If a person has been in an institution for a long period of time it is often hard to adjust to life outside, which is why these programs are important in the justice
The United States Parole system has been the longest running form of rehabilitation of inmates that have served time in the prison system. Parolees are granted parole by a committee that feel like the individual is ready to function normally back into society; in which case most are “maxed out” of the system, meaning that there is no more room in the prisons and due to good behavior within the prison walls these are the prisoners that are paroled out. Caseloads are at an all-time high due to the fact that parole officers are over worked and under paid, therefore there it is easier for the ex-cons to re-offend due to the lack of supervision that should be taking place. More often are the parolees just being released into society without supervision
Syme, D. (1997). Martin Bryant's Sentence- What the judge said, Retrieved 5 July, 2003, from http://www.geniac.net/portarthur/sentence.htm. 7. The Australian Encyclopaedia.
The criminal justice system has been in place the United States for centuries. The system has endured many changes throughout the ages. The need for a checks and balances system has been a priority for just as long. Federal sentencing guidelines were created to help create equal punishments among offenders. Judges are given the power of sentencing and they are not immune to opinions, bias, and feelings. These guidelines are set in place to allow the judge to keep their power but keep them within a control group of equality. Although there are a lot of pros to sentencing guidelines there are also a lot of cons. Research has shown that sentencing guidelines have allowed the power to shift from judges to prosecutors and led to sentencing disparity based on sex, race, and social class.
Because these changes in sentencing policy have created greater prison populations, laws like the Three Strike Policy have parole officers with a heavier burden. This increased work load transformed the focus of parole supervisors from rehabilitation of ex offenders, to law enforcement. (Travis 241) New modes of surveillance were introduced and by 1997, the rate of successful reentry was at a low of 44%— successful reintegration back into society was not the norm for most individuals. (Austin
Sentencing of a convicted criminal is ultimately in the hands of the judge. Although there are standards that may be suggested for a judge to follow that work in accordance with the crime committed, by no means is a judge required to follow those suggested standards when making a decision. In the end, the final verdict is left up to the judge presiding over the case and they can do with that how they feel fit. Which is why in the case of Rhonda Kuzak, the judge has decided to go a less conventional route with her punishment. Because of the previous convictions Kuzak has on her record, a simple fine and/or jail time will not be what the court ordered. Kuzak has been arrested and convicted three prior times for possession of drugs, cocaine to
In recent years, there has been controversy over mass incarceration rates within the United States. In the past, the imprisonment of criminals was seen as the most efficient way to protect citizens. However, as time has gone on, crime rates have continued to increase exponentially. Because of this, many people have begun to propose alternatives that will effectively prevent criminals from merely repeating their illegal actions. Some contend that diversion programs, such as rehabilitation treatment for drug offenders, is a more practical solution than placing mentally unstable individuals into prison.
Reentry programs have been developed nationwide to address offender needs and smooth the transition from prison into the community. Reentry programs are initiatives taken to ensure that ex-offenders successfully transition into law-abiding members of their communities. Studies have revealed that ex-offender reentry is a process that all individuals transitioning from prison to the community experience. Ex-offender reentry program is a precursor to successful community reintegration, hoewever, there are few interventions that have demonstrated success to meet the overwhelming needs of individuals leaving correctional facilities during their
We need to change the way we look at drug abusers in our justice system the fact that approximately 50% of addicts that are released from prison will return. It seems...
Zhang, S. X., Roberts, R. E. L., & Callanan, V. J. (2006). Preventing parolees from returning to prison through community-based reintegration. Crime & Delinquency, 52(4), 551-571.
The “Tough on Crime” and “War on Drugs” policies of the 1970s – 1980s have caused an over populated prison system where incarceration is policy and assistance for prevention was placed on the back burner. As of 2005, a little fewer than 2,000 prisoners are being released every day. These individuals have not gone through treatment or been properly assisted in reentering society. This has caused individuals to reenter the prison system after only a year of being release and this problem will not go away, but will get worst if current thinking does not change. This change must be bigger than putting in place some under funded programs that do not provide support. As the current cost of incarceration is around $30,000 a year per inmate, change to the system/procedure must prevent recidivism and the current problem of over-crowed prisons.
For many inmates as soon as they are released it back to a life of crime. People may be asking themselves why. Why would somebody who just left prison risk going back there at all. People may say it’s because they are bad people and like doing terrible things. Others think it all they know how to do. The idea is to add work programs and education to our prisons. The Penial System currently needs rehabilitation programs as it doesn’t reduce recidivism rates, is not financially smart, and does not help find the sources of crime. But obviously not every system is without it flaws some inmates my still return even after going through rehabilitation programs and basically waste the money that has been spent to put them through these programs.
In recent discussions of prison reform, a controversial issue has been whether diversion programs are more beneficial than not. On the one hand, some argue that diversion programs give convicted criminals a chance to hopefully better themselves and get back into society. On the other hand, however, others argue that these programs are allowing dangerous criminals back into the streets with no guarantee of them changing their behaviors. In sum, then, the issue is whether society and the government should allow these unguaranteed hopes to continue. While some believe that diversion programs may be a good substitute for prison, diversion programs are not an efficient substitute because they release potentially dangerous criminals and felons out onto the streets.
The United States criminal justice system is an ever-changing system that is based on the opinions and ideas of the public. Many of the policies today were established in direct response to polarizing events and generational shifts in ideology. In order to maintain public safety and punish those who break these laws, law enforcement officers arrest offenders and a judge or a group of the law offender’s peers judge their innocence. If found guilty, these individuals are sentenced for a predetermined amount of time in prison and are eventually, evaluated for early release through probation. While on probation, the individual is reintegrated into their community, with restrict limitations that are established for safety.
She explained that his involvement in the crime was not excessive and that it was his brother who was the leader. She went on to describe his eight previous arrests for crimes like robbery and cocaine possession. Given his long history she said she was not surprised to see him involved in this kind of case. Because of his other charges I thought the prosecutor was going to suggest the higher end of the sentencing guidelines. However, as she continued I realized I was incorrect. Instead of focusing on his previous crimes she talked about how he needed rehabilitation. She emphasized recovery from his current lifestyle more than sending him to prison again. She brought up his involvement in his church and his successful marriage and questioned why he would throw all of that away. She also suggested that he turn to his church and his wife for support and to aid him in his battle with addiction. Throughout the case, the prosecutor was compassionate and seemed more like a disappointed parent to the defendant rather than angry. The one time the prosecutor did act somewhat harsh was towards the middle of her statement. She brought up the fact that the defendant had previous medical conditions such as a stab and shot wounds. She suggested that the defense had asked for these injuries to be taken into account when the sentence was decided on. She was adamant that the court should not take