proposed study: probation/suspended sentence violations scored on the felony sentencing guidelines

Proposed Study:Probation/Suspended Sentence Violations Scored

on the Felony Sentencing Guidelines

Background

F.1 - All Violations under § 19.2-306: Submit Sentencing Revocation Report

F.2 - Technical Violations: Submit Revocation Report & Probation Violation Guidelines

Current Requirements

4


5

In cases where an offender is being sentenced for a suspended

sentence/probation violation at the same time as a new felony offense,

the Sentencing Revocation Report (SRR) and the sentencing guidelines

should be completed

Suspended sentence/probation violations are scored as an additional

offense based on the highest statutory maximum for the underlying

offense(s)


6

Not all revocations (§ 19.2-306) in the same sentencing event are scored on new offense guidelines

Attorneys and Officers have to prepare two sets of guidelines (Court’s decision on the revocation based on a new offense often is unknown)

1. New offense guidelines and

2. New offense guidelines with a revocation scored as an additional offense and a Sentencing Revocation Report

Submitting both the new law guidelines and the sentencing revocation report was viewed as duplication of work and confused many. (As a result, both forms are often not completed)

There is no complete data source for new law probation violations (Condition 1)― Court data is missing or overwritten― Corrections data is missing or overwritten― Sentencing guidelines are not always modified to reflect convictions in the sentencing

event― Probation violation data is sometimes missing violations scored as additional offense on

the new offense guidelines

Result of the Current Requirements

7

Procedural issues complicate the data collection process

― In some jurisdictions, the same judge that heard the original offense presides over the violation hearing. For offenders with multiple offenses and multiple sentencing judges, this may result in separate hearings for the same violation behavior.

― In other jurisdictions, one judge presides over all violations, regardless of the original judge, offenses or sentencing dates.

― In some jurisdictions, offenders are prosecuted for technical violations while the new law violation proceeds through court. Once there is a conviction for the new offense, the offender is brought before the court for a second violation.

― In other jurisdictions, offenders appear before the court for a violation after the new law violation is concluded. Both technical violations and new law violations are resolved in the same hearing.

― When found in violation, some judges will impose a sentence and then suspend a portion of the sentence. Others will impose just a portion of the suspended time. As a result, It is often difficult to calculate the amount of revocable time.

Other Issues

8

Research Considerations

Determining the scope of the issue and the potential impact of modifying the guidelines:

1. How often are offenders sentenced for a new felony at the same time as a probation/suspended sentence violation?

─ Research Strategy: Match sentencing guidelines data to the SRR, court, and jail databases

2. How often is the violation listed as an additional offense on the sentencing guidelines and how often are these guidelines scored correctly?

─ Research Strategy: Analyze sentencing guidelines data and compare expected scores to actual scores recorded on the guidelines

3. How often is an SRR completed when a probation/suspended sentence violation is listed as an additional offense?

─ Research Strategy: Match sentencing guidelines data to SRR database

� How would modifying the rules for scoring probation/suspended sentence violations as an additional offense affect compliance?

1. Research Strategy: Estimate guidelines compliance based on potential rule change

Research Questions and Strategies

11

Possibilities for addressing the issue(s):

― Training efforts over the past few years may have led to an increase in the number of guidelines submitted that list a probation/suspended sentence violation as an additional offense. However, this does not address disparities in recommendations due to differences in scheduling cases.


12

Sentencing Guidelines Cases with Violations IncludedFY2009 - FY2013 (Preliminary)

N=1,697

Possibilities for addressing the issue(s), continued:

─ Staff would like to explore the option of modifying the rules so that probation/suspended sentence violations would not be scored on the felony sentencing guidelines, even if they are sentenced at the same time as a new felony offense.

─ Under this scenario, the Sentencing Guidelines form would be completed for the new felony offense and the Sentencing Revocation Report (SRR) would be completed for the probation/suspended sentence violation.

May allow for more consistency in guidelines recommendations across jurisdictions

This change would likely affect compliance for certain guidelines offenses


13

Sentencing Guidelines Compliance for Cases with and without a Violation Listed as an Additional Offense FY2009 - FY2013 (Preliminary)

Preliminary Analysis

14

Offense GroupCompliance for Cases

without a ViolationCompliance for Cases

with a Violation

Assault 73.2% 79.5%

Burglary/Dwelling 66.2% 73.2%

Burglary/Other 75.7% 89.5%

Drug Sch. I/II 81.8% 69.5%

Drug Other 83.9% 66.7%

Fraud 85.3% 73.3%

Kidnapping 64.5% 100%*

Larceny 82.9% 71.0%

Murder/Homicide 63.3% 66.7%*

Sexual Assault 67.5% 42.9%*

Rape 66.9% 80.0%*

Robbery 63.1% 64.3%

Traffic 81.5% 64.0%

Miscellaneous 74.4% 61.7%

Weapon/Firearm 75.8% 63.2%

* Less than 10 cases reported

Offense Groups Where Compliance for Cases with a Violation is Lower

FY2009 - FY2013 (Preliminary)

15

Offense Group

Cases without a Violation Cases with a Violation

Comp. Mit. Agg. Comp. Mit. Agg.

Drug Sch. I/II 81.8% 10.1% 8.1% 69.5% 13.3% 17.1%

Drug Other 83.9% 5.8% 10.4% 66.7% 11.8% 21.6%

Fraud 85.3% 9.2% 5.5% 73.3% 18.5% 8.2%

Larceny 82.9% 9.3% 7.8% 71.0% 12.8% 16.3%

Sexual Assault 67.5% 12.6% 19.8% 42.9%* 14.3% 42.9%

Traffic 81.5% 7.3% 11.2% 64.0% 6.5% 29.5%

Miscellaneous 74.4% 12.0% 13.6% 61.7% 6.4% 31.9%

Weapon/Firearm 75.8% 12.3% 11.9% 63.2% 5.3% 31.6%

High aggravation rates for some offense groups may be attributable to sentences given for the suspended sentence/probation violation

* Less than 10 cases reported

Preliminary Analysis

Possibilities for addressing the issue(s), continued:

― Multiple steps are necessary in estimating guidelines compliance if the violations are no longer scored as additional offenses. These include:

Calculating what the guidelines recommendation would be if the

violations were not scored (across 15 offense groups).

– Involves using available data to recalculate the guidelines,

including re-scoring offenders who would move from Section C

to Section B due to the reduced number of points on Section A.

Extracting the sentence for the violation from the total sentence

reported on the guidelines form.


16

For sentencing events covered by the guidelines, the total sentence for all offenses included in the event is recorded on the disposition sheet.


17

To extract the sentence for the probation/suspended sentence violation from the sentence recorded on the guidelines, staff will attempt to match the guidelines cases to several data sources, including:

― Sentencing Revocation Report (SRR) Database

─ Circuit Court Case Management System (CMS)

― Local Inmate Data System (LIDS)

Due to the integration of LIDS into the Department of Correction’s CORIS

system this summer, FY2013 LIDS data are not yet available

Once the violations have been removed from the guidelines

recommendation and the total effective sentence for the event, projected

compliance will be computed and presented to the Commission.


18