Swift Certain Fair Resource Center

  • Programs
  • SCF Evaluations
  • Newsroom
  • About
Home
|
Newsroom
|
Custodial Versus Non-Custodial Sentences: Long-Run Evidence from an Anticipated Reform
Posted on May 25, 2022 by Kelly Smith

Custodial Versus Non-Custodial Sentences: Long-Run Evidence from an Anticipated Reform

Given that offenders who received a custodial sentence did not have to wait as long as those who received a non-custodial sentence (because the latter were tried closer to the date of the reform), it is possible that our results (showing that custodial sentences foster crime compared to noncustodial ones) underestimate the true negative impact of incarceration. However, two elements allow us to minimize the extent of this concern. First, the percentage increase in trial waiting time in the 12 months prior to the signing of the legislation remains limited. It only increases sharply in the couple of weeks preceding the signature. Second, while theoretical arguments suggest that punishment celerity should deter recidivism, criminologists now tend to agree that it has no impact (see Pratt and Turanovic (2018) for a review of the evidence).30
30 In Pratt and Turanovic’s own words: “While exceptions exist […] the general pattern revealed in this body of work is that celerity effects of punishment are nonexistent, and that even when present it can be difficult to disentangle such effects from other potentially confounding influences, like the perceived (or actual) certainty or severity of punishment. So again, the pattern is pretty clear that faster punishments appear to have little to no consistent, independent effect on one’s future criminal behavior.” While a few studies on the impact of the Hawaii Opportunity Probation with Enforcement (HOPE) project fostering swift-and-certain punishments found significant positive effects (Hawken and Kleiman, 2009; Kilmer et al., 2013), replication studies carried out in other states found no impact (see, for example, the experimental studies by Lattimore et al. (2016) and O’Connell et al. (2016)). Criminology & Public Policy devoted an issue to this topic, see for example Nagin (2016) and Cullen et al. (2016) in addition to the articles just cited.

Posted in Newsroom
Louisiana’s Justice Reinvestment Reforms: 2020 Annual Performance Report
Sorting Through the Evidence: A Step Toward Prioritization of Evidence-Based Community Supervision Practices

SIGN UP FOR UPDATES

Keep up with the latest from the Swift Certain Fair Resource Center. Subscribe to our newsletter.

Find us

Swift Certain Fair Resource Center New York University 370 Jay Street, 12th Floor Brooklyn, NY 11201 Telephone: (646) 308-0508

E-mail: info@scfcenter.org

New York University Marron Institute of Urban Management
Web Site Notice of Federal Funding and Disclaimer:
This Web site is funded in whole or in part through a grant from the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Neither the U.S. Department of Justice nor any of its components operate, control, are responsible for, or necessarily endorse, this Web site (including, without limitation, its content, technical infrastructure, and policies, and any services or tools provided). SCFCenter.org - Copyright © 2023. All rights reserved.