1. Community
Corrections:
Probation and
Intermediate
Sanctions
Chapter 4

2. Community Correction Assumptions
 Offenders’ criminal records/current offenses are not
serious enough to warrant incarceration.
 Community supervision is cheaper than
incarceration.
 Recidivism rates are no higher than those in prison.
 Ex-inmates require support and supervision as they
rebuild their lives.

3. Probation
 The History and Development of Probation
 John Augustus
 Boston Police Court 1841
 Benefit of clergy
 Protection under the authority of the church
 Judicial reprieve recognizance
 Suspension of a sentence for good behavior

4. Probation
 Recognizance
 Boston Municipal Court Judge Peter Oxenbridge
Thatcher was the originator of this practice
 Implied supervision of the court
 Sum of money, surety
 Forfeit by nonperformance
 Humanizing criminal law and mitigating harshness

5. Discussion Question
Discuss if the current probation system is similar
to the ideology of Augustus, or has time
changed the overall goals of the system set
forth by this pioneer.

6. Probation
 The History and Development of Probation
 The modernization of probation
 Social work role (support services)
 Law enforcement role (control and surveillance)
 Medical model (rehabilitation)
 Reintegration model (assessed clients)
 Risk management (surveillance and control)

7. Intermediate Sanctions
 Rationale
 Instead of probation
 Instead of prison
 Most sanctions in Western democracies do not
involve imprisonment
 Prison is ineffective
 Tailor punishment to offender’s situation

8. Discussion Question
What if ALL first time, non-violent offenders
were given intermediate sanctions as a
sentence regardless of race, age, gender or
other demographics? The only rule is the
crime must be a misdemeanor or a non-
violent felony. What effect would this have on
the criminal justice system and corrections?

9. Intermediate Sanctions
© Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

10. Intermediate Sanctions
 Problems with Intermediate Sanctions
 Selecting agencies—have staff and experience
to design programs
 Selecting offenders—crime and criminal
considered
 Net widening—social control
 Wider nets, stronger nets, different nets

11. Intermediate Sanctions
 Varieties of Intermediate Sanctions
 Judiciary
 Pretrial diversion—targets drug offenders
 Fines
 Forfeiture—seized property
 Community service & restitution—free labor and a
a sum of money for victim

12. Intermediate Sanctions
 Varieties of Intermediate Sanctions
 Sanctions administered in the community
 Day reporting (treatment) centers
 Probation/restitution centers
 Intensive supervision probation
 Home confinement
 Electronic monitoring

13. Discussion Question
What if the United States began fining people
for drug possession? For instance, first time
offenders would face a minimum of $1,000 or
30 days in jail (their choice). Second time
offenders would face a $5,000 fine or 90 days
in jail. Third time offenders would face 1 year
in prison or a $50,000 fine. Would this
approach work? Explain.

14. Intermediate Sanctions
 Varieties of Intermediate Sanctions
 Sanctions administered in institutions and the
community
 Shock incarceration
 Boot camp

15. Intermediate Sanctions
 Making Intermediate Sanctions Work
 Sentencing issues
 Principle of interchangeability
 Selection of offenders
 The target group—less costly than prison, effective
alternative to probation
 Problems of bias—race, gender, age
 Surveillance and control

16. Discussion Question
What if programs such as Scared Straight and
other programs based on the in-your-face
tough approach used a more educational and
rehabilitation approach with teens and young
adults? Would this approach be more
effective? Explain.

17. The New Correctional Professional
 Three Major Shifts in the Working
Environment
 Nongovernment organizations emerged to
administer community corrections programs
 Increased emphasis on accountability and
reduction in discretion
 Principles of criminal justice more important
than professional relationships with clients

18. Community Corrections Legislation
 Reducing the Reliance on Prison
 Evaluation of Community Corrections
Legislation
 Three aims
 Reduce rate and number of people sent to
correctional facilities
 Reduce tax revenues spent on corrections
 Reduce prison populations

19. The Future of Community
Corrections
 Three Recurring Problems
 Tendency to increase level of corrections
 Need to increase community support for
community corrections
 Purpose must be clarified
 Justice reinvestment
 Community assistance to rebuild crime-prevention
programs