Larceny and Fraud Study 2013-2015 Update. Background.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
REPORTING VIOLATIONS OF PROBATION
Advertisements

JUDICIAL CONCURRENCE Preliminary FY2007. Preliminary FY2007 Guideline Worksheets Keyed as of 3/5/07 (N=10,715)
Proposed Topics for Possible Guidelines Revisions September 8, 2014 VIRGINIA CRIMINAL SENTENCING COMMISSION.
Project Director: Brian Ostrom, Ph.D. National Center for State Courts Assessing Consistency & Fairness in Sentencing: A Comparative Study in Three States.
1 Incorporating Statistical Process Control and Statistical Quality Control Techniques into a Quality Assurance Program Robyn Sirkis U.S. Census Bureau.
UNCLASSIFIED Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Common Reporting Errors Sharon K. Huffman Crime Statistics Management Unit (CSMU) Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Virginia State Crime Commission Grand Larceny Threshold October 14, 2008.
1 _____ March 5, 2009 SC Sentencing Reform Commission Presenter South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster S206/H3166 _____.
Possible Recommendations for Guidelines Revisions November 5, 2014 VIRGINIA CRIMINAL SENTENCING COMMISSION.
Proposed Recommendations for Guidelines Revisions.
Albrecht, Albrecht, Albrecht, Zimbelman © 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part, except.
NC1 WETZEL. Purpose  To revise policy and provide guidance for the establishment of a sexual assault prevention/victim assistance program within the.
Study of Virginia’s Parole- Eligible Inmate Population.
Immediate Sanction Probation Pilot Project Virginia Criminal Sentencing Commission November 6, 2013.
May 1, Division of Parole and Probation Tony DeCrona, Interim Chief Kim Madris, Deputy Chief Tony DeCrona, Interim Chief Kim Madris, Deputy Chief.
DATA REASONABLENESS   Data is reviewed for possible errors or problems.   Some issues are common sense.   Data is compared to national norms.
Sentencing and Punishment
Re-validation of the Nonviolent Offender Risk Assessment Instrument: Preliminary Findings.
Larceny and Fraud Study Proposed Methodology.
Crimes Committed in the Presence of Children Proposed Methodology for 2008 Study.
Proposed Study: Probation/Suspended Sentence Violations Scored on the Felony Sentencing Guidelines.
Case Opening Sample Documents for Case Opening Police Report/Incident Report DA CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (CMS)
Virginia Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2013 Report June 10, 2013.
Guidelines for Conducting Training and Procedures Reporting Safety Loss Loss Control Committee Meetings.
The Crime Picture Chapter 2 Frank Schmalleger Criminal Justice Today 13 th Edition.
September 8, 2014 VIRGINIA CRIMINAL SENTENCING COMMISSION Two Decades of Truth-in- Sentencing in Virginia Update.
 Which crimes were changed and how will those changes impact the State Courts?  How does the emphasis on the Accountability Courts movement affect prosecutors?
Quick! What is a crime?. So, just how much has to be proven in court to find someone guilty of a crime? Burden of Proof The prosecution has the burden.
1 Statewide Criminal Justice System Plan Division of Planning, Policy and Research.
November 5, 2014 New Nonviolent Offender Risk Assessment Instruments – Status Update VIRGINIA CRIMINAL SENTENCING COMMISSION.
1 The MDOC Five Year Plan to Control Prison Growth Phase III: Long Term Policy Options SUMMARY BRIEF SUMMARY BRIEF Preliminary MDOC Proposal Revising Michigan’s.
Guidelines Research Proposals. 2 Felony Child Abuse and Neglect  Focus: Convictions under § (A) between FY03 and FY07 Any parent, guardian.
Proposed Recommendations for Guidelines Revisions.
Proposed Recommendations for Guidelines Revisions November 6, 2013.
Harvey J. Reed, Director Linda S. Janes, Assistant Director Presentation and Update to the Ohio Criminal Sentencing Commission.
Work Session on Ombudsman ordinance and Proposed Changes to the Local Code of Ethics Board of County Commissioners April 26, 2011.
Crime and Criminal Justice Trends in Virginia Virginia Criminal Sentencing Commission September 21, 2015.
What’s New 2015 Virginia’s Sentencing Guidelines.
Project Director: Brian Ostrom, Ph.D. National Center for State Courts Assessing Consistency & Fairness in Sentencing: A Comparative Study in Three States.
Juveniles Convicted in Circuit Court FY2001 – FY2008.
What’s New 2011 Virginia’s Sentencing Guidelines.
Proposed Recommendations for Guidelines Revisions.
What’s New 2012 Virginia’s Sentencing Guidelines.
Proposed Topics for Possible Guidelines Revisions September 21, 2015 VIRGINIA CRIMINAL SENTENCING COMMISSION.
Training Update| User Comments | Possible Revisions Administration TopicsAdministration Topics.
Review of Guidelines Worksheet Structure – Data Analysis.
Larceny and Fraud Study Update. Embezzlement Study The Commission conducted a study of felony embezzlement cases to examine the.
Review of Guidelines Worksheet Structure - Research Proposal.
Immediate Sanction Probation Pilot Project Virginia Criminal Sentencing Commission June 8, 2015.
Regional Seminar on Promotion and Utilization of Census Results and on the Revision on the United Nations Principles and Recommendations for Population.
Proposed Recommendations for Guidelines Revisions.
Welcome to Court Quest Who’s WhoJurisdiction Courtroom Lingo Civil or Criminal Court Numbers This and That $200 $100 $400 $300 $100 $200 $300 $400 $100.
Virginia Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2014 Report April 14, 2014.
JUDICIAL CONCURRENCE WITH SENTENCING GUIDELINES July 1, 2006 – June 30, 2007 (Preliminary)
Purpose of Sentencing. Denunciation  express society’s disapproval of the offence.  “Send a message”  the action is against the law and the values.
SENTENCING Overview/Review The “PSI” and “Risk Assessment” Sentencing Disparity Sentencing Guidelines Who Dictates Time Served?
Chapter 10 – Crimes Against Property. Arson The willful and malicious burning of a person’s property Intentionally burning a building to defraud the insurance.
State and Federal Court Systems. Dual Court System There are separate state and federal court systems Federal courts deal with matters of federal law.
Virginia Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2015 Report June 8, 2015.
Virginia Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2013 Report September 9, 2013.
The Crime of Lawyer Theft Timothy J. O’Sullivan, Esq. Executive Director NYS Lawyers’ Fund for Client Protection.
Virginia RULES Teens Learn & Live the Law Property Crimes.
Delaware Pretrial Risk Assessment Validation & Lessons Learned Presented at NCJA Baltimore Regional Meeting June 2016.
Outline of the U.S. and Arizona Criminal Justice Systems
Criminology A Unit 1 Practice Test.
Statewide Criminal Justice System Plan
Livingston Police Department Department Update
Existing sources at international level Doc. ESDTAT/D6/CR/04
ZERO AND NEGATIVE EXPONENT
ZERO AND NEGATIVE EXPONENT Unit 12 Lesson 5
Presentation transcript:

Larceny and Fraud Study Update

Background

Embezzlement Study The Commission conducted a study of felony embezzlement cases to examine the relationship between the amount embezzled and sentencing outcomes. ― Analysis of felony embezzlement cases sentenced under truth-in-sentencing laws between January 1, 1995, and June 30, 1997 Since analysis revealed a relationship between dollar amount embezzled and the sentence received, new factors were added to Sections A, B, and C of the Fraud worksheets.

The following year, the Commission conducted a study of larceny and fraud cases to examine the relationship between the amount of money or value of property stolen and sentencing outcomes The Commission studied a sample of felony larceny and fraud cases sentenced in CY1998 and CY1999. ― Sample excluded embezzlement because it had been examined in the previous study. ― Certain other offenses were also excluded, such as motor vehicle theft and forging public record, since the statutory definition is not tied to value. Larceny and Fraud Study

Final sample was 749 cases (309 larceny; 440 fraud). Supplemental data was collected on factors of interest that were not contained in automated data. − Narratives from the Pre/Post-Sentence Investigation (PSI) reports − Court records Larceny and Fraud Study

Although many variations of the factors were tried, models with factors that were statistically significant were only marginally better than the existing guidelines model. − The best models involved both dollar amount and a factor related to restitution and/or victim type. − Adding such factors would have added a layer of complexity for users when scoring. Larceny and Fraud Study Commission took no action 6

Study

A large sample is preferred, as some cases will be eliminated in subsequent stages. ― Supplemental data may reveal a conviction for an excluded offense. ― Wrong VCC may have been used. ― Available data may be insufficient to include the offender. Strategy is similar to the original Larceny/Fraud Study in Selection of Study Sample: Larceny and Fraud Study

Sample was based on a stratified random sampling technique to under-sample grand larceny cases and over-sample other types of larcenies. − To ensure adequate number of cases for non-grand larceny in the sample Sample includes embezzlement. − Length of time since previous study − Judges frequently cite dollar amount when sentencing above the guidelines Selection of Study Sample: Larceny and Fraud Study

Number of Cases Grand Larceny200 Embezzlement600 Other Larcenies400 Fraud300 Total1,500 For the analysis, the sampled cases will be weighted to reflect each subgroup’s actual proportion in the population. Selection of Study Sample Larceny and Fraud Study

Dollar value of money or property stolen Type(s) of items Damage of items Money/items recovered Insurance coverage for items Location of offense Duration of offense Number of victims Type and Age of victim(s) Offender relationship to victim Status of restitution at time of sentencing Restitution ordered at sentencing Larceny and Fraud Study Supplemental Data Collection

Pre/Post-Sentence Investigation (PSI) reports ― 42% of the sampled cases were matched to PSI data − Of these, 98% contained information in the offense narrative field Officer of the Court Remote Access (OCRA) System ― Contains scanned copies of court records ― Of the sampled cases, 49.6% occurred in a court with OCRA The majority of sampled cases (72.7%) either had a PSI or occurred in an OCRA jurisdiction Possible Electronic Data Sources: Larceny and Fraud Study

Larceny and Fraud Study OCRA Jurisdictions 13 AugustaPortsmouth BedfordPrince William BristolRockingham CarolineRichmond City ChesapeakeRoanoke County DanvilleRoanoke City DickensonShenandoah DinwiddieSmyth FauquierSouthampton FredericksburgSpotsylvania HalifaxStafford HanoverStaunton HenricoSuffolk Isle of WightTazewell LoudounWashington Newport NewsWaynesboro NorfolkWilliamsburg NorthamptonWinchester

Larceny and Fraud Study Information Available in OCRA 14 Stipulation of Facts

Larceny and Fraud Study Information Available in OCRA 15 Stipulation of Facts

Larceny and Fraud Study Information Available in OCRA 16 Sentencing Order

Larceny and Fraud Study Information Available in PSI 17 Offense Narrative

Larceny and Fraud Study Information Available in PSI 18 Victim Information

Law Enforcement Databases Commonwealth’s Attorneys’ files Victim Impact Statements Other Court records (paper files) Probation Office records Larceny and Fraud Study Other Potential Data Sources

20 Region 1 Tidewater Cases: 83 Region 2 Northern Virginia Cases: 38 Region 5 Southside Virginia Cases: 41 Region 6 Shenandoah Valley/Piedmont Cases: 66 Region 4 Southwest Virginia Cases: 100 Region 3 Central Virginia Cases: 81 Larceny and Fraud Study Cases in Non-OCRA Courts without a PSI Total: 409

July 2014 – June 2015 Data collection June 2015 – August 2015 Data analysis September 2015 Present preliminary results November 2015 Present proposal for guidelines revision (if supported by data) Larceny and Fraud Study Revised Work Plan 21