Proposed Recommendations for Guidelines Revisions.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
REPORTING VIOLATIONS OF PROBATION
Advertisements

Callie Glanton Steele Supervising Deputy Federal Public Defender Central District of California.
Legislative Impact Analysis for the 2007 General Assembly.
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.
Sentencing Structure Comparisons Barb Tombs July 16, 2007 Presentation to the CT Sentencing Task Force Subcommittees.
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 1 Virginia Child Protection Accountability System §
Debra Dial, Director of Legal and Client Advocacy Mental Health America of Indiana May 9, 2014.
Offender Population Forecasting in Virginia. 2 Background - Studies by JLARC in 1980s  Staff of the Joint Legislative Audit & Review Commission (JLARC)
Possible Recommendations for Guidelines Revisions November 5, 2014 VIRGINIA CRIMINAL SENTENCING COMMISSION.
Proposed Recommendations for Guidelines Revisions.
The Judicial Branch. Court Systems & Jurisdictions.
Virginia’s Sentencing Guidelines
Study of Virginia’s Parole- Eligible Inmate Population.
May 1, Division of Parole and Probation Tony DeCrona, Interim Chief Kim Madris, Deputy Chief Tony DeCrona, Interim Chief Kim Madris, Deputy Chief.
Susheela Varky (804) , x.33 Presented at "Pursuing Justice for Victims of Domestic Violence: Training for Law Enforcement Officers,
Public Safety Realignment Local custody for non-violent, non- serious, non-sex offenders Changes to State Parole Local Post-release Supervision Local.
OVERVIEW OF IMMIGRATION LAW RELATING TO CRIMINAL OFFENSES June 9, 2009.
Mandatory Transfer to Superior Court 13 through 15 years old Class A felony offense 2 juveniles in FY 2004/05.
Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) Defendant pled guilty to offense punishable by imprisonment between 5 and 10 years Judge at sentencing hearing.
Re-validation of the Nonviolent Offender Risk Assessment Instrument: Preliminary Findings.
INTRODUCTION TO THE LAW OF EVIDENCE
Sentencing in Canada Imposing a Sentence.
Crimes Committed in the Presence of Children Proposed Methodology for 2008 Study.
Proposed Study: Probation/Suspended Sentence Violations Scored on the Felony Sentencing Guidelines.
Pre-Sentence Investigation Proposal Purpose: To gather and provide information to the Courts and to other Criminal Justice stakeholders that will aid at.
Virginia Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2013 Report June 10, 2013.
YCJA - Senior High Handout
Hennepin County School/Shared Social Work Project Social Work Project May 16, 2013 Mark Griffin Senior Assistant County Attorney.
Legislative Impact Analysis for the 2009 General Assembly.
Volunteer Training for Denver Metro DACA Registration Drive D EFERRED A CTION P RE -R EGISTRATION W ORKSHOP C RIMINAL H ISTORY.
November 5, 2014 New Nonviolent Offender Risk Assessment Instruments – Status Update VIRGINIA CRIMINAL SENTENCING COMMISSION.
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.
Disposition Hearing Juvenile Law Cle Oct 17, 2014.
Criminal Sentencing in N.C.. Structured Sentencing In 2011, N.C. passed the Structured Sentencing law to organize the punishment of criminals. – Sentencing.
Larceny and Fraud Study Update. Background.
Salient Factor Score CTSFS99. What it is How to use it.
What’s New 2015 Virginia’s Sentencing Guidelines.
Deciding on a Punishment. Sentencing is a difficult job for a Judge. There is much at stake. Safety of society Safety of society Freedom of the offender.
Juveniles Convicted in Circuit Court FY2001 – FY2008.
What’s New 2011 Virginia’s Sentencing Guidelines.
SENTENCE:  punishment imposed on a person convicted of committing a crime.
What’s New 2012 Virginia’s Sentencing Guidelines.
Legislative Impact Analysis for the 2008 General Assembly.
Judicial Concurrence with Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2009.
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.
Proposed Recommendations for Guidelines Revisions.
Virginia Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2014 Report April 14, 2014.
JUDICIAL CONCURRENCE WITH SENTENCING GUIDELINES July 1, 2006 – June 30, 2007 (Preliminary)
Virginia Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2015 Report June 8, 2015.
Virginia Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2013 Report September 9, 2013.
Virginia RULES Teens Learn & Live the Law Virginia’s Judicial System.
What are the Goals of Sentencing?? Protection of the Public Main goal is to protect the public. When an offence is committed the individual harms the victim.
Criminal Law Basics.
Intro to Virginia’s Judicial System
Use Of Risk Assessments in Utah Sentencing
The Colorado Court System
Maryland Juvenile Services Long Term Trends FY 2007 – FY December 2016
Metro Region Juvenile Services Long Term Trends: Counties of Montgomery and Prince George’s DJS Office of Research and Evaluation, January 2017.
Baltimore City Juvenile Services Long Term Trends
Sentencing Guidelines/Mandatory Minimums and Charging
Southern Region Juvenile Services Long Term Trends: Counties of Anne Arundel, Calvert, Charles, and St. Mary’s DJS Office of Research and Evaluation, January.
Prince George’s County Juvenile Services Long Term Trends
Presentation transcript:

Proposed Recommendations for Guidelines Revisions

2 Proposed Recommendations  At its September meeting, the Commission considered proposals for possible revisions to the sentencing guidelines.  The Commission voted to table two recommendations pending further analysis by staff.  Staff have conducted additional analysis for the Commission’s review.

Proposed Recommendation 3: False Statement on Firearm Consent Form

4 False Statement on a Firearm Consent Form, § :2(K)  Issue This offense was added to the guidelines effective July 1, During the first year of implementation, compliance for Making a False Statement on a Firearm Consent Form was 67%, with mitigation comprising nearly all of the departures (30%). Most commonly cited reasons for mitigation are: minimal circumstances of the case, plea agreement, lack of serious prior record, and recommendation of Commonwealth’s attorney. Many of the offenders whose sentences were mitigated had only one count of the offense, no additional offenses, and no victim injury; many had a prior record that included a previous incarceration, but no legal restraint was scored.

5 Recommended Disposition Probation/ No Incarceration Incarceration 1 day - 6 mos. Incarceration over 6 months Probation/ No Incarceration 79.3%20.7%0% Incarceration over 6 months 36.8%26.3%36.8% False Statement on a Firearm Consent Form, § :2(K) Actual Disposition 29 cases 38 cases

6 Proposed Recommendation 3 – Original 3

7 By revising the primary offense score for Making a False Statement on a Firearm Consent Form on Section A of the Weapons Guidelines from 4 points to 3 points, compliance can be improved slightly. Proposed Recommendation 3 – Original Current Guidelines Original Proposal Compliance67%70% Mitigation30%24% Aggravation3%6% FY2007 (66 cases)

8 Virginia Form

9 Federal Form

10 Denial of Firearm Purchases The State Police maintains files on all firearm transaction requests and the results of the state and federal criminal history searches, as well as searches for protective orders, outstanding warrants, and adjudications of mental deficiency. Records are kept for approximately 12 months and then destroyed. Commission staff requested copies of these records for persons convicted of making a false statement in order to gain a better understanding of the these cases.

11 Basis of Firearm Transaction Denial Note: Firearm transaction records were available for 61 of the 70 offenders examined. Multiple reasons may be cited in each case. For 10 of these offenders, an out-of-state felony conviction was noted. For 8 of these offenders, a juvenile adjudication for a felony offense was noted.

12 Basis of Firearm Transaction Denial and Guidelines Compliance Note: Firearm transaction records were available for 61 of the 70 offenders examined. Multiple reasons may be cited in each case. Felony Conviction or Juvenile Adjudication (N=30) Domestic Violence Conviction (N=20) Protective Order (N=8) Felony Indictment, Warrant or Mental Health (N=6) Compliance60%70%75%100% Mitigation40%25%12.5%0% Aggravation0%5%12.5%0%

13 Basis of Firearm Transaction Denial and Guidelines Compliance Note: Firearm transaction records were available for 61 of the 70 offenders examined. Multiple reasons may be cited in each case. No Prior Felony Person Crime (N=22) Prior Felony Person Crime (N=8) Compliance55%75% Mitigation45%25% Aggravation0% Offenders with a Prior Felony Conviction or Juvenile Adjudication

14 Time Since Prior Felony Conviction or Juvenile Adjudication Note: Firearm transaction records were available for 61 of the 70 offenders examined. Multiple reasons may be cited in each case. Prior Felony Conviction or Juvenile Adjudication within Last 4 Years (N=16) Prior Felony Conviction or Juvenile Adjudication More than 4 Years Ago (N=14) Compliance75%43% Mitigation25%57% Aggravation0%

15 Proposed Recommendation 3 – Revised Revise the Weapons Sentencing Guidelines by decreasing the points assigned to the primary offense factor on Section A (from 4 points to 1) and by adding a factor to increase the score (by 3 points) for offenders with: - a prior adult or juvenile felony conviction for a crime against the person - a conviction for any other felony within the last five years - a prior domestic assault misdemeanor conviction - an outstanding protective order For offenders meeting any of the above conditions, the revision will have no impact on guidelines recommendation. For the remaining offenders, the guidelines will be less likely to recommend a term of incarceration of more than six months.

SCORE THE FOLLOWING ONLY IF PRIMARY OFFENSE AT CONVICTION IS FALSE STATEMENT ON A FIREARM CONSENT FORM (§ :2(K)) Basis of False Statement on Consent Form (listed below) Prior felony conviction for crime against person Other prior felony conviction within 4 years of current offense Prior domestic assault misdemeanor conviction Subject to protective order at time of offense If YES, add 3 NEW FACTOR 1

17  By revising the guidelines for Making a False Statement on a Firearm Consent Form as described, compliance can be improved slightly and a better balance between mitigation and aggravation can be achieved. Proposed Recommendation 3 – Revised Current Guidelines Original Proposal Revised Proposal Compliance67%70% Mitigation30%24%17% Aggravation3%6%13%

Proposed Recommendation 4: Involuntary Manslaughter

19 Involuntary Manslaughter (§ & § (A))  Issue Combined, the compliance for Involuntary Manslaughter and Involuntary Vehicular Manslaughter is 52%, with nearly all of the departure sentences above the guidelines. Most commonly cited reasons for aggravation are: aggravating circumstances/flagrancy of offense, extreme violence/victim injury, guidelines recommendation is too low, offender has drug/alcohol problems In nearly two-thirds of the aggravating departure cases, the offender had been recommended for probation or up to six months in jail but was sentenced to serve more than six months of incarceration.

20 Compliance in Cases of Involuntary Manslaughter and Involuntary Vehicular Manslaughter FY2003 – FY cases Involuntary Manslaughter (§ & § (A))

21 Recommended Disposition Probation/ Incarceration up to 6 months Incarceration over 6 months Probation/ Incarceration up to 6 months 38.2%61.8% Incarceration over 6 months 7.4%92.6% Involuntary Manslaughter (§ & § (A)) 102 cases 122 cases Actual Disposition

22 Proposed Recommendation 4 – Original 3 2 nd count

23  By increasing the points for the primary offense on Section A of the Murder/Homicide Guidelines from 1 point to 3 points (for 1 count) and from 3 to 8 points (for 2 counts), the guidelines would better reflect recent judicial practice. Proposed Recommendation 4 – Original Current Guidelines Proposed Change Compliance52%62% Mitigation7% Aggravation41%31%

24 Recommended Disposition ComplianceMitigationAggravation Probation/ Incarceration up to 6 months 38.2%0%61.8% Incarceration over 6 months 63.9%10.7%25.4% Involuntary Manslaughter (§ & § (A)) 102 cases 122 cases

25 Proposed Recommendation 4 – Revised Revise the Murder/Homicide Sentencing Guidelines applicable to Involuntary Manslaughter by: - increasing the points for the primary offense on Section A from 1 point to 3 points (for 1 count) and from 3 to 8 points (for 2 counts), and - increasing the points for the primary offense on Section C (adding 3 points for the Other Category, and making corresponding increases for Category I and Category II). As a result of these changes, offenders convicted of involuntary manslaughter will be more likely to receive a recommendation for more than six months of incarceration. In addition, offenders convicted of involuntary manslaughter will receive a longer sentence recommendation on Section C.

26 Proposed Recommendation 4 – Revised 88 X 44 X 22 X

27  By revising the guidelines for Involuntary Manslaughter in the manner described, compliance can be improved and the rate of aggravation can be reduced, better reflecting recent judicial practice. Proposed Recommendation 4 – Revised Current Guidelines Original Proposal Revised Proposal Compliance52%62%64% Mitigation7% 8% Aggravation41%31%28%