About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

18 Crim. Just. Pol'y Rev. 3 (2007)

handle is hein.journals/cjpr18 and id is 1 raw text is: 


                                                                        Criminal justice
                                                                        .. i.... o x Review
                                                                        Volum 18I Number1

Probation           Violations,                                         Mach 2007 3-30
                                                                  C 2007 S0ag  hlic.tions
Revocations, and                 Imprisonm            ent          11      40400b...
                                                                              hosted at
The Decisions of Probation Officers,                               http://online.sagepub.com
Prosecutors, and Judges Pre- and
Post-Mandatory Drug Treatment

Nancy Rodriguez
Arizona State University, Glendale
Vincent J. Webb
Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, 7X


   The focus of previous probation studies has been on identifying the significant predictors
   of probation outcomes (e.g., violations and arrests) and probation processes (e.g., revo-
   cation). In this study, the authors examine how the passage of Arizona's mandatory drug
   treatment law affected probation violations and the revocation process. They rely on pro-
   bation, prosecution, and sentencing case file data of imprisoned low-level drug offenders
   to analyze how the mandatory drug treatment law influenced the decision-making
   processes of probation officers, prosecutors, and judges. Findings indicate that the major-
   ity of revocations leading to incarceration involved technical violations and not the com-
   mission of new crimes. Furthermore, the type of violations significantly differed pre- and
   postimplementation of the law, as did prosecution and sentencing decisions. Policy impli-
   cations for probation supervision and drug treatment laws are discussed.

   Keywords: probation revocation; probation violations; mandatory drug treatment


M andatory drug treatment laws, the latest drug control policy, require that low-
       level drug offenders receive substance abuse treatment while on probation
rather than be incarcerated. As studies begin to assess the impact of such laws on
offenders (Farabee, Hser, Anglin, & Huang, 2004; Hser et al., 2003; Longshore et al.,
2004; Speiglman, Klein, Miller, & Noble, 2003), minimal attention has been devoted
to how probation departments, prosecutors, and judges have adjusted their practices
to process low-level drug offenders. For example, it is unclear whether the types of
probation violations that result in revocations have changed since the implementation
of mandatory drug treatment laws and whether prosecutors and judges have modified
how they handle such revocations. Although prosecutors' and judges' discretion is
ever present in court decision-making processes, the implementation of mandatory


Authors' Note: Preparation of this article was assisted by a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
Substance Abuse Policy Research Program. The authors would like to thank the editor and reviewers for
their insightful comments on an earlier draft of this article.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing nearly 3,000 academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline with pricing starting as low as $29.95

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most