Tag Archives: recidivism

DOJ Report Contains Recidivism Detail – Update for July 19, 2024

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

WELCOME BACK, RECIDIVISTS!

welcomeback240719There has been little in compassionate release litigation that has been more disappointing (and intellectually dishonest) than the government’s ratchet-like arguments about the danger that the prisoner seeking a sentence reduction poses to the public if he or she gains a release earlier than the expiration of the original sentence.

The Dept of Justice PATTERN system provides a metric comparing an inmate’s likelihood of general recidivism and violent crime recidivism to the universe of federal prisoners by rating the inmate in 15 categories. The resulting ratings place an inmate in categories of minimum, low, medium or high risk of recidivism.

PATTERN was adopted to work hand-in-glove with the recidivism reduction program adopted in the First Step Act. A prisoner could, through good conduct and successful completion of programs designed to decrease recidivism, lower his or her recidivism level and benefit from the rewards of good programming, time reduction of up to a year and early placement in halfway house or home confinement.

DOJ officially has a fan of PATTERN, saying that it has “confidence in the accuracy of PATTERN,” a system that uses “many factors that are scientifically-weighted based on their predictability of reduced recidivism… factors most predictive of the risk of recidivism… The Department [has] measured PATTERN to ensure that it was predictive across all races and genders.”

At least, it’s been a fan except where fandom is inconvenient. Where an inmate’s risk of recidivism is “medium” or “high,” you can depend on the government to argue to the court that the risk to the public of early release is too elevated to justify compassionate release. But when a prisoner’s recidivism risk is “low” or “minimum,” you can usually count on the US Attorney to argue that despite the rating, grant of compassionate release will endanger the public anyway.

headsiwin240719Heads, I win. Tails, you lose.

Up to now, a prisoner’s risk to the public has been an easy issue for the government to demagogue. An FSA-eligible prisoner seeking to convince a court that the DOJ’s own rating is reliable facing a dearth of real-world data to cite. However, the DOJ’s First Step Act Annual Report – June 2024 contains ample recidivism data that underscores the likelihood that PATTERN has it right.

People with minimum PATTERN recidivism ratings reoffend at the rate of 2.8%. People with low ratings reoffend at the rate of 5.6%. The medium-rating folks commit new crimes at the rate of 21.9%, while the high-rating people top the charts at 38.2%.

What is surprising is that sentence length appears to be largely untethered from recidivism. People serving five years or less reoffend at the rate of 7%. Those who do 6-10 years recidivate at the rate of 10.5%, while those serving 11-15 years have a reoffense level within three years of 20.4%. Only people who have done more than 15 years reverse the trend, with a recidivism rate of 15.6%.

Still, these reoffense rates undermine the conventional wisdom that longer sentences are effective in curbing recidivism.

Recidivismtable240719Protection of the public, one of the sentencing factors listed in 18 USC § 3553(a), is undoubtedly an important element of corrections policy. The First Step requirement that the BOP keep track of its FSA “graduates” makes an important contribution to addressing the issue with fact instead of hyperbole.

Dept of Justice, First Step Act Annual Report – June 2024

Dept of Justice, The First Step Act of 2018: Risk and Needs Assessment System (July 19, 2019)

Dept of Justice, The First Step Act of 2018: Risk and Needs Assessment System Update – January 2020 (January 15, 2020)

– Thomas L. Root

BOP Says CARES Act Worked, Suggests Support for New Program – Update for April 8, 2024

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

BOP STUDY SHOWS CARES ACT REDUCED RECIDIVISM

caresbear231116You may remember a Senate effort last fall, S.J.Res. 47, to force those still on CARES Act home confinement back to prison. That measure, sponsored by Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) and co-sponsored by 27 other Republicans, was sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee where it is languishing with no hearings and no prospects for being reported out.

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) declared at the time that extending CARES Act home confinement — especially now that federal inmates have been vaccinated or offered the vaccine for COVID-19 — “betrays victims and law-enforcement agencies that trusted the federal government to keep convicted criminals away from the neighborhoods that the offenders once terrorized.”

cotton190502Good ol’ Tom. Every federal prisoner has an inner rapist/drug dealer just waiting to erupt upon release from prison to terrorize women and children.

The Federal Bureau of Prisons issued a study last week showing that “the CARES Act’s provision for early and extended home confinement did not negatively impact recidivism rates. In fact, it may have contributed to a reduction in post-release recidivism, offering a promising direction for justice-involved stakeholders seeking effective strategies to reduce incarceration and its associated costs, while also promoting public safety and successful reintegration into society.”

The study determined that prisoners with a CARES assignment failed no more or less than comparable persons in home confinement (during the final 6 months/10% of their sentences). The CARES Act and were less likely to recidivate in the year following release from custody (3.7% vs 5.0%) and marginally less likely to be re­arrested for violent offenses (0.9% vs 1.3%). And those with a CARES assignment fail less often than comparable persons after release.

BOP Director Colette Peters said, “This study suggests that reducing incarceration for appropriate people through measures like early and extended home confinement does not compromise public safety and in fact, suggests it may contribute to successful reintegration into society.”

recidivism240408Writing in Forbes, Walter Pavlo said, “The BOP intends to build on the information from this study and others on home confinement. Prisons remain crowded and many inmates are serving longer sentences in expensive institutions than are necessary. Home confinement, which is a major benefit to both inmates and taxpayers, is a big part of the First Step Act. Whether the BOP can fully implement the program to get inmates out of prisons and into the community faster remains a challenge.”

BOP, CARES Act: Analysis of Recidivism (March 29, 2024)

BOP, CARES Act Shows Promise in Reducing Recidivism, Reinforcing the Benefits of Reduced Incarceration (March 29, 2024)

Forbes, Bureau of Prisons Releases Encouraging Study on CARES Act (March 30, 2024)

– Thomas L. Root

President Vows to Block GOP Plan to Lock Up People Remaining on CARES Act Home Confinement – Update for December 1, 2023

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

BIDEN THREATENS VETO OF BLACKBURN EFFORT TO CANCEL CARES ACT HOME CONFINEMENT

return161227The White House has threatened to veto a Republican-sponsored Senate resolution that would send about 3,000 federal offenders who were released to home confinement during the COVID-19 pandemic back to prison.

NPR reported yesterday that as early as next week, the Senate could vote on S.J.Res. 47, sponsored by Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) and more than two dozen other Republican senators. The resolution would negate Dept. of Justice rules that permit over 3,000 federal prisoners sent to home confinement during the COVID pandemic by the CARES Act to complete their sentences at home absent misbehavior.

The resolution is brought under the Congressional Review Act, legislation passed 27 years ago to create a process for Congress to overturn federal agency rules.

Blackburn’s office told NPR that “the COVID national emergency is over, and criminals need to be behind bars, not on the streets.” NPR reported that DOJ says only 27 of the 13,000 prisoners released to extended home confinement during COVID were rearrested or returned to prison custody for committing a new crime.” Blackburn’s office alleges that some of those 27 people “face charges for assault, drugs and human smuggling,” according to NPR, “but analysts who follow the criminal justice system say the people released during the pandemic have a very low recidivism rate – less than 1%, much smaller than the rate for all federal prisoners, according to government statistics.”

Writing three weeks ago in The Hill, Sarah Anderson of the R Street Institute noted that CARES Act home confinement recidivism “is a less than 0.2 percent recidivism rate, which is less than 1/200th of the federal government’s overall self-reported recidivism rate of 43 percent. Put differently, a staggering 99.8 percent of those sent to home confinement under the CARES Act succeeded in establishing and maintaining law-abiding lives outside of federal brick-and-mortar custody. Advocates of public safety and the rule of law should count that as a bonafide win.”

veto231201In a statement of administration policy released Wednesday, the Office of Management and Budget said flatly that President Biden will veto S.J.Res. 47 if it makes it to his desk. OMB cited the extraordinarily low recidivism rate among those released to home confinement and the reduced cost to taxpayers compared to incarceration:

Of the over 13,000 people released to home confinement under the CARES Act, less than one percent have committed a new offense—mostly for nonviolent, low-level offenses—and all were returned to prison as a result. Moreover, since home confinement is less than half the cost of housing someone in prison, this program has saved taxpayers millions of dollars and eased the burden on [Federal Bureau of Prisons] staff so they can focus on the higher risk and higher need people in Federal prison.

Daniel Landsman, Vice President of Policy for FAMM, said, “Our federal prison system is approaching crisis level with understaffing and its ability to properly care for and keep safe both the people who live and the people who work in their facilities… [T]he thought of adding, in one fell swoop, 3,000 or so people back into the population when we’re already struggling to adequately staff and keep people safe just doesn’t make sense to me.”

recividists160314Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) issued a policy brief last June that declared “CARES Act home confinement has been a resounding success in safely reintegrating individuals into the community without compromising public safety.”

The effect of a Biden veto would probably be to kill S.J.Res. 47. With the Democrats controlling the Senate and the Republicans having a razor-thin majority in the House, the likelihood of both chambers to rustle up a two-thirds majority to override a Biden veto is extremely remote.

S.J.Res. 47, Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Justice relating to Office of the Attorney General; Home Confinement Under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act (October 30, 2023)

Reason, Biden Threatens To Block GOP Plan To Send 3,000 People Back to Federal Prison (November 30, 2023)

Reason, 11,000 Federal Inmates Were Sent Home During the Pandemic. Only 17 Were Arrested for New Crimes (August 22, 2022)

Dept of Justice, Office of the Attorney General; Home Confinement Under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, 88 FR 19830 (April 4, 2023)

Office of Management and Budget, Statement of Administration Policy: S.J. Res. 47 – A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Justice relating to “Office of the Attorney General; Home Confinement Under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act” (November 30, 2023)

Sen Cory Booker (D-NJ), CARES Act Home Confinement – Three Years Later (June 23, 2023)

The Hill, The Senate should codify — not reject— CARES Act’s home confinement policy (November 9, 2023)

NPR, Hundreds released from prison during pandemic may be sent back under Senate proposal (November 30, 2023)

– Thomas L. Root

Anti-Crime Candidates Should Embrace First Step – Update for August 21, 2023

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

THE HILL ARGUES GOP SHOULD LAY OFF FIRST STEP ATTACKS

firststepB180814Writing in The Hill last week, Marc Levin – chief policy counsel for the Council on Criminal Justice – wrote that while the First Step Act was a bipartisan effort to rein in excessive penalties for low-level drug offenses and allowed some people in federal prison to earn time off their sentences by completing programs, Republican presidential candidates “in their attempts to pass the Trump train on the right are now claiming that the Act caused a crime surge while sidestepping their burden of proof.”

These attacks are ironic, Levin wrote, given Republicans’ past support for the law, and the fact that many left-wing groups opposed it primarily because they felt it didn’t go far enough.

While it is reasonable to ask whether First Step is “somehow to blame for the subsequent uptick in crime,” Levin wrote, “the best evidence currently available suggests otherwise.” People released early with FSA credits, for example, comprise under 1% of all prisoners in the US. What’s more, some 38 states offer earned credits like those provided for in the Act, and those states have found that such credits boost program participation rates, improving behavior behind bars and prospects for success upon release.

recividists160314The BOP has reported that 12.4% of those released early due to FSA credits have been reincarcerated at the federal, state or local level. Even these numbers overstate matters: the BOP has acknowledged the number includes all those released at various times since the Act went into effect in 2019.

Levin writes that “legitimate policy disagreements on crime should be part of political campaigns. But prison reforms at the state and federal level have been embraced across the spectrum because all Americans have an interest in a system that treats people fairly and breaks the cycle of crime without breaking the bank.”

The Hill, The GOP was for these prison reforms before turning against them (August 16, 2023)

– Thomas L. Root

USSC Channels Captain Obvious on Recidivism – Update for June 24, 2022

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

FUN WITH NUMBERS

funwithnumbers170511While it awaits the approval of the slate of new members, the United States Sentencing Commission remains busy. With a staff of lawyers, actuaries and policy wonks, the USSC continues to crank out studies that provide some pretty useful data for those seeking to make a point with their sentencing judges.

This week, the USSC issued a seventh recidivism study, this one an examination of the relationship between the length of incarceration and recidivism. Two years ago, the USSC issued a report on federal offenders released in 2005, finding that people receiving sentences of more than 60 months were less likely to recidivate compared to people receiving shorter sentences.

The new study replicates the previous study, which in itself is useful as a check on the accuracy of the prior results. Focused on over 32,000 people released in 2010, the USSC studied whether incarceration has a deterrent effect, a criminogenic effect, or no effect at all.

A “criminogenic” effect would mean that incarceration is likely to cause recidivism rather than deter it.

obvious191031The findings may seem self-evident to many, but in the real world, even Captain Obvious sometimes needs validation. The study found that people sentenced to less than 60 months were neither more nor less likely to be recidivists as a result of their incarceration. But folks sentenced to more than 60 months but less than 120 months were 18% less likely to commit a new offense after release than similar people receiving shorter sentences. For people who served more than 120 months, the likelihood of recidivism was even less, 29% lower compared to offenders receiving shorter sentences.

The National Institute for Justice has previously noted that “policymakers and practitioners believe that increasing the severity of the prison experience enhances the ‘chastening’ effect, thereby making individuals convicted of an offense less likely to commit crimes in the future.” Only nine years ago, criminologist Daniel S. Nagin wrote, “Scientists have found no evidence for the chastening effect… Studies show that for most individuals convicted of a crime, short to moderate prison sentences may be a deterrent but longer prison terms produce only a limited deterrent effect…”

recividists160314The two USSC studies, however, suggest the opposite. To be sure, the difference in recidivism reduction begins to flatten – a 60-120 month sentence gets you an 18% reduction while 120-plus only adds 11 points more. Still, the gain from 18%to 29% could be convincing to a court deciding that someone – especially with a prior record – would benefit from over a decade on ice to cure him or her of criminal predispositions.

U.S. Sentencing Commission, Length of Incarceration And Recidivism (June 20, 2022)

Sentencing Law and Policy, US Sentencing Commission releases another report on “Length of Incarceration and Recidivism” (June 21, 2022)

National Institute for Justice, Five Things About Deterrence (June 5, 2016)

Nagin, Daniel S., Deterrence in the Twenty-First Century (Crime and Justice in America: 1975-2025), M. Tonry, ed, Chicago, Ilinois: University of Chicago Press (2013)

– Thomas L. Root

Senate Takes on BOP, and Other Short Rockets – Update for February 18, 2022

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

rocket-312767

Some short takes to end the week:

Mike Carvajal’s Legacy: The Associated Press yesterday reported that a bipartisan group of senators, led by Jon Ossoff (D-Georgia) and Mike Braun (R-Indiana) has launched a working group “aimed at developing policies and proposals to strengthen oversight of the beleaguered federal prison system and improve communication between the Bureau of Prisons and Congress.”

prisoncorruption2310825Giving itself a well-deserved victory lap, the AP says the task force – which calls itself the Senate Bipartisan Prison Policy Working Group – formed “following reporting by The Associated Press that uncovered widespread corruption and abuse in federal prisons.”

The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Illinois) also will be part of the group. I’m hoping to see Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)

AP called the federal prison system “a hotbed of corruption and misconduct… [that] has been plagued by myriad crises in recent years, including widespread criminal activity among employees, systemic sexual abuse at a federal women’s prison in California, critically low staffing levels that have hampered responses to emergencies, the rapid spread of COVID-19, a failed response to the pandemic and dozens of escapes.”

Advocates from across the spectrum lauded the announcement. “The COVID-19 pandemic exposed serious weaknesses in our federal prison system, but also provided a blueprint for reform. Congress should take an active role in ensuring that BOP builds on the lessons of the pandemic to ensure the safety of incarcerated persons and the community, promote rehabilitation and reentry, and maximize alternatives to incarceration,” Kyle O’Dowd, Associate Executive Director for National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers said. “The Prison Policy Working Group can open a bipartisan dialogue on these issues and lead the way in creating a more humane and rational prison system.”

David Safavian, General Counsel, American Conservative Union, said, “It is high time that Congress addresses issues facing both federal prisoners and correctional officers alike. The newly created Senate Prison Policy Working Group must help develop policies that strengthen public safety, advance human dignity, and ensure that the prison bureaucracy is held accountable for the results it delivers to the taxpayers.”

More BOP accountability… Ironically, that may be BOP Director Mike Carvajal’s legacy.

Associated Press, Senate launches group to examine embattled US prison system (February 17, 2022)

Senator Jon Ossoff, Sens. Ossoff, Braun Launch Bipartisan Working Group to Examine U.S. Prison Conditions, Promote Transparency (February 17, 2022)

And This is Kind of What the Senators Are Talking About: A BOP employee pleaded guilty Thursday to charges he sexually abused at least two inmates at FCI Dublin, the first conviction in a wave of arrests resulting from what prisoners at the women’s facility and employees called “the rape club.”

sexualassault211014The latest, a recycling technician, is one of four employees, including the warden and chaplain, who’ve been arrested for sexually abusing Dublin inmates. The Associated Press said last week that several other Dublin workers are under investigation.

The employee pled guilty to three counts of sexual abuse of a ward. Sentencing guidelines in similar cases have ranged from three months to two years, the AP said. The employee, on administrative leave since last April, remains “currently employed with the Bureau of Prisons,” the agency said last Friday. He had been allowed to transfer to another BOP facility while under investigation.

The AP published results of its investigation of FCI Dublin a week ago, saying it had found “a permissive and toxic culture at the Bay Area lockup, enabling years of sexual misconduct by predatory employees and cover-ups that have largely kept the abuse out of the public eye.” Inmates told AP they had been subjected to years of “rampant sexual abuse by correctional officers and even the warden, and were often threatened or punished when they tried to speak up.”

Federal News Network, Worker pleads guilty to abusing inmates at US women’s prison (February 11, 2022)

Associated Press, AP investigation: Women’s prison fostered culture of abuse (February 6, 2022)

Violent Offender Recidivism: The US Sentencing Commission last week released a study suggesting that violent federal offenders committed new crimes at double the rate of nonviolent offenders.

welcomeback181003Over an 8-year period, 64% of violent offenders released in 2010 were rearrested, compared to 38% of non-violent offenders. The median time to rearrest was 16 months for violent offenders and 22 months for non-violent offenders. What’s more, while recidivism dropped with age, in all categories violent offender committed new crime at a higher rate than nonviolent. For ages 60+, violent offenders’ recidivism rate was 25%, compared to 12% for nonviolent.

Violent offenses were defined based on the sentencing guidelines applied. By the definitions used, 9% of federal prisoners are serving time for violent crimes and 34% have prior violent-crime convictions.

US Sentencing Commission, Recidivism of Violent Federal Offenders Released in 2010 (February 10, 2022)

– Thomas L. Root

Forget I said What I said… – Update for January 13, 2022

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

GLAD TO EAT MY WORDS

Victory220113Not more than an hour after I posted the blog below, the Dept of Justice issued a press release announcing that the Bureau of Prison had adopted a final rule for application of its earned-time credit program.

I practiced administrative agency law in Washington, D.C., for a long time, but I never have seen such an agency execute such an astounding about-face on a proposed rule between the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and final order before.

It’s Christmas Day for inmates. I will take a dive into the new rule for a blog tomorrow.  For now, suffice it to say… wow.

Ignore the following:

BOP EARNED TIME CREDIT MEMO PORTENDS LITIGATION

delay190925The Federal Bureau of Prisons has been stalling full implementation of First Step Act earned time credits for three years now, but the clock runs out in a few days. By then, the BOP is supposed to have the earned-time credit program (which the BOP is calling “Federal Time Credits”) fully implemented.

Under the FTC program, prisoners who successfully complete recidivism reduction programming and productive activities are eligible to earn up to 10 days of FTCs for every 30 days of program participation. Minimum and low-risk inmates will get 15 days. But the list of programs and productive activities is limited, the list of eligible prisoners is even more limited, and the BOP has thus far fought inmates’ efforts to win any credit.

That has resulted in decisions such as an Oregon holding from November that the BOP’s belief that “may delay awarding time credits to inmates that complete qualifying programming until January 15, 2022, is contrary to the statute.”

Forbes magazine last week published portions of an “internal memorandum posted at some prison camps.” The memo said that beginning in January 2022, the Bureau will begin applying FTC under this update. However, while inmates with high and medium PATTERN risk levels may earn FTC, only those with low and minimum levels may actually use them.

The BOP plans to apply the first 365 days of FTC time to early release, with “[a]ny FTC earned beyond that may be applied toward community placement.” The BOP plans to update sentence computations in the next few months, with the Bureau’s Designation and Sentence Computation Center to “prioritize based on those inmates we project to be immediate releases, beginning with inmates in community placement.”

confusion200424Forbes predicts that “far from clarifying things… implementation of [FTC]… will be almost impossible over the near term. This affects multiple levels of the criminal justice system; prisons, halfway houses, home confinement, and supervised release. It is an intricate web of agencies that manage the incarceration and supervision of hundreds of thousands of people in the federal criminal justice system. Thousands will file lawsuits whether they are in prison, halfway houses, home confinement, or supervised release, fighting for their right to a broadly defined, and subject to BOP discretion, FSA credit… This is going to be more complicated than anyone ever imagined.”

The great unsettled question is exactly what constitutes program participation. Inmates were jubilant when First Step passed, because everyone wrongly assumed that if one had an hour-long evening class four days a week for four weeks, he or she would have earned 16 days of programming credit on successful completion. But then the BOP proposed rule – which has not yet been adopted – holding that a day of program participation was equal to eight hours of programming. Under that metric, an hour a day four days a week for four weeks would be worth 16 hours, or two days of programming, not 16 days.

What was as bad, the credits for “productive activities” are capped. Working in UNICOR – the Federal prison industries – has a well-earned reputation for reducing recidivism. But credit for UNICOR work is limited to 500 hours. In other words, if one works in UNICOR for four months at 35 hours a week, he or she has amassed 500 FTC hours, which translates to 62 days, which translates to two months. Two months of FTC credit is worth 30 days off the sentence.

If the inmate works in UNICOR for 10 years (which would be about 17,500 hours), he or she would still get 30 days off his or her sentence. Is the favorable effect of 10 years of productive factory work on recidivism no different than four months? The BOP rule would seem to suggest so.

oddcouple210219As of today, the rulemaking proceeding has not been completed, yet another failure of the BOP to get anything done on time. What’s more, Senator Richard Durbin (D-Illinois), chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and Committee Ranking Member Senator Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) jointly blasted the proposed rule last May, asking the Attorney General to “reevaluate and amend the rule consistent with the statute’s goals of incentivizing and increasing program participation to reduce recidivism. Establishing robust programming and a fair system to earn time credits is critical to meeting the FSA’s goal of reducing recidivism.”

Durbin and Grassley are the fathers of the First Step Actsuggesting that perhaps they know what they meant when they wrote it.

Whether anyone listened has yet to be answered. It’s a cinch that if the BOP’s 8-hour-day rule gets adopted, there will be litigation.

Forbes, Implementation of The Criminal Justice Reform Law, First Step Act, Will Likely End Up In Court (January 5, 2022)

Cazares v. Hendrix, Case No 3:20-cv-02019, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 240776 (D. Ore., November 9, 2021)

Press release, Durbin, Grassley Press DOJ to Strengthen First Step Act Rule on Earned Time Credits to Incentivize Rehabilitation (May 5, 2021)

– Thomas L. Root

‘How Are We Doing?’ Attorney General Asks (Rhetorically) – Update for January 5, 2021

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

FIRST STEP REPORT ISSUED

The First Step Act required that starting in 2020, the Attorney General generate an annual report on the Bureau of Prisons’ implementation of the various provisions of the law. The AG issued the report two weeks ago, which reads more like a hagiography of First Step compliance than a dispassionate recitation of how rocky the road to First Step implementation has been.

awesome210105Example: The AG says the BOP and Department of Justice “also implemented and responded to changes the FSA made involving retroactive application of the Fair Sentencing Act, compassionate release, and good conduct time.” If “implemented and responded to changes” means fighting compassionate release (10,929 out of 10,940 requests to the BOP for compassionate release denied) and Fair Sentencing Act reduction motions hammer-and-tong, DOJ and BOP have surely overperformed.

Surprisingly (or maybe not, given the political roar coming from Washington over the last two months), the First Step Report seems to have landed silently. Yet there are some interesting gold nuggets in the 59 pages of dross. I’m still reading it, and I’ll report more on it next week, but a few stats have jumped out already:

•      70% of all BOP inmates are designated to facilities within 500 miles of their release residences (but the Report does not compare this to the stats prior to passage of First Step);

•    the BOP has transferred over 19,000 people to home confinement since last March;

•         in 2020, one out of every four BOP inmates did not get any halfway house or home confinement prior to release

The most interesting tables I have seen so far are the recidivism tables. The Report found recidivism among people released under the First Step Act to be 11.3%, much less than the one-third or higher numbers usually cited. One curious finding: people who served less than 5 years had a recidivism rate of 10.9%; those serving between 5 and 10 years, 12.6%; those serving between 10 and 15 years, 13.1%; and those serving over 15 years, 7.8%.

tableB210105 copy

These stats present a strong argument about the deterrence value (or lack thereof) of sentences, a point which should be part of any 18 USC § 3553(a) analysis in a compassionate release or Fair Sentencing Act determination.

Dept of Justice, The Attorney General’s First Step Act Section 3634 Annual Report (December 21, 2020)

– Thomas L. Root

BOP Slouches Toward First Step Programming – Update for January 13, 2020

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

EARNED TIME CREDITS – THE DEVIL’S IN THE DETAILS

devil200113Probably the biggest selling point used by First Step Act supporters when Congress passed the measure in December 2018 was that the bill would deliver evidence-based programming to reduce recidivism. The inmates would be assessed under a new program that accurately gauged their likelihood to be recidivists and their needs that should be met to reduce that likelihood. The inmates would benefit, the public would benefit, the overcrowded and understaffed prisons would benefit, the U.S. Treasury would benefit. Everyone’s a winner!

The programming to reduce recidivism, after more than a year of preparation, is supposed to begin in a week. But the devil’s in the details, and hope for a broad rollout that meets the expectations of First Step backers, let alone those of inmates, is dwindling rapidly.

recividists160314By now, virtually all inmates have undergone an initial assessment under PATTERN, the new risk and needs assessment program developed in response to the First Step Act. According to the Act (a provision now codified at 18 U.S.C. § 3621(h)(1)(B)), the Bureau of Prisons is to begin to expand the most effective evidence-based recidivism reduction programs and productive activities it currently offers and to add any new evidence-based recidivism reduction programs and productive activities necessary to effectively implement First Step by Jan. 20. Subsection (h)(2)(A) gives the BOP until Jan. 20, 2022, to provide such programming for all inmates. During the “phase in” period, priority placement in the programs is to go to people closest to their release date.

As an incentive for participating in the programs, the First Step Act provides eligible inmates with earned-time credits which can be used toward increasing pre-release custody (halfway house and/or home confinement) or swapping time inside the BOP for more supervised release. A Bloomberg Law article described it last week like this: “Earned time credits… do not reduce a prisoner’s sentence, per se, but rather allow eligible prisoners to serve their sentence outside prison walls.”

winner200113But for a lot of reasons the question of whether the BOP is anywhere close to meeting the First Step Act’s timetable remains open. First, as the BOP admitted two weeks ago, PATTERN has not yet been adopted in its final form. Although the BOP has promised to identify its existing programs that will award inmates earned-time credits, it has not yet done so. What’s more, a surprising large number of federal inmates will not be eligible to receive earned time credits because the BOP has determined they are excluded by one or more of the 65 categories of crime or immigration statute exempted from the program by Congress.

The current limits on time in a halfway house (up to 12 months) and home confinement (the lesser of six months or 10% of the sentence) specified in 18 U.S.C. § 3624(c) will not apply to earned time credits. Thus, an inmate can be released to more than a year of halfway house or home confinement after accumulating earned time credits.

Bloomberg Law reported last week that any earned-time credits inmates receive for completing programs prior to the final implementation of the PATTERN tool – whenever that will be – will not be eligible for redemption until the tool is implemented. What’s more, the article reported, “the ability to start earning credits may not actually come for most prisoners until even later than that, depending on how long it takes the BOP to apply PATTERN and create programming and productive activities and assign prisoners to them.”

prisonrace200113PATTERN was the subject of a House Judiciary Committee Oversight hearing last October, where some experts expressed concern about its “racial bias and lack of transparency, fairness, and scientific validity.” The Dept. of Justice has not said how close PATTERN is to being finalized, stating only that it “is currently undergoing fine-tuning.” Indications are that inmates that have been scored so far have been analyzed under a preliminary version of the tool. Last July, DOJ estimates were that the final PATTERN program would be in place by Thanksgiving 2019.

A further impediment to full implementation of earned-time credit program will be the availability of halfway house beds. In most of the country, there is a shortage of available halfway house beds for federal inmates. The Act provides no additional funding or resources for the BOP to increase the loss of halfway house beds, which was at crisis levels several years ago.

“The BOP has a long history of acting in ways that result in lengthier and less productive terms of incarceration despite the obvious will of Congress,” David E. Patton, executive director of the nonprofit Federal Defenders of New York, was quoted as saying by the Washington Post. “For decades the BOP took an unreasonably restrictive view of good time, resulting in thousands of years of additional overall prison time. For decades it refused to exercise the authority given to it by Congress to release incarcerated people who were terminally ill, infirm, or otherwise suffered from extraordinary circumstances… and for decades it has not provided enough vocational, educational, mental health, and substance abuse programming despite abundant need and lengthy waitlists.” Pointing to DOJ data, Patton said wait lists include 25,000 prisoners for prison work assignments, 15,000 for vocational and educational training and 5,000 for drug treatment.

The Washington Post said last week that almost half of BOP prisoners complete no programs, more than half don’t get needed drug treatment, more than 80% haven’t taken technical or vocational courses, and more than 90% have no prison industry employment, according to data.

Help-Wanted180221“The BOP is struggling to fulfill the requirements of the Act as the Bureau is still more than 4,000 positions short,” Shane Fausey, president of the American Federation of Government Employees Council of Prison Locals, told the Post. He complained of “abusive overtime and mandatory double shifts,” adding that requirements of the First Step Act have worsened the crisis.

BOP Director Kathleen Hawk Sawyer told the House oversight committee last October that the understaffing was over 3,700 vacancies and said resolving that “is among my highest priorities… but doing so will take time.”

Bloomberg Law, Insight: The First Step Act—Earned Time Credits on the Horizon (Jan. 9)

Washington Post, Federal prison reform has bipartisan support. But it’s moving slowly. (Jan. 9)

– Thomas L. Root

Brilliant! Pell Experiment to be Studied to See Whether It Worked – Update for April 18, 2019

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

IS DEPT. OF EDUCTION SMARTER THAN A FIFTH GRADER? EFFECTIVENESS OF PELL GRANT EXPERIMENT FINALLY WILL BE STUDIED

Since 2015, the federal Dept. of Education has been experimenting with returning Pell grant assistance to inmates, giving grants to about 8,800 prisoners have been funded to take college-level courses inside their correctional institutions.

But no one knows whether the program has been effective. Back in 5th grade, we learned the scientific method. Integral to that method was evaluating the experimental testing, and refining or eliminating hypotheses as a result of the evaluation.

smarterthan5th190418

So let’s try this, kiddies. Our hypothesis is that providing prisoners with access to college-level course in prison will reduce recidivism. So four years ago, we experimented by giving 8,800 inmates Pell grants so that they could take college course while locked up. So what was the result? Was our hypothesis supported by the experimental results or not?

No one knows, because no one at DOE ever looked at the experimental results. When the agency was finally called out on it last week by the Government Accountability Office,  DOE unabashedly announced plans to conduct a “rigorous” examination of the program (after earlier saying it could not afford to do so.) The study is to “help provide policymakers with the information needed to make decisions about the future of Pell grants for incarcerated students,” wrote Gretta L. Goodwin, director of the Homeland Security and Justice division at GAO.

second170119Pell grants were made available 55 years ago to help low-income Americans benefit from higher education. The grants were denied to inmates after passage of the Violent Crime Control and Enforcement Act in 1994. But policymakers, faced with mounting evidence that education is critical to prisoner rehabilitation, approved the “Second Chance Pell” pilot program in a cautious attempt to rehabilitate the concept.

Advocates hoped the study will spark a bipartisan consensus about the need to return Pell grants in order to reduce mass incarceration.

The Crime Report, Does College Education in Prison Work? Ask the 8,800 Inmates Who Got Pell Grants (Apr. 11)

– Thomas L. Root