This Article Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Alarid, L. F. Articles by Montemayor, C. D. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Attorney Perspectives and Decisions on the Presentence Investigation Report: A Research Note

University of Texas at San Antonio

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: Leanne.Alarid{at}utsa.edu.

	Abstract

Presentence investigation reports (PSIRs) are still used as an important component in some sentencing recommendations. Perspectives on the utility of the PSIR have typically focused on probation officers and less so on attorneys who use the document in plea negotiations and in sentencing recommendations. This study examines the importance of the PSIR for 57 prosecutors and 16 defense attorneys. Findings indicate that adult record, history of probation/parole, victim-impact statements, official version of offense, gang affiliation, and pending cases were viewed as important for prosecutors than for defense attorneys when preparing sentencing recommendations using the PSIR. Implications of these findings will be discussed.

First published on September 18, 2009
Criminal Justice Policy Review 2009, doi:10.1177/0887403409344166


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?