Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Access Criminology and Criminal Justice journals now

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Criminal Justice Policy Review
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rodriguez, N.
Right arrow Articles by Webb, V. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Probation Violations, Revocations, and Imprisonment

The Decisions of Probation Officers, Prosecutors, and Judges Pre- and Post-Mandatory Drug Treatment

Nancy Rodriguez

Arizona State University, Glendale

Vincent J. Webb

Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, TX

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., revocation). 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 probation, 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 majority of revocations leading to incarceration involved technical violations and not the commission of new crimes. Furthermore, the type of violations significantly differed pre- and postimplementation of the law, as did prosecution and sentencing decisions. Policy implications for probation supervision and drug treatment laws are discussed.

Key Words: probation revocation • probation violations • mandatory drug treatment

Criminal Justice Policy Review, Vol. 18, No. 1, 3-30 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0887403406292956
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?