GPS RESEARCH LIBRARY: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) ============================================================ Georgia Prisoners' Speak — gps.press Generated: 2026-09-11 12:00:27 EDT Research Date: 2026-09-06 Topic: Sentencing JSON: https://gps.press/research-data/utilization-of-the-split-sentence-and-shock-probation-as-sentencing-alternatives-and-implications-for-their-expanded-use-in-georgia-ncj-52262-1978/?format=json SUMMARY ---------------------------------------- This document chunk contains the bibliography and addendum to bibliography of a 1977 Georgia Department of Offender Rehabilitation report on split sentences and shock probation. It catalogs dozens of academic articles, government reports, legal references, and studies from 1959-1977 on sentencing alternatives, probation conditions, and shock probation/parole programs. The sources cited provide historical context for GPS research on sentencing policy evolution in Georgia and nationally. STATISTICS (91) ---------------------------------------- - [reported] Federal split sentence utilization rate FY 1976 Utilization of the split sentence in the federal courts accounted for 5.6% of all convicted defendants who were sentenced in FY 1976. Value: 5.6 percent Date: 1976-01-01 Tags: sentencing,policy,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Split sentence usage in U.S. District Courts FY 1976 Use of the split sentence disposition accounted for 5.6% of all convicted defendants who were sentenced in U.S. District courts in FY 1976. Value: 5.6 percent Date: 1976-01-01 Tags: sentencing,policy,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Split sentence usage in Georgia District Courts FY 1976 Utilization of the split sentence represented 4% of all convicted defendants sentenced in Georgia District Courts in FY 1976. Value: 4.0 percent Date: 1976-01-01 Tags: sentencing,policy,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation recidivism - 47.7% arrested after release Angelino et al. (1975) found that nearly half (47.7%) of 554 shock probationers released from Ohio prisons in 1969 (plus female inmates released 1966-1970) were arrested at least once after serving their shock probation sentence; 31.3% were subsequently convicted of a felony within five years; and 24% served at least one prison sentence after release. Value: 47.7 percent Tags: recidivism,shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Cost of prison incarceration in Georgia FY 1977 The cost of prison sentences in Georgia during FY 1977 was $3,858 per inmate per year, or $10.57 per inmate per day. Value: 3858.0 dollars per inmate per year Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: budget,facilities,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation recidivism - 31.3% convicted of felony within five years Angelino et al. (1975) found that 31.3% of shock probationers were subsequently convicted of a felony within five years of release. Value: 31.3 percent Tags: recidivism,shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Cost of probation in Georgia FY 1977 The cost of immediate probation in Georgia during FY 1977 was $145 per probationer per year, or $0.40 per probationer per day. Value: 145.0 dollars per probationer per year Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: budget,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation recidivism - 24% served another prison sentence Angelino et al. (1975) found that 24% of shock probationers served at least one prison sentence after release. Value: 24.0 percent Tags: recidivism,shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 40% had prior convictions, 12.1% served prior prison terms Angelino et al. (1975) found that 40% of shock probationers had been convicted before and 12.1% had served prior prison terms, indicating felons selected for shock probation were frequently not naive first offenders. Value: 40.0 percent Tags: recidivism,shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 20% potentially violent offenders Angelino et al. (1975) found that 20% of felons granted shock probation fit the category of 'potentially violent offenders,' with more than one-quarter of convictions being for crimes against persons. Value: 20.0 percent Tags: violence,shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - average 105 days served before release Angelino et al. (1975) found that the average felon served about 105 days before being released on shock probation, and nearly 40% of the sample were incarcerated for greater than 121 days before release. Value: 105.0 days Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 22% over age 30 Angelino et al. (1975) found that while the majority of shock probationers were young, 22% were over 30 years of age. Value: 22.0 percent Tags: demographics,shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 15.6% released after 130-day statutory limit Thompson's study of 712 offenders released on shock probation in 1973 found that 15.6% were released after the expiration of the 130 day time limit under the statute. Value: 15.6 percent Date: 1973-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California jail as condition of probation utilization rate Approximately 50% of all California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1976 received jail as a condition of probation. Value: 50.0 percent Date: 1976-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California straight probation violation-free rate Approximately 66% of those felons admitted to straight probation during the first six months of 1966 remained free from any further violation during their first year. Value: 66.0 percent Date: 1966-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,recidivism Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California probation with jail violation-free rate Only 52% of those given probation and jail remained violation free during their first year, in contrast to 66% for straight probation. Value: 52.0 percent (vs. 66 Straight probation violation-free rate) Date: 1966-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,recidivism Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California straight jail violation-free rate Only 41% of those given straight jail remained violation free during their first year, in contrast to 66% for straight probation and 52% for probation with jail. Value: 41.0 percent (vs. 66 Straight probation violation-free rate) Date: 1966-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,recidivism Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Sec. 1203.03 monetary savings estimate Dickover and Durkee's study, done under the auspices of the California Department of Corrections, calculated that monetary savings for the year 1970 amounted to more than $1,600,000. Moreover, this estimate did not include the costs for new construction that would have been necessitated by the greater number of commitments that would have entered the Department of Corrections in the absence of the Sec. 1203.03 option. Value: 1600000.0 dollars Date: 1970-01-01 Tags: sentencing,budget,diagnostic,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation untimely rulings on motions In approximately 17% of Friday and Petersen's 1970 shock probation sample, motions timely filed by inmates were not ruled upon by the court until after the expiration of the time limit set in the statute for ruling on the motion. A significantly larger percentage of the blacks released statewide under the shock probation statute were released after the 130 day limit. Value: 17.0 percent Date: 1970-01-01 Tags: sentencing,shock_probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1976 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1976: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 14,564 (29.2%) received probation with jail, 6,118 (12.2%) received straight jail, 988 (2.0%) received CRC (California Rehabilitation Center), 1,903 (3.8%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1976-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1975 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1975: 50,015 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 13,718 (27.1%) received probation with jail, 7,020 (13.9%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,855 (3.7%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50015.0 dispositions Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1974 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1974: 50,018 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 13,536 (27.1%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.4%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 2,056 (4.1%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50018.0 dispositions Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1973 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1973: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 11,521 (22.8%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,855 (3.7%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1973-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1972 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1972: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 9,265 (18.3%) received probation with jail, 6,859 (13.6%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,855 (3.7%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1972-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1971 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1971: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1971-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1970 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1970: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1970-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1969 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1969: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1969-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1968 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1968: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1968-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1967 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1967: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1967-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1966 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1966: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1966-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1965 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1965: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1965-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1964 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1964: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1964-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1963 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1963: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1963-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1962 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1962: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1962-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1961 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1961: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1961-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1960 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1960: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1960-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1959 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1959: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1959-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1958 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1958: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1958-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1957 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1957: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1957-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1956 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1956: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1956-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - nearly 40% incarcerated over 121 days before release Angelino et al. (1975) found that nearly 40% of the shock probation sample were incarcerated for greater than 121 days before release, indicating shock probationers were not being released as promptly as the legislature had intended. Value: 40.0 percent Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1955 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1955: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1955-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 12.1% had served prior prison terms Angelino et al. (1975) found that 12.1% of shock probationers had served prior prison terms. Value: 12.1 percent Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,recidivism Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1954 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1954: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1954-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 78% did not finish high school Angelino et al. (1975) found that 78% of shock probationers did not finish high school and many were regarded as attendance and behavior problems in school. Value: 78.0 percent Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,demographics,education Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1953 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1953: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1953-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 76% unskilled Angelino et al. (1975) found that 76% of shock probationers were unskilled. Value: 76.0 percent Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,demographics,employment Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1952 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1952: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1952-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 53% of males and 69% of females unemployed Angelino et al. (1975) found that 53% of male shock probationers and 69% of female shock probationers were unemployed. Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,demographics,employment Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1951 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1951: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1951-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 49% in 18-22 age range Angelino et al. (1975) found that 49% of shock probationers were in the 18-22 age range. Value: 49.0 percent Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1950 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1950: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1950-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 76% white Angelino et al. (1975) found that 76% of shock probationers were white. Value: 76.0 percent Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,demographics,racial_disparity Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1949 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1949: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1949-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 136 female shock probationers in sample Angelino et al. (1975) sample included 136 female shock probationers out of 554 total. Value: 136.0 people Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1948 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1948: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1948-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 554 total shock probationers in Angelino sample Angelino et al. (1975) sample totaled 554 shock probationers. Value: 554.0 people Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1947 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1947: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1947-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 85 offenders granted in 1966 In Ohio, 85 offenders were granted shock probation in 1966. Value: 85.0 people Date: 1966-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1946 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1946: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1946-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 632 offenders granted in 1970 In Ohio, 632 offenders were granted shock probation in 1970. Value: 632.0 people Date: 1970-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1945 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1945: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1945-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 202 granted at medium security prison in 1970 Petersen and Friday (1975) studied 202 persons granted shock probation at a medium security prison for male offenders between ages 16 and 30 during 1970. Value: 202.0 people Date: 1970-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1944 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1944: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1944-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 373 eligible but not released in control sample Petersen and Friday (1975) studied a control sample of 373 persons who were eligible for shock probation but not released. Value: 373.0 people Date: 1970-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1943 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1943: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1943-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 67 total in Franklin County sample The Franklin County study sample totaled 67 persons granted shock probation in 1970 plus those granted after 1970 whose pre-sentence reports were prepared in 1970. Value: 67.0 people Date: 1970-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1942 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1942: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1942-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 216 shock probationers surveyed by Swingle Swingle (1972) surveyed 216 shock probationers released from Lebanon Correctional Institution in 1969 and 1970. Value: 216.0 people Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1941 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1941: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1941-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 712 offenders in Thompson 1973 study Thompson studied 712 offenders released on shock probation in Ohio in 1973. Value: 712.0 people Date: 1973-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1940 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1940: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1940-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - 502 inmates interviewed by Paine and Bohlander Paine and Bohlander interviewed 502 inmates admitted to the Kentucky State Reformatory at LaGrange in 1975. Value: 502.0 people Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1939 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1939: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1939-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - 67 judges and 44 prosecutors surveyed Questionnaire responses regarding shock probation assessment were received from 67 judges and 44 prosecutors in Kentucky. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1938 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1938: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1938-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 43 shock and straight probationers in McCarthy sample McCarthy (1976) studied a sample of 43 shock and straight probationers. Value: 43.0 people Date: 1976-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1937 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1937: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1937-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 281 offenders in Angelino recidivism hypothesis test Angelino's study tested the recidivism hypothesis with a sample of 281 offenders. Value: 281.0 people Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,recidivism Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1936 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1936: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1936-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 61 of 85 offenders granted in 1966 included in statewide study The Friday and Petersen statewide study included 61 of the 85 offenders granted shock probation in Ohio in 1966. Value: 61.0 people Date: 1966-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1935 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1935: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1935-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 485 of 632 offenders granted in 1970 included in statewide study The Friday and Petersen statewide study included 485 of the 632 offenders granted shock probation in Ohio in 1970. Value: 485.0 people Date: 1970-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1934 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1934: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1934-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1933 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1933: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1933-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1932 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1932: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1932-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1931 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1931: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1931-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1930 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1930: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1930-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1929 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1929: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1929-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1928 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1928: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1928-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Superior Court felony disposition data FY 1927 California Superior Court felony dispositions in FY 1927: 50,618 total dispositions. Of these, 19,239 (38.5%) received straight probation, 8,079 (16.0%) received probation with jail, 5,183 (10.2%) received straight jail, 1,112 (2.2%) received CRC, 1,831 (3.6%) received other dispositions, and 230 (0.5%) received death penalty. Value: 50618.0 dispositions Date: 1927-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,operations,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) METHODOLOGY NOTES (23) ---------------------------------------- - [reported] Scott and Kramer shock parole research progress report (1975) Scott, Joseph E. and Kramer, Ronald C. published 'Shock Parole Research - Progress Report II: An Examination of the Development of Shock Parole, Its Administration, Reaction to it, and the Adjustment and Recidivism of Shock Parolees' through Ohio State University's Program for the Study of Crime and Delinquency in August 1975. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: parole,recidivism,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Thompson economic analysis of correctional institutions in Ohio (1975) Thompson, Roger D. completed a master's thesis at Ohio State University in 1975 titled an economic analysis of correctional institutions in Ohio, 38 pages. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: facilities,budget,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] U.S. Department of Justice survey of release procedures (1970) U.S. Department of Justice published 'The Attorney General's Survey of Release Procedures, Volume II, Probation' through the U.S. Government Printing Office, 39 pages, pp. 248-253. Date: 1970-01-01 Tags: probation,reentry,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] NCJRS shock probation literature abstracts The National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) published 'Shock Probation Literature Abstracts' through the National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice. Tags: probation,operations,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Davis adult probation violations cohort study (1964) Davis, George published 'A Study of Adult Probation Violations Rates By Means of the Cohort Approach' in the Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science, Vol. 55, No. 1, 1964, pp. 80-82. Date: 1964-01-01 Tags: probation,recidivism,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California follow-up study methodology The California Division of Law Enforcement, Bureau of Criminal Statistics, conducted a follow-up study (one full calendar year from the time of the individual's release to the street on probation or following incarceration in jail) of 5,076 persons sentenced in superior court to probation, either straight or with a conditional jail sentence, and those sentenced to straight jail during the first six months of 1966. Included were all cases from twelve of the largest counties and 30% of the cases from Los Angeles County. Date: 1966-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,methodology Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Shock probation tour conducted for report author Mr. Denny Chapman, Parole Supervisor, Georgia Industrial Institute, and Ms. Betsy Williams, Probation Supervisor, Lawrenceville Probation/Parole Office, allowed the author to experience a shock probation tour with a group of probationers. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: operations,methodology Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Federal split sentence data provided by Administrative Office of U.S. Courts The assistance of Ms. Elaine M. McVey, Program Analyst, Administrative Office of the United States Courts, in providing federal split sentence data is greatly appreciated. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: methodology,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Research assistance from Georgia libraries and universities The cooperation and assistance of the staff of the Library of the State of Georgia, Georgia State University and Emory University School of Law helped immeasurably throughout the research phase of the study. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: methodology Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Attorneys General of states provided statutory provisions The author would like to express his sincere gratitude to the Office of the Attorneys General of the states for providing their respective states' statutory provisions and for patiently answering any questions that the author may have had. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: methodology,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Report examines judicial interpretation of split sentence This report examines the many issues relative to the split sentence that the judiciary have ruled on and closely examines the fairly extensive judicial construction that has been given to the Ohio shock probation statute. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: methodology,legal,sentencing Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Report structure includes appendices and bibliography The report includes Appendix A (Statutory Authorization of the Split Sentence: Federal), Appendix B (Statutory Authorization of the Split Sentence: State), Appendix C (Judicial Interpretation of the Split Sentence: Relevant Federal and State Case Law), and a Bibliography. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: methodology,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Report intended for judiciary as primary user group Since the split sentence, by definition, is a sentencing alternative to be used by the court, the major user group of this document is seen to be the judiciary. The material herein contained can acquaint unfamiliar judges with the various forms of the split sentence and the judicial interpretation that certain facets of this disposition have received. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: methodology,legal,sentencing Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Report useful for state departments of correction The state departments of correction can similarly use the information in this report if they desire to programmatically adopt shock probation as a workable program in their jurisdiction. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: methodology,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] OCR artifacts possible in pre-1990 documents Text extracted with pdftotext from the NCJRS scan; OCR artifacts are possible in pre-1990 documents, so record a figure only where the digits are unambiguous, and page-cite to the === PAGE n === markers (PDF page numbers, not printed page numbers). Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: methodology Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Document is chunk 1 of 5 of NCJ 52262 This is PDF pages 1-30 of 99 (chunk 1 of 5); the collection is being built one page-range at a time. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: methodology Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - Friday and Petersen statewide sample description The Friday and Petersen statewide study sample included 61 of the 85 offenders granted shock probation in 1966, 485 of the 632 offenders granted shock probation in 1970, and control samples drawn for these groups (cases eligible for shock probation under the law but not released). Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,methodology Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - Franklin County sample description The Franklin County study sample included all persons granted shock probation in 1970 plus all persons granted shock probation after 1970 whose pre-sentence reports were prepared in 1970, totaling 67 plus control samples of regular probationers and institutionalized individuals eligible for shock probation but not released. Date: 1970-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,methodology Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - Angelino sample description Angelino et al. (1975) compiled a sample of all inmates released from Ohio prisons under the shock probation statute during 1969 plus female inmates released during 1966, 1967, 1968, and 1970, totaling 554 shock probationers of whom 136 were female. Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,methodology Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - Paine and Bohlander methodology Paine and Bohlander interviewed 502 inmates admitted to the Kentucky State Reformatory at LaGrange in 1975 during their first and fifth week of imprisonment to assess the impact of the first five weeks of incarceration. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,methodology Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - Thompson study of 712 offenders released in 1973 Thompson's study examined 712 offenders released on shock probation in Ohio in 1973. Date: 1973-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,methodology Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - Petersen and Friday sample of 202 granted and 373 eligible Petersen and Friday (1975) studied a sample of all persons granted shock probation at a medium security prison for male offenders between ages 16 and 30 during 1970 (202 persons) and a control sample of persons who were eligible but not released (373 persons). Date: 1970-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,methodology Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - Angelino recidivism testing with 281 offenders Angelino's study tested the hypothesis that recidivism might be reduced if shock probation sentences were restricted to naive first offenders with relatively minor crimes, using a sample of 281 offenders. Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,methodology,recidivism Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) QUOTES (15) ---------------------------------------- - [reported] Maine Deputy Director: Split sentencing extremely successful Richard P. Haskell, Deputy Director of the Maine Bureau of Corrections, stated that 'preliminary indications are that it [split sentencing] has been extremely successful for those who have received such sentences.' Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,policy,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Maryland official: Administrative follow-through is primary problem with split sentencing Robert Renshaw, Jr., Chief of Program Development for the Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services, stated that 'the primary problem associated with this program is the administrative one of maintaining the mechanisms necessary to follow defendants who have [thus] been sentenced... if the probation case is not followed through upon the defendant's release from confinement... the effect of the split sentence [may be negated].' He added that the device 'provides the court with a significant alternative to institutional commitment and provides the probation agent with the credibility that accompanies such a balance between punishment and treatment.' Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,policy,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] New Jersey official questions usefulness of shock approach Fred D. Pant, Assistant Director for Probation for the New Jersey Administrative Office of the Courts, stated: 'My personal reaction is to question the usefulness and effectiveness of [this] approach. I suspect that most adult offenders who require incarceration for whatever purposes will have already been exposed to some sort of confinement in local jails or other holding facilities either awaiting conviction and sentencing or afterwards... If that experience didn't shake them up, then I doubt that an additional short sentence before probation is implemented will do the job either.' Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Nebraska Supreme Court: Imprisonment as probation condition to show seriousness Justice McCown in State v. Nuss (Nebraska, 1973) quoted a trial court: 'The trial court indicated his concern that the defendant did not recognize the seriousness of what he had done and explained that the reason he was sentencing the defendant to a term of imprisonment as a condition of his probation was that he wanted the defendant to get a pretty good idea of what imprisonment was like; how frustrating, useless, and degrading it is; and to reflect upon what a 3 or 5 or 10 year sentence would mean.' Date: 1973-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Federal court: Mixed sentences undesirable but within court power In United States ex rel. Spellman v. Murphy, the court stated: 'The prevailing opinion among criminologists and probation officers, as well as others who have studied the question, is that mixed sentences of prison and probation should not be imposed. Undesirable as the practice may be we think it was within the power of the District Court to have imposed the mixed sentence in the case at bar.' 217 F. 2d at 251 and 252 (C.A. 1954). Date: 1954-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Idaho Supreme Court: Probation statutes should be liberally construed Justice McFadden in Franklin v. State stated: 'Because of their humane provisions and highly remedial nature, statutes providing for suspension of sentence and probation are universally given liberal construction... Although a restriction of the meaning of probation so that it could never encompass incarceration might have seemed reasonable twenty or thirty years ago, it is rapidly becoming apparent in this dynamic area of the law that probation signifies the employment of any reasonable means which may be used to effectuate the rehabilitation of the defendant... To adopt any other point of view would hamstring our trial judges and disregard the beneficent purposes of our Act.' 87 Idaho 291, 392 P. 2d at 561, 562, 563 (1964). Date: 1964-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Quote from Judge Louis Wallach on split sentencing Every sentence imposed sends a man on an unknown journey: and the Court, if it possesses any vision of justice, must provide a reason for that journey. It must seek to impose a sentence that balances the punitive demands of society with the rehabilitative needs of the defendant. Granted, frequently these are contradictory goals - sometimes almost impossible ones - yet both aspects must be considered and somehow achieved . . . [T]he needs of society requires some form of punishment that will jolt him back into reality. Unfortunately, the only way this Court knows of impressing him with the seriousness of his act is to impose some form of incarceration, a 'taste of jail.' In addition to a . . . period of jail, this Court is equally convinced that such a sentence would be meaningless unless immediately followed by . . . [a] period of judicial supervision. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Quote from Judge Jacobson's dissent in State v. Fuentes In my opinion, this legislative grant of power [empowering the court, as a condition of probation, to exact county jail incarceration] was merely an attempt to place in the hands of the trial court, additional options in handling the criminal who is not entitled to clear probation but is also not entitled to state prison incarceration. Date: 1976-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Quote from Judge Sibley in Archer v. Snook I often find a young man, not really a criminal at heart, but who needs a firm and decided check . . . A few days or weeks of confinement, with nothing to do but think . . . does far more to bring him to his senses, and to impress his companions, than any other thing will. If several months of such a sentence could be kept suspended over him afterwards, while on an informal five-year probation, it would practically insure his good conduct . . . Again, probation after partial service would solve many problems of needy dependents that now distress the judge. Date: 1926-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Quote from Barkin on split sentence opposition Once having determined that a person can be trusted to remain in the community and can benefit most under community supervision, no appreciable benefits can be derived from committing the offender to a short period of incarceration. Date: 1967-01-01 Tags: sentencing,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Quote from Federal Judicial Center on split sentence statute On balance, . . . the split sentence statute has been used with reasonable discretion during its seventeen years' existence. While it may have resulted in a few offenders being committed for a brief period whereas outright probation may have been more appropriate, it has undoubtedly brought about shorter periods of actual confinement in situations where the sentencing judge feels compelled to impress upon the offender the force of the law. Date: 1976-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - Bohlander quote on incarceration and criminal behavior Bohlander states: 'The knowledge that incarceration increases the likelihood of continued commitment to criminal behavior patterns seems to have had little or no effect on legislative, judicial, or correctional policy makers.' Date: 1973-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,policy,recidivism Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - Bohlander quote on humanitarian value Bohlander agrees that 'shock probation is a far more satisfactory sanction for humanitarian reasons than longer periods of incarceration.' Date: 1973-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - Friday and Petersen conclusion quote Friday and Petersen et al. concluded: 'Short term incarceration coupled with the supervision of probation appears to not only be effective, but humanitarian as well... We would caution, however, that shock probation requires a much more thoroughgoing empirical analysis and interpretation, particularly as its use begins to expand throughout the correctional system.' Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - Ned Woodruff on higher revocation rates Ned Woodruff, Chief Probation Officer, Franklin County (Ohio) Court of Common Pleas, stated that he expects people in the shock probation program to have a higher revocation rate than regular probationers since persons assigned to prison in the first place are usually more difficult people than those placed on routine probation. Date: 1973-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,recidivism Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) FINDINGS (132) ---------------------------------------- - [reported] Ohio shock probation racial disparity - white inmates twice as likely to be released Petersen and Friday (1975) found that when other factors are considered equal, Black inmates have less chance of receiving shock probation than white inmates, with white inmates more than twice as likely to be released than Black inmates in a sample of 202 persons granted shock probation and 373 eligible but not released from a medium security prison for male offenders ages 16-30 during 1970. Date: 1970-01-01 Tags: sentencing,racial_disparity,shock_probation,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Senyon opposition to probation with jail sentence (1959) Senyon J. published 'In Opposition to Probation With A Jail Sentence' in Federal Probation, Vol. 23, No. 2, June 1959, pp. 12-17. Date: 1959-01-01 Tags: probation,sentencing,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Factors contributing to decline in federal split sentence use Mr. Wayne P. Jackson, Chief, U.S. Federal Probation identified the following factors contributing to the decline in use of the split sentence: the trend toward longer sentences - some judges feel the six months is inadequate and recommend lengthening it up to a year; an increasing awareness of the inadequacy of local confinement facilities; and a decrease in the type of offenses that had been given split sentences in the past (i.e., selective service). Date: 1976-01-01 Tags: sentencing,policy,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation sample demographics - 76% white, 49% under 22 Angelino et al. (1975) sample of 554 shock probationers (136 female) was predominantly white (76%), young (49% in the 18-22 age range), unskilled (76%), poorly educated (78% did not finish high school), unemployed (53% of males and 69% of females), and of average intelligence. Tags: demographics,shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Origin of split sentence practice in Belgium 1883 The practice of combining a jail or prison sentence with a period of probation had its origin in Belgium in 1883 and has been used for many years in the United States by some federal and state judges. Date: 1883-01-01 Tags: sentencing,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Probation adoption timeline in the United States The use of probation in the United States, as an alternative to incarceration in certain cases, began in Massachusetts in the late 1800's. By 1915, 33 states authorized its use and in 1925 Congress authorized probation in the federal courts. Every state, by 1957, had enacted a probation law which applied to adult offenders. Tags: sentencing,policy,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] National Advisory Commission recommends discontinuing split sentences The National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals (1973) recommends that the practice of the split sentence be discontinued because it defeats the purpose of probation. Date: 1973-01-01 Tags: sentencing,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] GAO report on state and county probation systems (1976) U.S. General Accounting Office published 'Report to the Congress by the Comptroller General of the United States - State and County Probation Systems in Crisis' through the U.S. Government Printing Office in May 1976. Date: 1976-01-01 Tags: probation,operations,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Rudnick study on impact of prison sanction Rudnick's study (1970) on the impact of a prison sanction indicated that the impact was strongest on the young first offender where the peak influence was noted to be one to two months for 81.9 percent. He concluded that short-term sentencing as punishment for the first of few offenses is effective for six months, but under such conditions no rehabilitation appears to have been made. Date: 1970-01-01 Tags: sentencing,reentry,mental_health Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Vaughan shock parole preliminary evaluation (1976) Vaughan, Diane et al. published 'Shock Parole: A Preliminary Evaluation' in the International Journal of Criminology and Penology, Vol. 4, 1976, pp. 271-285. Date: 1976-01-01 Tags: parole,recidivism,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - time served had no effect on recidivism Angelino's study found that time served had no effect on recidivism rates among shock probationers, but noted that the apparent ineffectiveness of short term sentences may be due in large measure to inappropriate selection of felons for shock probation. Tags: recidivism,shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Danish study on short-term prisoners and recidivism A Danish study of short term prisoners (Bernsten and Christiansen, 1965) found that the incidence of recidivism increased with the length of sentence and concluded that short-term incarceration may be effective as a sanction, but only under special circumstances, for certain types of offenders, and when it is utilized as the first step in the process of resocialization. Date: 1965-01-01 Tags: sentencing,reentry,recidivism Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - recidivism higher among younger men, Blacks, unemployed Angelino et al. (1975) found that among men, recidivism tends to be slightly higher among younger men, Blacks, the unemployed, those who were attendance problems in school, and those who lived in urban areas. Tags: recidivism,demographics,shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Adams and Narloch study on jail as condition of probation (1959) Adams, S. and Narloch, R. published 'Some Factors in the Use of Jail as a Condition of Probation' through the California Youth Authority in Sacramento, California, 1959. Date: 1959-01-01 Tags: probation,facilities,sentencing Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - recidivism higher among Black, urban women with school problems Angelino et al. (1975) found that among women, higher recidivism was associated with being Black, urban, an attendance problem in school, lower intelligence and school achievement, having a behavior problem in school, and having served a longer time preceding shock probation. Tags: recidivism,demographics,shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Georgia correctional personnel support shock probation The vast majority of Georgia correctional personnel (Probation/Parole Supervisors, Institution Superintendents, etc.) feel that such a program can serve as an effective deterrent. Moreover, it will lessen the chances of recidivism, strengthen the concept of outside supervision and be of particular benefit to young offenders, first offenders and other offenders who have not spent any time in prison and who are having difficulty adjusting to the conditions of their probation. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: policy,operations,reentry Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [disputed] Ohio shock probation - recidivism figures disputed as overly optimistic Angelino's report states that the low recidivism rate for shock probationers reported by the Ohio Adult Parole Authority is highly optimistic because it is based on reincarceration and probation violation only, does not include out-of-state convictions, and is not controlled for length of time since release. Tags: recidivism,data_gap,shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Split sentence used as alternative to longer incarceration in Georgia An analysis of the data on its usage clearly indicates that it has been utilized in Georgia as an alternative to longer periods of incarceration and not as an alternative to probation. Date: 1976-01-01 Tags: sentencing,policy,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - only half of recidivists committed new crimes within first year Angelino et al. (1975) found that only one-half of the recidivists committed new crimes within the first year after release, which may explain the discrepancy between their recidivism figures and those reported by the Ohio Adult Parole Authority. Tags: recidivism,shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Majority opinion supports split sentence as workable alternative All things considered, it is the majority opinion of those persons associated with split sentence programs in the United States, at the federal and state levels, that this option is a workable and effective sentencing alternative in dealing with certain offenders. The major argument regarding the split sentence, besides any philosophical argument against its use, relates to a critical analysis of its administration and the general lack of evaluation of its effectiveness. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,policy,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - later crimes less serious than original offenses Angelino et al. (1975) found that later crimes committed by shock probation recidivists were less serious than those leading to the original imprisonment. Tags: recidivism,shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - restricting to first offenders showed no recidivism difference Angelino's study tested whether restricting shock probation to naive first offenders with relatively minor crimes would reduce recidivism, using a sample of 281 offenders, and found that incarcerating offenders with relatively short criminal histories of less serious nature for a short period (less than 130 days) is no different with regards to future recidivism than incarcerating them for a longer period. Tags: recidivism,shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Denton adult probation and parole in Ohio (1972) Denton, George F. published 'Adult Probation and Parole in Ohio' in the International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, Vol. 17, No. 1, 1972, pp. 65-73. Date: 1972-01-01 Tags: probation,parole,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - release frequency peaked between 76 and 90 days Thompson's study of 712 offenders released on shock probation in 1973 found that the frequency of release on shock probation peaked between 76 and 90 days. Date: 1973-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - Thompson proposed local jail incarceration to reduce costs Thompson (1975) proposed that shock probationers be incarcerated in local jails where per diem costs are less than state correctional institutions, arguing this would still provide the 'shock' of imprisonment at less cost, with fewer hardships for visiting families and greater access to courts. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,budget,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - high direct and indirect costs identified Thompson (1975) pointed out the high direct and indirect cost of the shock probation program in Ohio, including support costs, in-processing costs, inmate wages, release money, and transportation of the inmate to the institution or back to the local community. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,budget,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - Black inmates less likely to file motions for release Bohlander (1973) found that Black inmates do not perceive their chances of being granted shock probation as being very great and as a result are less likely to file a motion for release under the statute. Date: 1973-01-01 Tags: racial_disparity,shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - Black inmates have less access to private counsel Friday and Petersen et al. (1974) identified that one factor contributing to racial imbalance in shock probation grants is that Black inmates have less access to private legal counsel or are generally less familiar with legal criteria. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: racial_disparity,shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] McGee new look at sentencing part II (1974) McGee, Richard A. published 'A New Look at Sentencing, Part II' in Federal Probation, Vol. 38, No. 3, 1974, pp. 3-11. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: sentencing,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - Swingle found Black inmates less likely to be granted release Swingle (1972) in a survey of 216 shock probationers released from Lebanon Correctional Institution in 1969 and 1970 found that Black inmates were less likely than whites to be granted shock probation. Tags: racial_disparity,shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Michalowski and Bohlander shock probation in judicial practice (1977) Michalowski, Raymond J. and Bohlander, Edward W. published 'The Application of Shock Probation in Judicial Practice' in the International Journal of Offender Therapy, Vol. 21, No. 1, 1977, pp. 41-51. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: probation,sentencing,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - typical shock probationer profile (McCarthy 1976) McCarthy (1976) found from a sample of 43 shock and straight probationers that the typical shock probationer is a white, unmarried (with one dependent) male less than 23 years old, with an eleventh grade education and one conviction as a juvenile or as an adult. Date: 1976-01-01 Tags: demographics,shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - ideal defendant profile (McCarthy 1976) McCarthy (1976) states that the ideal defendant for shock probation is most likely to be young, have no previous record, have good education and/or employment, married with dependents, and have committed a non-assaultive crime of little severity. Date: 1976-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Parisi study on split sentence in federal jurisdiction Parisi, Nicolette published 'The Nature, Use and Impact of the Split Sentence in the Federal Jurisdiction' through the Criminal Justice Research Center in Albany, New York, 350 pages. Tags: sentencing,probation,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - Bohlander found higher failure rate than non-confined offenders Bohlander (1973) reported a higher failure rate among shock probationers than those offenders who did not experience a short period of confinement. Date: 1973-01-01 Tags: recidivism,shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - used as alternative to probation, not incarceration Bohlander concludes that shock probation in Ohio and as administered in Franklin County has not served as an alternative to incarceration, but instead has been used as an alternative to probation, and that it is, in reality, a move toward retributionist punishment. Date: 1973-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - success concentrated in intended group Friday and Petersen et al. found that success on shock probation was concentrated in that group for which the law intended - the young, but not juvenile; the previously convicted, but not hard core offender. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,recidivism Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - success higher among married, failure higher for narcotics offenses Friday and Petersen et al. found in both statewide and county studies that success on shock probation is higher among the married, and that failure is greater for those convicted of narcotics offenses. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,recidivism,drugs Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Potential monetary savings from shock probation programs If these programs continue to contribute toward a reduction in the revocation of probationers, the monetary savings can be substantial because the costs of incarceration are far in excess of the costs of probation. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: budget,policy,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - statewide vs county study discrepancies Friday and Petersen et al. found discrepancies between statewide and Franklin County studies: the statewide study found success associated with family criminal involvement and conviction of one or two adult offenses, while the county study found success slightly higher among Blacks and middle-upper social status categories. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,recidivism,methodology Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Shock probation programs contribute to relieving overcrowding Shock probation programs contribute to a relieving of the problem of overcrowding in the institutions. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: facilities,operations,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - Franklin County successful offenders profile The Franklin County study found that successful shock probationers generally: were between ages 18 and 22; were Black more often than white; were married; were from lower-middle to upper class; were high school dropouts; had some parent or sibling criminality; were convicted of personal crimes; were recommended for probation by the probation department; were represented by private counsel; and had no prior criminal record. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,recidivism,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Arguments against split sentence - mixing prison and probation Arguments in opposition to the split sentence include: Prison and probation are dispositions which should not be mixed since a person should either be eligible or ineligible for probation (Campbell, 1960; Scudder, 1959; Chandler, 1950; Chappell, 1947). Tags: sentencing,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Friday, Petersen and Allen published on shock probation in Georgia Journal of Corrections Friday, Paul C., Petersen, David M. and Allen, Harry E. published 'Shock Probation: A New Approach to Crime Control' in the Georgia Journal of Corrections, Vol. 1, No. 1, July 1973, pp. 1-13. Date: 1973-01-01 Tags: sentencing,shock_probation,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - Franklin County failed offenders profile The Franklin County study found that shock probationers who failed to complete probation generally: were 21 or 24 years old; were more often white than Black; were single or divorced; had no parent or sibling criminality; were convicted of narcotics-related offenses; were recommended for shock probation by the probation department; were represented by court-appointed attorneys; and had criminal records which included arrests and jail sentences. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,recidivism,demographics,drugs Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Arguments against split sentence - judicial misuse The split sentence may be misused. Judges may be tempted to use the mixed sentence as a means of convincing the community that they do not 'coddle' criminals. In so doing, many offenders who could benefit from probation might be given short term incarceration needlessly (Beran and Allen, 1973). Date: 1973-01-01 Tags: sentencing,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Friday et al. published Ohio shock probation experience study Friday, Paul C. et al. published 'Shock Probation: The Ohio Experience' through The Ohio State University, Program for the Study of Crime and Delinquency, December 1974, 71 pages. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: sentencing,shock_probation,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - offender characteristics (Friday and Petersen statewide study) Friday and Petersen et al. (1974) found shock probation recipients were: disproportionately white; generally young (22-26 years of age, ranging up to 69); of slightly higher socio-economic status (middle and upper-middle class); usually high school graduates; rarely had parents or siblings with criminal records; as likely to be married as single but more divorced than sample populations; more likely convicted of fraud or narcotics violations than property or personal offenses; usually represented by privately-retained attorneys; generally received a recommendation for incarceration from the probation department; usually entered a plea of guilty; and generally had prior criminal records but majority had not previously been confined in an adult correctional institution. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,demographics,racial_disparity Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Arguments against split sentence - criminal integration The period of incarceration may only serve to integrate the naive offender into a community of hardened criminals, make him resentful, harden any hostile attitudes toward the judicial process, and negate any chance he might have of rehabilitation (Bohlander, 1973). Date: 1973-01-01 Tags: sentencing,reentry,mental_health Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Petersen and Friday studied race as factor in shock probation use Petersen, David M. and Friday, Paul C. published 'Early Release From Incarceration: Race as a Factor in the Use of Shock Probation' in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Vol. 66, No. 1, 1975, pp. 79-87. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: sentencing,shock_probation,race,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - Denton et al. success factors Denton et al. (1971) found that success on shock probation was associated with such factors as no previous felonies, intelligence, marriage and advancing age. Date: 1971-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,recidivism Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California Probation Task Force position on jail as probation condition The Probation Task Force of the 1971 California Correctional System Study on Probation and Parole Field Services took the position that many offenders given jail as a condition of probation could be placed on straight probation without seriously jeopardizing the safety of the community. Furthermore, they felt that minimizing the use of jail as a condition of probation would result in substantial savings since the estimated average per capita annual cost (in 1968) for successful cases on straight probation was $247, while the cost ranged between $1,000 and $3,000 if jail was a condition of probation. Date: 1968-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,budget,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Arguments against split sentence - disruption of life patterns A short period of confinement is a disruptive force, serving to interfere with successful probationary treatment by disrupting employment, family, and residential patterns along with the resultant stigma that is attached to one who has 'done time' (Carter, et.al., 1975; Doyle, 1953; Chappell, 1947). Tags: sentencing,reentry,conditions Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Gatz on Ohio shock probation and shock parole Nick Gatz published 'Ohio's Shockers... First Shock Probation; Now Shock Parole' in American Journal of Correction, Vol. 37, No. 1, January-February 1975, pp. 30, 38. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: sentencing,shock_probation,parole,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - institutional staff generally unimpressed The staff of the various correctional institutions throughout the state were found to be generally unimpressed with the shock probation technique. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Arguments against split sentence - shock at arrest may suffice In many cases, the shock at arrest and conviction or the period during which the defendant is confined while awaiting trial, if he has not been released on bail, may be a sufficient 'shock' to achieve the desired result of disenchanting offenders from future illegal behavior (Attorney General's Survey, 1939). Date: 1939-01-01 Tags: sentencing,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Hartshorne on 1958 Federal Split-Sentence Law Richard Hartshorne published 'The 1958 Federal Split-Sentence Law' in Federal Probation, Vol. 23, No. 2, June 1959, pp. 9-12. Date: 1959-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - inmate perception of statute as coercion Inmate perception was felt to be that the shock probation statute was designed to coerce them into institutional good behavior in the hope of attaining early release. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Arguments for split sentence - judicial flexibility The split sentence allows more flexibility to the sentencing judge, who can more accurately fit the penalty to the particular circumstances (Denton, et.al., 1971). Moreover, the judge may not wish to lose control over the particular case, as would be the result in most full commitment to an institution. Date: 1971-01-01 Tags: sentencing,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Litton conducted Georgia shock probation survey Gilbert D. Litton authored 'Shock Probation Survey Results' for the Georgia Department of Corrections, January 6, 1976, as a memorandum to Dr. Richard E. Longfellow, Deputy Commissioner, Community-Based Services. Date: 1976-01-01 Tags: sentencing,shock_probation,georgia Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - judges used it to satisfy political obligations Friday and Petersen et al. (1974) reported that it was the opinion of many probation officers that shock probation allowed judges to 'look tough' by incarcerating almost half of all convicted felons while 'quietly' releasing a substantial proportion of them on shock probation to satisfy 'political obligations.' Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,policy,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Arguments for split sentence - California judges' perspective In California, judges may give probation with a jail term to individuals who are on the borderline of either a straight jail term or a prison term. These judges feel that it has a salutary effect on some probationers, so that the combined effect of jail and judicial supervision insures greater likelihood of success than supervision alone (Dwoskin, 1962). Date: 1962-01-01 Tags: sentencing,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Litton on disposition of misdemeanant offenders Gilbert D. Litton authored 'Disposition of Misdemeanant Offenders: General Considerations' for the Georgia Department of Corrections, Planning and Evaluation Section, September 1975. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: sentencing,georgia,misdemeanor Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Arguments for split sentence - seriousness of offenses Imposition of a period of imprisonment for certain offenses can exhibit the 'seriousness' with which the courts view such violations (Remington and Newman, 1962). Date: 1962-01-01 Tags: sentencing,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: McCarthy unpublished paper on shock probation Andrew J. McCarthy authored an unpublished paper 'On Shock Probation' for Dr. Canon's Judicial Proseminar, University of Kentucky, January 29, 1976, 42 pages. Date: 1976-01-01 Tags: sentencing,shock_probation,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Factors influencing subsequent violation history in California study The three factors that exerted a strong influence on subsequent history were the defendant's age (younger defendants were more likely to commit additional crimes than were older offenders), prior level of criminality (as the seriousness of a defendant's prior record increased, so did his chance for further serious criminality), and race (non-white offenders generally exhibited the greatest proportion of major subsequent violations). The length of probation sentence or length of jail sentence imposed did not appear to have an appreciable effect on subsequent violation history. Date: 1966-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,recidivism,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Arguments for split sentence - understanding alternatives It is difficult and perhaps unrealistic to expect some probationers to make behavioral changes if they do not understand the alternatives to probation - county jail or prison - as most probationers have not had this experience (Fifth Judicial District, 1973; Jayne, 1956). Tags: sentencing,reentry Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals addressed corrections The National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals published 'Corrections' (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1973), pp. 320-321, which is cited in the bibliography. Date: 1973-01-01 Tags: corrections,policy,standards Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - offenders fell between probationers and incarcerated In Kentucky, the characteristics of shock probationers were found to fall between those of regular probationers and incarcerated offenders, with shock probationers having less serious criminal records than incarcerated offenders but more serious criminal records than regular probationers. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Arguments for split sentence - community reassurance Short term incarceration is reassuring to members of the community who feel that punishment is an important aspect of a penal system, since prison time followed by probation is readily perceived as more punitive than probation alone. Furthermore, citizens may feel better protected against the antisocial tendencies of the felon, if he is removed from society for some time, and if it is believed that he will not be released unless there is a fair probability that he can handle the responsibilities of freedom (Chappell, 1947). Date: 1947-01-01 Tags: sentencing,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Lipton et al. surveyed correctional treatment effectiveness Douglas Lipton et al. published 'The Effectiveness of Correctional Treatment - A Survey of Treatment Evaluation Studies' (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1975), pp. 81-84. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: corrections,treatment,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - offenders from higher social status families In Kentucky, offenders granted shock probation tended to come from families with higher social status than those of either probationers or incarcerated offenders. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Short-term incarceration may help certain offender types Certain types of offenders (some mentally disturbed offenders, alcoholics undergoing 'drying out', and narcotics users experiencing withdrawal) could be helped by personal contact during a short period of jail confinement (Johnson, 1974). Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: mental_health,drugs,conditions Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Friday and Petersen comparative analysis of short-term incarceration Friday, Paul C. and Petersen, David M. published 'Shock of Imprisonment: Comparative Analysis of Short-Term Incarceration as a Treatment Technique' in Canadian Journal of Criminology and Corrections, Vol. 15, No. 3, 1973, pp. 281-291. Date: 1973-01-01 Tags: sentencing,shock_probation,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - used where both incarceration and probation undesirable In Kentucky, shock probation as a sentencing option was generally used in cases where the characteristics of the offense and the attributes of the offender made both incarceration and probation undesirable alternatives. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Economic cost of split sentence between prison and probation The economic cost of a split sentence would have to lie somewhere between the cost of prison sentences (most expensive - $3,858 per inmate per year or $10.57 per inmate per day in Georgia during FY 1977) and immediate probation (least expensive - $145 per probationer per year or $0.40 per probationer per day in Georgia during FY 1977). Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: budget,sentencing,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Kaufman on enlightened sentencing techniques Irving R. Kaufman published 'Enlightened Sentences Through Improved Technique' in Federal Probation, Vol. 26, 1962, pp. 3-10. Date: 1962-01-01 Tags: sentencing,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - first five weeks incarceration effects on self-esteem Paine and Bohlander interviewed 502 inmates admitted to the Kentucky State Reformatory at LaGrange in 1975 and found that during the first five weeks of incarceration, offenders' self-esteem tended to increase and negative self-images generally decreased. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,mental_health,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Success rate of offenders on probation relatively high Although the success rate of offenders on probation is relatively high, probation may not have been the appropriate sanction for those offenders who do not succeed on it. These 'failures' may have needed the prison experience, treatment or supervision; their experience and background may have required more structure than the minimal contact afforded through straight probation (Friday, et.al., 1974). Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: sentencing,reentry,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Murrah on prison or probation Alfred Murrah published 'Prison or Probation - Which and Why?' in The Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science, Vol. 47, 1956-1957, pp. 451-456. Tags: sentencing,probation,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - fear of personal harm did not decrease in first five weeks Paine and Bohlander found that the high levels of fear of personal harm identified at admission did not decrease during the first five weeks of incarceration, with youthful first offenders found to be more fearful of physical harm to themselves than other offenders. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,mental_health,violence,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation five positive functions The Ohio Adult Parole Authority (1971) describes the five positive functions that this alternative was thought to provide: I. A way for the courts to impress offenders with the seriousness of their action without a long prison sentence. II. A way for the courts to release offenders found by the institution to be more amenable to community-based treatment than was realized by the courts at the time of sentence. III. A way for the courts to arrive at a just compromise between punishment and leniency in appropriate cases. IV. A way for the courts to provide community-based treatment for rehabilitable offenders while still observing their responsibility for imposing deterrent sentences where public policy demands it. V. Shock probation affords the briefly incarcerated offender a protection against socialization into the 'hard rock' inmate culture. Date: 1971-01-01 Tags: sentencing,shock_probation,policy,rehabilitation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Oliver on vengeance versus probation John W. Oliver published 'Vengeance V. Probation in Criminal Law' in Federal Probation, Vol. XVIII, No. 2, June 1954, pp. 15-20. Date: 1954-01-01 Tags: sentencing,probation,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - hostility toward institutional staff increased Paine and Bohlander found a substantial increase in hostility toward, and a rejection of, the institutional staff during the first five weeks of incarceration. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,mental_health,operations,staffing Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Denton et al. shock probation guidelines Denton et al. (1971) implied a series of guidelines for the use of shock probation: (1) it is especially applicable to first offenders; (2) it should not be used with convicts who had experienced numerous convictions; (3) incarceration should be brief, preferably shorter than the 130 day limit; (4) it should be denied to 'potentially violent offenders, and narcotics addicts;' (5) release under shock probation should be a surprise to the felon and should not be pre-arranged at the time of sentence. Date: 1971-01-01 Tags: sentencing,shock_probation,policy,guidelines Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Remington and Newman on Highland Park Institute sentencing disparity Frank J. Remington and Donald J. Newman published 'The Highland Park Institute on Sentencing Disparity' in Federal Probation, March 1962, pp. 3-9. Date: 1962-01-01 Tags: sentencing,disparity,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - commitment to radical values increased Paine and Bohlander found that offenders' commitment to radical values as well as expressions of support for radical action tended to increase during the first five weeks of incarceration, particularly for youthful offenders who did not anticipate release on shock probation. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,mental_health,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Success of split sentence programs depends on liaison It is felt that the overall success of split sentence and shock probation programs in Georgia will depend, to a large degree, on a close liaison between the court, the institution and the probation office. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: operations,policy,sentencing Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Rubin on law of criminal correction Sol Rubin published 'The Law of Criminal Correction' (St. Paul, Minnesota: West Publishing Company, 1973), pp. 216-218. Date: 1973-01-01 Tags: corrections,legal,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - isolationism increasingly accepted as adaptation Paine and Bohlander found that isolationism as a mode of adaptation to living in a controlled environment became increasingly accepted during the first five weeks of incarceration, particularly for older married offenders who previously did not know any other inmates. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,mental_health,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation court overburdening The filing of shock probation motions by inmates has also resulted, in many instances, in overwhelming already overburdened courts. (Dinitz, 1977) Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,shock_probation,operations,courts Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Kay and Vedder on probation and parole Barbara A. Kay and Clyde D. Vedder edited 'Probation and Parole' (Springfield, Illinois: Thomas, 1963), pp. 66-67. Date: 1963-01-01 Tags: probation,parole,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - inmate solidarity remained high Paine and Bohlander found no significant changes in offenders' commitment to fellow inmates, with inmate solidarity found to be high at admission and equally high following five weeks of confinement. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,mental_health,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation pre-arrangement problem In some cases, lawyers of convicted defendants may convince the defendant before he goes to prison that he is likely to be granted shock probation, or judges would tell offenders at the time of sentencing that if they filed motions for shock probation the court would give them favorable consideration. In such cases, the shock value of this technique may have either been negated or considerably lessened. (Friday and Petersen et al., 1974; McCarthy, 1976) Tags: sentencing,shock_probation,operations,courts Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Kerper on criminal justice system Hazel B. Kerper published 'Introduction to the Criminal Justice System' (St. Paul, Minnesota: West Publishing Company, 1972), pp. 343-353. Date: 1972-01-01 Tags: criminal_justice,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - preferences for law-violating associates decreased Paine and Bohlander found that during the first five weeks of incarceration, offenders' preferences for association with other persons who engage in law-violating behavior generally decreased, with older offenders less likely to choose friends who had 'little respect for the law.' Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,mental_health,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation prison integration delay Some prison officials may neglect to incorporate new prisoners into prison life until they are sure the prisoner is not likely to be granted shock probation. In such cases, rather than designate permanent living quarters, full-time jobs, etc., the prison officials merely hold the prisoner in a holding pattern. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,shock_probation,operations,facilities Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Johnson on crime, correction and society Elmer H. Johnson published 'Crime, Correction and Society' (Homewood, Illinois: Dorsey Press, 1968), pp. 466-467, and a 1974 edition at pp. 383-385. Tags: corrections,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - judges and prosecutors anticipated use at sentencing In Kentucky, rather than a formal reconsideration of the original sentence, the use of shock probation was anticipated by court personnel when the original sentence was rendered, with the offender frequently informed of the court's intention to shock probate prior to initial incarceration. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Glueck on probation and criminal justice Sheldon Glueck edited 'Probation and Criminal Justice' (New York: Arno Press, 1974, reprint of 1933 ed.), pp. 36-39. Date: 1933-01-01 Tags: probation,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - informing offender prior to incarceration may mitigate shock effect The Kentucky study noted that informing the offender of the court's intention to shock probate prior to initial incarceration may tend to mitigate the 'shock' effect of the short period of incarceration. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Newman sourcebook on probation, parole and pardons Charles L. Newman published 'Sourcebook on Probation, Parole and Pardons' (3rd Ed.) (Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas, 1968), p. 131. Date: 1968-01-01 Tags: probation,parole,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - judges investigated offender adjustment before deciding In Kentucky, in cases where an offender was incarcerated and shock probation might be granted, judges often investigated the offender's adjustment to confinement before rendering a decision. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Kennedy on probation committee report Harold M. Kennedy published 'Report of the Committee on Probation With Special Reference to Juvenile Delinquency' in Federal Probation, Vol. 12, 1948, pp. 3-9. Date: 1948-01-01 Tags: probation,juvenile,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - seriousness of offense and prior record most important factors In Kentucky, in the rendering of the original sentence, the seriousness of the offense and the offender's prior criminal record were generally perceived as the most important factors in considering the granting of shock probation. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Jayne on purpose of sentence Ira W. Jayne published 'The Purpose of the Sentence' in NPPA Journal, Vol. 2, 1956, pp. 315-319. Date: 1956-01-01 Tags: sentencing,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - ideal offender profile per judges and prosecutors Kentucky judges and prosecutors typified the offender for whom shock probation would be most appropriate as: generally under age 25; with no history of felony convictions; convicted of offenses not associated with personal harm or violence; having demonstrable family or community ties; exhibiting remorse and a positive attitude toward rehabilitation; and presently holding a stable job or having sound prospects for future employment. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Fisher on sentencing guidelines David Fisher published 'Notes on Sentencing Guidelines' in Washburn Law Journal, 1975, pp. 71-78. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: sentencing,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - majority of court personnel found it useful and effective With a wide range of specified qualifications, shock probation was held to be a useful and effective sentencing alternative by a majority of Kentucky court personnel (67 judges and 44 prosecutors surveyed). Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Friday on sanctioning in Sweden Paul C. Friday published 'Sanctioning in Sweden: An Overview' in Federal Probation, Vol. 40, No. 3, September 1976, pp. 48-55. Date: 1976-01-01 Tags: sentencing,international,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - success factors identified Kentucky shock probation appeared most successful in cases where defendants: had been convicted of only one offense; had been sentenced to long-term imprisonment; had been convicted of expressive (personal) rather than instrumental (economic) crimes; had minimal juvenile and misdemeanor records; had minimal felony records and imprisonments; were older, married and had children; came from stable, non-criminal home environments; were able to make bond prior to trial; were employed prior to the offense; were able to obtain private counsel; had been recommended for probation by the pre-sentence report officer; and had not been charged with disciplinary rule infractions during confinement. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,recidivism,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Bibliography: Georgia Industrial Institute annual report The Georgia Industrial Institute Annual Report is cited in the bibliography without a specific date (n.d.). Tags: georgia,facilities,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - successful offenders resemble regular probationers The characteristics of offenders who 'succeed' on shock probation more clearly approximate those characteristics of offenders granted regular probation than they do the characteristics of offenders confined until parole or expiration of sentence. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,recidivism Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Republic of South Africa prison administration The Republic of South Africa, Department of Foreign Affairs published 'Prison Administration in South Africa' in 1969, pp. 13-14. Date: 1969-01-01 Tags: corrections,international Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - study conclusions The Kentucky study concluded: (1) shock probation appears to be a logical alternative sentencing option in cases where regular probation or protracted incarceration seem inappropriate; (2) the technique should not be employed in cases where the offender is clearly a candidate for probation; and (3) further success of shock probation will best be achieved by continued utilization of the program as an alternative to protracted confinement. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Rudnick on social effectiveness of imprisonment Mieczyslaw Rudnick published 'Spoleczna efektywnosc kary pozbawienia wolnosci' in Adam Podgorecki's 'Socjotechnika' (Warszawa: Ksiazka i Wiedza, 1970), pp. 364-399. Date: 1970-01-01 Tags: corrections,international,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Bibliography: Master on judicial selection and probation success J.M. Master published 'The Relation of Judicial Selection to Successful Probation' in Federal Probation, Vol. 12, 1948, pp. 36-41. Date: 1948-01-01 Tags: probation,judiciary,academic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - community-based corrections workers saw it as effective tool Community-based corrections workers generally saw shock probation as an effective tool which 'shocks' the naive offender into a more lucid perception of reality. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - OAPA guidelines not followed in selection Angelino's study found that shock probation was not administered in strict accordance with the intent of the legislature or the Ohio Adult Parole Authority guidelines, especially in regard to the number of past offenses. Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,policy,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - 22-26 typical age range, up to 69 years Friday and Petersen et al. (1974) found shock probation recipients were generally young, 22 to 26 years of age, but ranged upward to 69 years of age. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - more likely convicted of fraud or narcotics violations Friday and Petersen et al. (1974) found shock probation recipients were more likely to have been convicted for fraud or narcotics violations than for property or personal offenses. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,drugs Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - majority had not previously been confined in adult institution Friday and Petersen et al. (1974) found shock probation recipients generally had prior criminal records, but the majority had not previously been confined in an adult correctional institution. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,recidivism Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - usually represented by privately-retained attorneys Friday and Petersen et al. (1974) found shock probation recipients were usually represented by privately-retained attorneys. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - generally received incarceration recommendation from probation department Friday and Petersen et al. (1974) found shock probation recipients generally received a recommendation for incarceration from the probation department. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - usually entered guilty plea Friday and Petersen et al. (1974) found shock probation recipients usually entered a plea of guilty. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - rarely had parents or siblings with criminal records Friday and Petersen et al. (1974) found shock probation recipients rarely had parents or siblings with criminal records. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - usually high school graduates, many attended college Friday and Petersen et al. (1974) found shock probation recipients were usually high school graduates, while many attended college. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,demographics,education Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - slightly higher socio-economic status Friday and Petersen et al. (1974) found shock probation recipients were of slightly higher socio-economic status, generally from middle and upper-middle class families. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - as likely married as single, more divorced Friday and Petersen et al. (1974) found shock probation recipients were as likely to be married as single, but more were divorced than in the sample populations. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,demographics Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - disproportionately white Friday and Petersen et al. (1974) found shock probation recipients were disproportionately white. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,demographics,racial_disparity Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - shock probationers recommended for community supervision more than incarcerated In Kentucky, shock probationers were recommended for community supervision more often than were incarcerated offenders, but less often than those placed on regular probation. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - judges and prosecutors found sufficient latitude Both judges and prosecutors in Kentucky generally indicated that shock probation provides them with sufficient latitude in cases where regular probation or protracted incarceration would potentially fail to either protect society or rehabilitate the offender. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) TRENDS (1) ---------------------------------------- - [reported] Federal split sentence utilization peak FY 1973 Use of the split sentence peaked in FY 1973 when it accounted for 8.4% of defendants sentenced. Since that time, its use has steadily declined. Date: 1973-01-01 Tags: sentencing,policy,trend Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) LEGAL FACTS (89) ---------------------------------------- - [reported] President's Commission Task Force on Corrections report (1967) The Task Force on Corrections of the President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice published its Task Force Report: Corrections in 1967 through the U.S. Government Printing Office. Date: 1967-01-01 Tags: corrections,policy,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California first state to authorize split sentence California seems to have been the first state to authorize a split sentence when, in 1927, it enacted a statutory provision permitting imprisonment in a county jail as a condition of probation. Date: 1927-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Michigan split sentence authorization 1931 In 1931, the Michigan legislature authorized courts to impose a sentence of not more than 60 days in the county jail as a condition to the probation order. This statute seems to have been prompted by a judicial decision [People v. Robinson, 253 Mich. 507, 235 N.W. 236 (1931)] which ruled that a condition of probation requiring service of a jail sentence was unauthorized. Date: 1931-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Federal Split Sentence Statute enacted 1958 Utilization of the split sentence became a formalized federal practice with the passage in 1958 of the Federal Split Sentence statute (18 U.S.C.A. Sec. 3651). Under this law, an offender could be sentenced to a period of up to six months of incarceration in a jail-type institution to be followed by probation. Date: 1958-01-01 Tags: legal,sentencing,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] United States Code Title 18 provisions on sentencing and probation (1970) United States Code, 1970 edition, Title 18 - Crimes and Criminal Procedure, Sections on Sentencing and Probation and Fed. Rules for Parole at Time of Sentencing, published by U.S. Government Printing Office, pp. 4439-4440, 4459-4460. Date: 1970-01-01 Tags: legal,sentencing,probation,parole Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] U.S. Supreme Court: No probation after commitment begins under 1925 Probation Act The United States Supreme Court in United States v. Murray/Cook v. United States ruled that when a person sentenced to imprisonment by a District Court had begun to serve his sentence, the court had no power under the Probation Act of 1925 to grant him probation even though the term at which sentence was imposed had not expired. The Court held that neither the language of the Act nor the declared purpose of Congress was consistent with granting probation after commitment. 275 U.S. 347, 48 S.Ct. 146, 72 L.Ed. 309 (1928). Date: 1928-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,probation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] States without explicit split sentence statutory language Of all the states which authorize a disposition of this type, South Carolina and Florida are the only ones with statutes whose language does not explicitly provide for the split sentence. However, the courts in South Carolina and Florida have uniformly interpreted their statutes as authorizing a split sentence. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] California first state to authorize split sentence in 1927 At the state level, California was the first state to authorize a split sentence when, in 1927, it enacted a statutory provision permitting a condition of probation to include imprisonment in a county jail. Date: 1927-01-01 Tags: legal,sentencing,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] First federal court support for mixed sentence in White v. Burke dissent The first direct statement in the federal courts in support of the mixed sentence came in Judge Cotteral's dissent in White v. Burke, where he interpreted the Probation Act as conferring the power, before sentence has begun, to grant probation or suspend sentence, effective after a partial service of the sentence. 43 F. 2d 329 (C.C.A. 1930). Date: 1930-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Arizona split sentence confinement limit Arizona authorizes a split sentence with confinement not to exceed one year in county jail. An additional option available to the court is that it can refer defendants, prior to sentencing, to the diagnostic facilities of the Department of Corrections (which will accept them only when adequate staff and facilities are available) for diagnosis and recommendation which must be sent to the court within 90 days. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] LEAA compendium of corrections legislation and standards (1975) U.S. Department of Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration published 'Compendium of Corrections Legislation and Standards and Judicial Decisions' through the U.S. Government Printing Office in June 1975, pp. II-15, II-16, II-35, II-40, II-47, II-48. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: legal,corrections,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] United States v. Wittmeyer: Court could reserve jurisdiction for probation after partial service In United States v. Wittmeyer, the court held that a District Court at the time of imposing sentence not exceeding one year could reserve jurisdiction of the case and, after the defendant had served a portion of the sentence, could order the release of the defendant on probation for the remainder of the term. 16 F. Supp. 1000 (D.C. 1936). Date: 1936-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Arkansas split sentence confinement limits Arkansas authorizes a split sentence with confinement not to exceed 90 days for a felony or 30 days for a misdemeanor, served in county jail, city jail or other facility to be determined by the court. Any time served as a condition of probation will be credited on any sentence of imprisonment imposed upon revocation of probation. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California split sentence confinement limits California authorizes a split sentence with confinement not to exceed 90 days for a felony, 60 days for a misdemeanor or 5 days for a petty offense, served in county jail, road camp or other place of detention to be determined by the court. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Federal Split Sentence statute passed in 1958 The Federal Split Sentence statute (18 U.S.C.A. Sec. 3651) was passed in 1958. Federal court decisions after its passage dealt with authority of and procedure under the statute, including Gaddis v. United States, 280 F. 2d 334 (C.A. 1960) and Green v. United States, 298 F. 2d 230 (C.A. 1961), and reaffirmed that the term of imprisonment allowable under the statute was six months. Date: 1958-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,legislation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Colorado split sentence diagnostic option Colorado authorizes a split sentence. An additional option available to the court, in instances where offenses are punishable by imprisonment in the state prison, is that it can refer defendants, prior to sentencing, to the diagnostic facilities of the Department of Corrections (which will accept them only when adequate staff and facilities are available) for diagnosis and recommendation which must be reported to the court within 90 days (unless an extension is granted). Any time served under this option is credited on a term of imprisonment imposed at sentence. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Pre-statute state courts: Split sentence not authorized Prior to the passage of statutory provisions authorizing a split sentence, the majority of state courts ruling on this issue held that such a disposition was not authorized by statute; that if courts were to exercise the power of granting probation it must be in toto rather than in part; and that, if imprisonment were to be coupled with probation, it could only be imposed after probation was revoked or terminated. Tags: sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Georgia split sentence confinement limit Georgia authorizes a split sentence with confinement not to exceed six months. This option is not authorized for offenses punishable by death or life imprisonment. An additional option available to the court is that during the interval between the conviction or plea and a hearing to determine probation, the court may order confinement of the defendant without bond. The sentencing judge does not lose jurisdiction over the defendant during the term of probation. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Wright Federal Practice and Procedure on criminal rules (1969) Wright, Charles Alan published 'Federal Practice and Procedure - Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure' through West Publishing Company, St. Paul, Minnesota, 1969, pp. 432-442. Date: 1969-01-01 Tags: legal,sentencing Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] California legislature authorized split sentence in 1927 after court decision In 1927, the California legislature authorized the split sentence by amending its statute, following the decision in People v. Ramos, 251 P. 941 (Calif. 1926). Date: 1927-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,legislation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Hawaii split sentence confinement limit Hawaii authorizes a split sentence with confinement not to exceed six months. This option is not authorized for offenses punishable by death or life imprisonment. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Michigan legislature authorized split sentence in 1931 after court decision In 1931, subsequent to the decision in People v. Robinson, 253 Mich. 507, 235 N.W. 236 (1931), the Michigan legislature authorized the split sentence. Date: 1931-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,legislation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Idaho split sentence provisions Idaho authorizes a split sentence where the defendant may be placed on probation at any time during service of a sentence in the county jail, or within 120 days (which may be extended an additional 60 days) for those sentenced to the custody of the State Board of Corrections. This option is not authorized for the offenses of treason and murder. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Barkin legal problems in sentencing (1972) Barkin, Eugene N. published 'Legal Problems in Sentencing' in 54 F.R.D. 285 (1972). Date: 1972-01-01 Tags: legal,sentencing Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] State supreme courts liberally interpreted statutes to authorize split sentences In four instances, state supreme courts have liberally interpreted the statutory provision giving trial judges the discretion to determine the conditions of probation as to authorize placing a defendant on probation after serving a designated portion of the term of imprisonment. Cases cited include Moore v. Patterson/State v. Moore, 203 S.C. 90, 26 S.E. 2d 319 (1943); State v. Maxwell, 216 S.C. 182, 57 S.E. 2d 165 (1949); Franklin v. State, 87 Idaho 291, 392 P. 2d 552 (1964); State v. Best, 257 S.C. 361, 186 S.E. 2d 272 (1972); State v. Jones, 327 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 1976). Tags: sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Illinois split sentence confinement limit Illinois authorizes a split sentence with confinement not to exceed six months, not in a facility of the Department of Corrections. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Best and Birzon conditions of probation analysis (1963) Best and Birzon published 'Conditions of Probation: An Analysis' in the Georgia Bar Journal, Vol. 51, 1963, pp. 829-830. Date: 1963-01-01 Tags: legal,probation,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Indiana split sentence confinement limit Indiana authorizes a split sentence with confinement not to exceed six months. This mechanism is done on the court's own motion and after review of the diagnostic report by the Department of Corrections. The court may also modify a sentence by reducing it anytime within 180 days after imposition of the sentence. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Bullock on North Carolina split sentence restrictions (1962) Bullock published 'Criminal Law - Split Sentence - Trial Judge in North Carolina Not Permitted to Impose Sentence Active in Part and Suspended in Part' in the North Carolina Law Review, Vol. 40, 1962, pp. 333-340. Date: 1962-01-01 Tags: legal,sentencing,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Nebraska and South Dakota supported liberal interpretation for split sentences That a general statutory provision relating to probation should be liberally interpreted as to include authority for a split sentence has also been supported by the State of Nebraska's contention in State v. Nuss, 190 Neb. 755, 212 N.W. 2d 565 (1973); and in the dissenting opinion of Justice Wollman in State v. Marshall, 247 N.W. 2d 484 (S. Dak. 1976). Tags: sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Iowa sentence modification provisions Iowa authorizes the court to modify the sentence for a felony, other than a class A felony or a felony requiring a minimum sentence of confinement, within 90 days after service of the sentence begins or within 30 days for a misdemeanor. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Validity and constitutionality of split sentence provisions consistently upheld The validity and constitutionality of statutory provisions providing for a split sentence has been consistently upheld by courts, including In re Nachnator, 89 C.A. App. 391 (1917); In re Robinson, 8 Ohio App. 208, 84 N.E. 980 (1915); Porter v. Gillmore, 148 Ga. 261, 96 S.E. (1918); Waldridge v. Womble, 157 Ga. 64, 120 S.E. 620 (1923); In re Silverman, 69 O.A. 128, 42 N.E. 2d 87 (1942). Tags: sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kansas split sentence and diagnostic provisions Kansas authorizes a split sentence with confinement to be determined by the court; Department of Corrections if confinement is for more than one year, jail if less than one year. An additional option available to the court, in cases where the death sentence is not imposed, is to commit a defendant to the Kansas reception and diagnostic center, for a period not to exceed 120 days, for a pre-sentence investigation and report. The court may also modify and/or reduce a sentence within 120 days after it is imposed. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Five ways split sentence can be authorized In general, the split sentence may be authorized in one or more of the following ways: A. The court may suspend the imposition or execution of the sentence in part and place the defendant on probation. B. The court may impose a period of confinement as a condition of probation. C. The court may modify or reduce a sentence within a specified period of time. D. The court may send an offender, prior to sentencing, to a state or other diagnostic facility for diagnosis and recommendation for sentence. E. The court may release an offender, who is already serving a term of imprisonment, to a period of probation. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: legal,sentencing,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Courts lack jurisdiction to modify sentence after execution begins absent statute As a matter of common law (in the absence of statute), the court has no jurisdiction, once the defendant has entered upon execution of the sentence, to set it aside and modify the sentence. Cases cited include State v. Fiester, 32 Or. 254, 50 P. 561 (1897); In re Sullivan, 3 Cal. App. 193, 94 P. 781 (1906); State v. Meyer, 86 Kan. 793, 122 P. 101 (1912); Stewart v. State, 27 S.E. 2d 240 (Ga. 1943); State v. McKelvey, 246 P. 550 (Ariz. 1926). Tags: sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky split sentence and shock probation provisions Kentucky authorizes a split sentence with confinement not to exceed six months in county jail. An additional option available to the court is 'shock probation' where an inmate may be released on probation after serving a period of 30-180 days in prison. Shock probation is not permitted if the offense involved use of a firearm. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy,shock_probation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Model Penal Code addresses split sentence The Model Penal Code developed by the American Law Institute in 1962 addresses the split sentence in Sec. 301.1(3), providing that the court may sentence a defendant to a term of imprisonment not exceeding 30 days as a condition of probation. Date: 1962-01-01 Tags: legal,sentencing,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] House hearings on H.R. 6238 and H.R. 7260 (1958) Hearings on H.R. 6238 and H.R. 7260 were held before Subcommittee No. 3 of the Committee of the Judiciary, House of Representatives, 85th Congress, 2nd Session, 1958, pp. 2-7. Date: 1958-01-01 Tags: legal,sentencing,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Courts cannot suspend sentence and place on probation after execution begins Courts cannot suspend sentence and place a person on probation once execution of sentence has begun, per Rutland v. State, 14 Ga. App. 746, 82 S.E. 293 (1914); United States v. Murray/Cook v. United States, 275 U.S. 347 (1928); United States v. Albrecht, et al., 25 F. 2d 93 (1928); Lloyd v. Superior Court of California, 208 C. 622, 283 P. 931 (1929); People v. Forbragd, 127 C.A. 768, 16 P. 2d 755 (1933); Opinion of the Indiana Attorney General No. 58 (June 27, 1945); Ex Parte Smith/Smith v. Pelham, 40 So. 2d 570 (Ala. 1949). Tags: sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Louisiana split sentence provisions Louisiana authorizes a split sentence with confinement not to exceed one year, without hard labor, for a felony. Additionally, the court may grant probation after complete or partial service of a sentence for a misdemeanor except criminal neglect of family. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Split sentence provisions upheld in federal and state courts Although split sentence provisions have been upheld in federal and state courts, such a disposition might or might not be upheld in the absence of a specific statute or legislative intent. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: legal,sentencing Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Herlands on when and how sentencing judge should use probation (1964) Herlands, William B. published 'When and How Should A Sentencing Judge Use Probation' in 35 F.R.D. 381 (1964). Date: 1964-01-01 Tags: legal,sentencing,probation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Legislature may limit or prohibit suspension of sentence after service begins The legislature, in providing for the suspended sentence, is not acting arbitrarily or discriminatorily when it places limits upon the exercise of that power by the trial courts or by prohibiting courts from suspending sentence once the defendant has begun to serve the sentence. See Beeton v. State, 506 S.W. 2d 137 (Tenn. 1974). Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Maine split sentence confinement limit Maine authorizes a split sentence with confinement to be determined by the court, however, if it will be served in the State Prison it is not to exceed 30 days. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Hoffman sentencing the automobile thief (1962) Hoffman, Walter E. published 'Sentencing the Automobile Thief' in 30 F.R.D. 185 (1962). Date: 1962-01-01 Tags: legal,sentencing Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Probation order may be modified before original condition fully complied with An order granting probation may be modified by extending the period to be served as a condition thereto where such change is made before the original condition has been fully complied with. See Ex Parte Sizelove, 15 Cal. 493, 111 P. 527 (1910); In re Glick, 126 C.A. 649, 14 P. 2d 796 (1932); People v. Roberts, 136 C.A. 709, 29 P. 2d 432 (1934); Ex Parte May, 11 C.A. 2d 359, 53 P. 2d 1021 (1936); State v. Jones, 327 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 1976). Tags: sentencing,legal,probation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Maryland sentence modification provisions Maryland authorizes a split sentence with confinement to be determined by the court. The court may also modify and/or reduce a sentence within 90 days after its imposition. After that time, revision may be done only in case of fraud, mistake or irregularity. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Columbia Law Review judicial review of probation conditions (1967) Columbia Law Review published 'Judicial Review of Probation Conditions' in Vol. 67, 1967, pp. 181-207. Date: 1967-01-01 Tags: legal,probation,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Suspension order considered informal grant of probation Where the court, after pronouncing a judgment and sentence of imprisonment, orders all or a part of the sentence suspended, such an order is considered to be an informal grant of probation equivalent to a formal order. See Stockton v. State, 27 S.E. 2d 240 (Ga. 1943); Ex Parte Torres, 86 C.A. 2d 178, 194 P. 2d 593 (1948); Oster v. Municipal Court of Los Angeles Judicial District, 45 C. 2d 134, 287 P. 2d 755 (1955); People v. Brandon, 166 C.A. 2d 96, 332 P. 2d 708 (1959); United States ex rel. Wissfeld v. Fay, 214 F. Supp. 360 (D.C.N.Y. 1963); People v. Victor, 42 Cal. Rptr. 199, 62 C. 2d 280, 398 P. 2d 391 (1965). Tags: sentencing,legal,probation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Massachusetts split sentence restrictions Massachusetts authorizes a split sentence with confinement to be determined by the court. If the sentence is to imprisonment, this option is not authorized for crimes punishable by death or life imprisonment; if the sentence is to fine and imprisonment, it is not authorized for crimes punishable by life imprisonment, crimes committed when armed with a dangerous weapon, or if the defendant has been previously convicted of a felony. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Imprisonment as probation condition is not a sentence An order placing a defendant on probation, even though it includes as a condition a period of imprisonment, is not a judgment and sentence and does not amount to serving a term of imprisonment in a penal institution because the period of imprisonment was imposed not as a sentence but as a condition of probation. See People v. Roberts, 136 C.A. 709, 29 P. 2d 432 (1934); People v. Wallach, 8 C.A. 2d 129, 47 P. 2d 1071 (1935); Ex Parte Goetz, 46 C.A. 2d 848, 117 P. 2d 47 (1941); Ex Parte Martin, 82 C.A. 2d 16, 185 P. 2d 645 (1947); Ex Parte Hays, 120 C.A. 2d 308, 260 P. 2d 1030 (1953); People v. McShane, 126 C.A. 2d Supp. 845, 272 P. 2d 571 (1954); State v. Bassett, 86 Idaho 277, 385 P. 2d 246 (1963); In re Williams Petition, 145 Mont. 45, 399 P. 2d 732 (1965); Petersen v. Dunbar, 355 F. 2d 800 (C.A. 1966); People v. Terven, 130 Ill. App. 708, 264 N.E. 2d 538 (1970); State v. Wright, 202 N.W. 2d 72 (Iowa, 1972); Prue v. State, 63 Wis. 2d 109, 216 N.W. 2d 43 (1974). Tags: sentencing,legal,probation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Michigan split sentence confinement limit Michigan authorizes a split sentence with confinement not to exceed six months in county jail or house of correction. An additional option available to the court is to place youthful offenders, under 21 years of age, convicted of crimes for which a sentence in the state prison may be imposed, in a Department of Corrections probation camp for a period not to exceed one year. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Imprisonment served as probation condition deducted from revocation sentence where statute exists Where statutory authority exists, the period of imprisonment that a probationer serves as a condition of his probation shall be deducted from a subsequent term of imprisonment imposed upon revocation of his probation. See People v. Roberts, 136 C.A. 709, 29 P. 2d 432 (1934); People v. Wallach, 8 C.A. 2d 129, 47 P. 2d 1071 (1935); State v. Jones, 327 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 1976). Tags: sentencing,legal,probation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Minnesota split sentence confinement limit Minnesota authorizes a split sentence with confinement not to exceed 90 days. However, if it will be served in a facility of the Department of Corrections, the length will be determined by the commissioner. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] National Commission on Reform of Federal Criminal Laws final draft (1971) The National Commission on Reform of Federal Criminal Laws published its Final Draft, Section 3106 and comment, in 1971. Date: 1971-01-01 Tags: legal,sentencing,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Without statute, no credit for probation-condition imprisonment upon revocation Without statutory provision, courts may infer that it was the intent of the legislature to allow the court, upon revocation, to impose the maximum penalty allowable by law without credit for the period of imprisonment served as a condition of probation. See People v. Wallach, 8 C.A. 2d 129, 47 P. 2d 1071 (1935); Ex Parte Hays, 120 C.A. 2d 308, 260 P. 2d 1030 (1953); In re Larsen, 44 C. 2d 642, 283 P. 2d 1043 (1955); People v. Jaynes, 23 Mich. App. 360, 178 N.W. 2d 558 (1970); State v. Barnett, 112 Ariz. 212, 540 P. 2d 684 (1975); State v. Fuentes, 26 Ariz. App. 444, 549 P. 2d 224 (1976). Tags: sentencing,legal,probation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Mississippi intermittent confinement provision Mississippi authorizes intermittent confinement not to exceed 30 days in county jail as a condition of probation. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Double jeopardy applies only when combined time exceeds maximum sentence The possible applicability of the double jeopardy clause may be considered only when presentence jail time and/or incarceration as a condition of probation, when added to the sentence imposed after revocation, exceeds the maximum statutory sentence. See State v. Pena, 26 Ariz. App. 442, 549 P. 2d 222 (1976); State v. Fuentes, 26 Ariz. App. 444, 549 P. 2d 224 (1976). Date: 1976-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,double_jeopardy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Nevada split sentence provisions Nevada authorizes a split sentence with confinement to be determined by the court. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Polonsky limitations upon trial court discretion in imposing conditions of probation (1974) Polonsky, Louis E. published 'Limitations Upon Trial Court Discretion in Imposing Conditions of Probation' in the Georgia Bar Journal, Vol. 8, 1974, pp. 471-471. Date: 1974-01-01 Tags: legal,probation,sentencing Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Ohio shock probation statute passed in 1965 Ohio's shock probation statute was passed in 1965 and has undergone fairly extensive judicial construction since its passage. Date: 1965-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,legislation,shock_probation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] New Hampshire split sentence confinement limit New Hampshire authorizes a split sentence with confinement not to exceed 60 days, restricted to misdemeanors or class C or D felonies. Another option available to the court is to place an offender under 21 years of age, as a condition of probation, in a Division of Youth facility for a period not to exceed one year. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Rubin federal sentencing problems and Model Sentencing Act (1969) Rubin, Sol published 'Federal Sentencing Problems and the Model Sentencing Act' in 1969. Date: 1969-01-01 Tags: legal,sentencing,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] State v. Veigel nearly destroyed Ohio shock probation statute's intended effect Only two months after Ohio's shock probation statute became effective, the decision in State v. Veigel almost destroyed the intended effect of the statute when it was ruled that the only time a trial court could use the statute was when it addressed the facts in passing sentence. 17 Ohio Misc. 1, 242 N.E. 2d 751 (1968). Date: 1968-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,shock_probation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] New Jersey split sentence provisions New Jersey authorizes a split sentence with confinement not to exceed 6 months if served in a facility of the Department of Corrections or not to exceed 30 days if served in a local confinement facility. This option is only available for offenses carrying maximum prison sentences of 5 years or less, where the defendant has not served an active sentence within the previous five years, and where his background indicates that a sentence should be imposed. Any time served under this option will be credited on any sentence of imprisonment imposed upon revocation of probation. An additional option available to the court is that it may impose, as a condition of probation, that a probationer, within the first 30 days of his probation, visit with his probation officer a prison unit of the Department of Corrections for a tour so that he may better appreciate the consequences of probation revocation. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Seminar on disparity of sentences for Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth Circuits (1962) A seminar and institute on disparity of sentences for the Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth Circuits was held in Highland Park, Illinois, published in 30 F.R.D. 401, 445, 459 (1962). Date: 1962-01-01 Tags: legal,sentencing,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation cannot be granted beyond ten-day period Shock probation may not be granted by a trial court beyond the ten-day period following the hearing on the motion, either pursuant to a motion for reconsideration or otherwise. At the expiration of the ten-day period the trial court would lose jurisdiction over the defendant. Date: 1972-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,shock_probation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] New Mexico split sentence provisions New Mexico authorizes a split sentence with confinement to be determined by the court; felonies will be served in a state facility, misdemeanors in a county or regional facility. This option may only be utilized prior to the time custody of an offender is transferred to a penal institution, except in the case of a misdemeanor where it may be done prior to or during the service of the sentence. An additional option available to the court is that it may order a defendant, prior to sentencing, to an appropriate licensed public or private institution for diagnostic testing for a period not to exceed 30 days (which may be extended another 30 days by the court). Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Ohio Supreme Court Rule 13: Hearing within six days of filing Ohio Supreme Court Rule 13 of the Rules of Superintendence (adopted July 11, 1973) provides in part: 'If a hearing is demanded within the trial court in the interim it is on a motion for suspension of further execution of sentence and probation made pursuant to R.C. 2947.061, each court shall hold the hearing within six days after the filing date of the motion and enter its ruling thereon within ten days after the hearing. If no hearing is conducted on such motion, the court shall enter its ruling within ten days after the filing of the motion.' 35 Ohio St. 2d 176, 298 N.E. 2d at 879 (1973). Date: 1973-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,shock_probation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] North Dakota split sentence provisions North Dakota authorizes a split sentence with confinement to be determined by the court. This option may not be imposed when an offender received the death penalty or subsequent to a felony conviction. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation motion must be filed within statutory time limit The one time limit in the statute is the time within which a motion for shock probation must be filed. After expiration of this time limit the court loses jurisdiction under the statute. See State ex rel. Dallman v. Court of Common Pleas, 32 Ohio App. 2d 102, 288 N.E. 2d 303 (1972); State ex rel. Smith v. Court of Common Pleas, Civil No. 73 AP-15 (Ct. App. Franklin County, Ohio, Jan. 26, 1973). Tags: sentencing,legal,shock_probation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio split sentence provisions Ohio authorizes a split sentence with confinement not to exceed 30 days. If the sentence is for a misdemeanor or felony, sentence may be suspended and probation granted at any time during service of the sentence. If the sentence is to the penitentiary for a felony, sentence may be suspended and probation granted at any time during service of the sentence. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ignorance of shock probation statute does not relieve time limit It has been ruled that ignorance of the shock probation statute does not relieve an inmate from the time limit requirement. See State v. Crawford, 34 Ohio App. 2d 137, 296 N.E. 2d 578 (1973). Date: 1973-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,shock_probation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Oklahoma split sentence confinement limit Oklahoma authorizes a split sentence with confinement not to exceed 120 days. The court, under this option, may reduce a sentence within 120 days after the sentence is imposed. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky Court of Appeals: Oral motion for shock probation In a related decision on Kentucky's similar shock probation statute, the Kentucky Court of Appeals in Commonwealth ex rel. Hancock v. Melton ruled that an oral motion for shock probation could be considered. Date: 1976-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,shock_probation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] States with sentence modification provisions Certain states, either singularly (Wyoming), or in addition to other statutory provisions authorizing a split sentence (i.e., Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland), allow the court to modify or reduce a sentence within a specified period of time (usually one, three, four or six months). By this procedure, a split sentence can also be effectuated. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation statute: Court loses jurisdiction after time limit After expiration of the statutory time limit for filing a shock probation motion, the court loses jurisdiction under the statute. Tags: sentencing,legal,shock_probation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] States with pre-sentence diagnostic commitment options An additional procedure which authorizes a split sentence is the option, in Arizona, California, Kansas and North Dakota, by which the court can commit an offender, prior to sentencing, to a state or other diagnostic facility for diagnosis and recommendation for sentence. The period of confinement in these instances ranges from one month to four months depending upon the particular statute. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Shock probation maximum confinement periods by state The 'shock probation' statutes of Ohio, Kentucky and Texas authorize the split sentence by permitting the court to resentence an offender, who is already serving a term of imprisonment, to a period of probation. The maximum period of confinement under these statutes is supposed to be 130 days in Ohio and Kentucky, 120 days for felonies in Texas and 90 days for misdemeanors in Texas. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy,shock_probation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Kentucky shock probation statute enacted 1972 Relying heavily on the reported success of shock probation in Ohio, the Kentucky Legislature enacted a shock probation statute (KRS Sec. 439.265) in 1972, following almost exactly the wording of the Ohio statute, allowing courts to release an inmate on probation after 130 days or less of incarceration (with a minimum of 30 days served). Date: 1972-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,legislation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Kentucky shock probation - 130 day maximum, 30 day minimum Under the Kentucky shock probation statute (KRS Sec. 439.265), an inmate may be released on probation after 130 days or less of incarceration, with a minimum of 30 days that must be served. Date: 1972-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,legislation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] California pre-sentence diagnostic program enactment Since its enactment in 1957, criminal courts in California have an option (Cal. Penal Code Sec. 1203.03) of sending, prior to sentencing, an individual convicted of an offense punishable by imprisonment, to the Department of Corrections for up to 90 days, for the purpose of obtaining a diagnostic evaluation and a recommendation for an appropriate sentence. Date: 1957-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy,diagnostic Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation enactment In 1965, the Ohio legislature passed into law Section 2947.061 of the Ohio Revised Code which has come to be known as 'shock probation.' This occurred seven years after the implementation of the federal split sentence statute. Date: 1965-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy,shock_probation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation eligibility and timing Unlike the federal split sentence statute, shock probation is not part of the original sentence. This technique allows the court, after approval of a motion made by an inmate (all incoming inmates - felons and misdemeanants - are eligible to file a motion for early release), or by the court, to release an inmate on probation after 130 days or less of incarceration (a minimum of 30 days must be served under the statute). Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy,shock_probation Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Conditions of probation divided into general and special Conditions of probation generally may be divided into general and specific or special conditions. General conditions are applicable to all probationers, and special conditions may be imposed in a given case (Carter, et. al., 1975). Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: legal,sentencing,policy Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Federal split sentence statutory authorization The 85th Congress passed, in 1958, Public Law 85-741 [18 U.S.C.A. Sec. 3651] which authorized a split sentence of up to six months incarceration in a jail-type institution followed by probation. This statutory provision authorized the split sentence as a disposition upon conviction of an offender for as few as one count. Previously, offenders convicted on two or more counts could be sentenced to a period of incarceration on one count followed by a period of probation on the other count(s). Date: 1958-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy,federal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Federal pre-sentence study commitment provision An additional technique available in the federal courts is the statutory procedure [18 U.S.C.A. Sec. 4208 (b)] by which the court may commit a prisoner while a study is being made (which must be finished in at most six months) and thereafter the court may impose any lawful sentence, including probation. Furthermore, under Rule 35 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, a court may reduce a sentence within 120 days of its imposition or affirmation. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,policy,federal Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Georgia cases cited on suspension as informal probation Georgia case law cited in the report includes Stockton v. State, 27 S.E. 2d 240 (Ga. 1943) on suspension orders as informal grants of probation, and Stewart v. State, 27 S.E. 2d 240 (Ga. 1943) on lack of jurisdiction to modify sentences after execution begins. Date: 1943-01-01 Tags: sentencing,legal,georgia Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [confirmed] Georgia cases on split sentence validity Georgia cases cited on the validity of split sentence provisions include Porter v. Gillmore, 148 Ga. 261, 96 S.E. (1918) and Waldridge v. Womble, 157 Ga. 64, 120 S.E. 620 (1923). Tags: sentencing,legal,georgia Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) POLICYS (9) ---------------------------------------- - [reported] Shock probation programs in three Georgia correctional institutions Shock probation programs (a form of split sentence) presently are utilized in three of Georgia's correctional institutions. The most frequently used program involves taking a probationer, who is on the verge of having his probation revoked, to an institution for a period of time and allowing him to go through a mock entry into the institution as well as seeing the functions of the institution during the day. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: policy,operations,facilities Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Recommendation to expand split sentence in Georgia The report recommends that utilization of the split sentence be expanded in Georgia to include an array of options: A. The Traditional Split Sentence; B. Post-Incarceration Probation; C. Pre-Sentence Diagnostic Referral; D. Imposition of a Period of Imprisonment as a Condition of Probation. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: policy,sentencing,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Recommendation to expand shock probation programs The report recommends that shock probation programs be expanded into additional appropriate Georgia correctional institutions. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: policy,operations,facilities Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Recommendation to establish task force for split sentence legislation The report recommends that a task force be established, consisting of those parties who will affect and be affected by such a proposed course of action, to develop statutory legislation and program operating policies and procedures. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: policy,legal,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Recommendation to build evaluative mechanisms into programs The report recommends that evaluative mechanisms be built into all split sentence and shock probation programs that are created or modified through the actions of the task force so that the effectiveness of such programs can be measured. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: policy,operations,data_gap Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Recommendation for pre-sentence reports in Georgia The report recommends that pre-sentence reports, in general, be required in Georgia as a guide in sentencing decisions. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: policy,sentencing,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Recommendation for comprehensive statewide sentencing data The report recommends that comprehensive statewide data on sentencing dispositions of defendants convicted in Georgia state courts be developed. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: policy,data_gap,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Recommendation for media presentation on shock probation The report recommends that the Georgia Department of Offender Rehabilitation develop a media presentation which explains the shock probation program by showing excerpts of all facets of the program for training and educational purposes. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: policy,operations Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Shock probation goal in Georgia The goal of the shock probation program is to make these offenders more aware of the realities of imprisonment and in so doing encourage them that it is more beneficial for them to abide by their conditions of probation than to risk revocation and subsequent imprisonment. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: policy,operations,reentry Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) DATA GAPS (3) ---------------------------------------- - [reported] Lack of statistical evaluation of split sentence effectiveness There is a lack of statistical data from the literature needed to statistically document the effectiveness of the split sentence as a sentencing alternative. Date: 1977-01-01 Tags: sentencing,policy,data_gap Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Ohio shock probation - OAPA recidivism measure limitations identified Angelino's report identified three limitations of the Ohio Adult Parole Authority recidivism measure: (1) it is based on reincarceration and probation violation and does not include convictions of persons who have completed probation unless they are reincarcerated; (2) it does not include out-of-state convictions; and (3) recidivism figures are not controlled for length of time since release from the institution. Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,data_gap,recidivism,methodology Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) - [reported] Kentucky shock probation - Paine and Bohlander note no long-term attitudinal data Paine and Bohlander point out that their analysis does not address long-term attitudinal change among offenders sentenced to shock probation. Date: 1975-01-01 Tags: shock_probation,sentencing,legal,data_gap,methodology Sources: Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978) DATASETS (4) ---------------------------------------- # Cost comparison of sentencing options in Georgia FY 1977 Comparison of annual and daily costs for prison incarceration versus probation in Georgia during FY 1977. Sentencing Option Annual Cost Daily Cost ----------------------------------------------- Prison incarceration 3858 10.57 Probation 145 0.4 # California Superior Court Felony Dispositions by Type of Sentence Annual felony dispositions in California Superior Court from FY 1927 through FY 1976, broken down by type of sentence: straight probation, probation with jail, straight jail, CRC (California Rehabilitation Center), other dispositions, and death penalty. Source: California Bureau of Criminal Statistics. Fiscal Year Total Dispositions Straight Probation Probation with Jail Straight Jail CRC Other Death Penalty --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1976 50618 19239 14564 6118 988 1903 230 1975 50015 19239 13718 7020 1112 1855 230 1974 50018 19239 13536 5183 1112 2056 230 1973 50618 19239 11521 5183 1112 1855 230 1972 50618 19239 9265 6859 1112 1855 230 1971 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1970 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1969 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1968 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1967 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1966 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1965 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1964 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1963 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1962 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1961 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1960 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1959 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1958 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1957 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1956 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1955 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1954 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1953 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1952 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1951 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1950 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1949 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1948 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1947 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1946 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1945 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1944 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1943 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1942 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1941 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1940 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1939 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1938 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1937 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1936 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1935 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1934 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1933 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1932 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1931 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1930 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1929 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1928 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 1927 50618 19239 8079 5183 1112 1831 230 # Ohio Shock Probation Utilization and Recommitment Rates, 1966-1976 Annual data on shock probation cases granted and recommitted in Ohio from 1966 through 1976, as reported by the Ohio Adult Parole Authority. Recommitment percentages do not account for absconders, which may approximate an additional 2-3%. Year Shock Probation Cases Granted Shock Probation Cases Recommitted Recommitment Rate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1966 85 5 5.8 1967 183 20 14.2 1968 294 18 6.1 1969 350 38 10 1970 632 61 10.7 1971 816 83 9.2 1972 1292 115 8.9 1973 1132 137 12.1 1974 1079 118 10.9 1975 1528 153 10.3 1976 1478 166 11.2 # Split sentence utilization rates FY 1976 Percentage of convicted defendants sentenced with split sentences in U.S. District Courts and Georgia District Courts in FY 1976. Jurisdiction Split Sentence Rate ---------------------------------------------- U.S. District Courts 5.6 Georgia District Courts 4 KEY ENTITIES (129) ---------------------------------------- - Administrative Office of the United States Courts [organization]: Federal agency that provided federal split sentence data for the report through Program Analyst Elaine M. McVey. - Alfred Murrah [person]: Author of 'Prison or Probation - Which and Why?' in Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science, 1956-1957. - American Law Institute [organization]: Organization that developed the Model Penal Code in 1962, which addresses the split sentence in Section 301.1(3). - Andrew J. McCarthy [person]: Author of unpublished paper 'On Shock Probation' for University of Kentucky, 1976. - Archer v. Snook [case]: D.C. case (10 F.2d at 57n, 1926) from which Judge Sibley's quote on split sentencing is taken. - Arizona [organization]: Authorizes split sentence with up to one year county jail; has pre-sentence diagnostic commitment option. - Arkansas [organization]: State where incarcerated people are not paid for most prison work. - Barbara A. Kay [person]: Co-editor of 'Probation and Parole', 1963. - Beeton v. State [case]: Tennessee case, 506 S.W. 2d 137 (Tenn. 1974); upheld legislature's power to limit suspension of sentence. - Bohlander [person]: Researcher cited regarding lack of rigorous scientific evaluation of split sentence effectiveness (1973). - California [organization]: U.S. state that downsized prison population 23% between 2006 and 2012 while violent crime fell 21%. - California Board of Corrections [organization]: Source of 1971 data on probation costs in California. - California Bureau of Criminal Statistics [organization]: Conducted follow-up study of 5,076 persons sentenced in California superior court in 1966; source of California felony disposition data. (aka: California Division of Law Enforcement, Bureau of Criminal Statistics) - California Department of Corrections [organization]: Oversaw Dickover and Durkee's study of Sec. 1203.03 diagnostic commitments; operates diagnostic facilities. - California Department of Justice [organization]: Published findings from the California follow-up study on probation outcomes. - California Youth Authority [organization]: California state youth correctional agency where Schoenthaler et al. 2023 RCT was conducted (aka: CYA) - Charles L. Newman [person]: Author of 'Sourcebook on Probation, Parole and Pardons' (3rd Ed.), 1968. - Clyde D. Vedder [person]: Co-editor of 'Probation and Parole', 1963. - Colorado [organization]: Authorizes split sentence; has pre-sentence diagnostic commitment option with 90-day report requirement. - Commonwealth ex rel. Hancock v. Melton [case]: Kentucky Court of Appeals case on Kentucky's shock probation statute; ruled oral motion could be considered. - Criminal Justice Research Center [organization]: Research center in Albany, New York that published Nicolette Parisi's study on split sentences in the federal jurisdiction. - David Fisher [person]: Author of 'Notes on Sentencing Guidelines' in Washburn Law Journal, 1975. - David M. Petersen [person]: Researcher and co-author with Paul C. Friday on shock probation studies including race as a factor in shock probation use. - Denton et al. [person]: Authors who implied guidelines for the use of shock probation in 1971. - Dickover and Durkee [person]: Researchers who studied California Sec. 1203.03 diagnostic commitments; calculated $1.6 million savings for 1970. - Dinitz [person]: Researcher cited regarding shock probation motions overwhelming courts (1977). - Donald J. Newman [person]: Co-author of 'The Highland Park Institute on Sentencing Disparity' in Federal Probation, 1962. - Douglas Lipton [person]: Lead author of 'The Effectiveness of Correctional Treatment' survey, 1975. - Elmer H. Johnson [person]: Author of 'Crime, Correction and Society' with 1968 and 1974 editions. - Emory University School of Law [organization]: Law school whose library staff assisted with research for the report. - Federal Courts [organization]: Federal court system utilizing split sentences under 18 U.S.C.A. Sec. 3651. (aka: United States District Courts, federal courts) - Federal Judicial Center [organization]: Organization that provided commentary on the split sentence statute, noting it has been used with reasonable discretion during its seventeen years' existence. - Federal Split Sentence Statute [legislation]: Federal law passed in 1958 that formalized the split sentence practice, allowing offenders to be sentenced to up to six months of incarceration in a jail-type institution followed by probation. (aka: 18 U.S.C.A. Sec. 3651) - Florida [organization]: State where incarcerated people are not paid for most prison work. - Frank J. Remington [person]: Co-author of 'The Highland Park Institute on Sentencing Disparity' in Federal Probation, 1962. - Franklin County Court of Common Pleas [organization]: Ohio court where Ned Woodruff served as Chief Probation Officer; site of the Franklin County shock probation study. - Franklin v. State [case]: Idaho Supreme Court case, 87 Idaho 291, 392 P. 2d 552 (1964); Justice McFadden's opinion supported liberal construction of probation statutes. - Fred D. Pant [person]: Assistant Director for Probation for the New Jersey Administrative Office of the Courts in 1977; questioned usefulness of shock approach. - Friday and Petersen et al. [person]: Researchers who studied Ohio shock probation in 1970 and 1974; documented problems with implementation. (aka: Friday and Petersen) - GAO [organization]: Federal agency that audited DCRA compliance in 2022. (aka: U.S. Government Accountability Office) - Georgia [organization]: U.S. state that is the subject of this criminal justice data compilation (aka: State of Georgia) - Georgia Department of Offender Rehabilitation [organization]: The state agency responsible for Georgia's correctional system, including state and county institutions. Produced the Earned Time System evaluation. (aka: DOR, DCOR, Department of Corrections/Offender Rehabilitation, Georgia Department of Corrections) - Georgia Industrial Institute [facility]: Georgia correctional institution where Parole Supervisor Denny Chapman facilitated a shock probation tour for the report author. - Georgia State University [organization]: University where the Georgia Innocence Project is based. - Gilbert D. Litton [person]: Author at Georgia Department of Corrections Planning and Evaluation Section; conducted shock probation survey and wrote on misdemeanant offender disposition. - Harold M. Kennedy [person]: Author of 'Report of the Committee on Probation With Special Reference to Juvenile Delinquency' in Federal Probation, 1948. - Harry E. Allen [person]: Co-author with Friday and Petersen on 'Shock Probation: A New Approach to Crime Control' in Georgia Journal of Corrections, 1973. - Hawaii [organization]: Authorizes split sentence with up to six months confinement; not authorized for death or life imprisonment offenses. - Hazel B. Kerper [person]: Author of 'Introduction to the Criminal Justice System', 1972. - Idaho [organization]: Authorizes split sentence; not authorized for treason or murder. - Illinois [organization]: One of two states that fully repealed pay-to-stay fees in state correctional facilities. - Indiana [organization]: Authorizes split sentence with up to six months; court may modify sentence within 180 days. - Iowa [organization]: Authorizes sentence modification within 90 days for felonies or 30 days for misdemeanors. - Ira W. Jayne [person]: Author of 'The Purpose of the Sentence' in NPPA Journal, 1956. - Irving R. Kaufman [person]: Author of 'Enlightened Sentences Through Improved Technique' in Federal Probation, 1962. - J.M. Master [person]: Author of 'The Relation of Judicial Selection to Successful Probation' in Federal Probation, 1948. - John W. Oliver [person]: Author of 'Vengeance V. Probation in Criminal Law' in Federal Probation, 1954. - Judge Louis Wallach [person]: Judge quoted in People v. Warren (360 N.Y.S. 2d at 965, 1974) on the rationale for split sentencing. - Kansas [organization]: Authorizes split sentence; has pre-sentence diagnostic commitment option up to 120 days; court may modify sentence within 120 days. - Kentucky [organization]: State mentioned in the report's table of contents as having shock probation programs examined. - Kentucky Legislature [organization]: Enacted Kentucky's shock probation statute (KRS Sec. 439.265) in 1972, modeled on Ohio's statute. - Kentucky State Reformatory [facility]: Kentucky state prison at LaGrange where Paine and Bohlander conducted interviews with 502 inmates in 1975. (aka: LaGrange Reformatory) - KRS Sec. 439.265 [legislation]: Kentucky shock probation statute enacted in 1972, allowing court release of inmates on probation after 130 days or less of incarceration with a minimum of 30 days served. (aka: Kentucky shock probation statute) - Law Enforcement Assistance Administration [organization]: Federal agency that provided funding for the ETS evaluation under Grant No. 76ED040025. (aka: LEAA) - Lawrenceville Probation/Parole Office [facility]: Probation/parole office in Lawrenceville, Georgia, where Probation Supervisor Betsy Williams facilitated a shock probation tour. - Lebanon Correctional Institution [facility]: Ohio correctional institution from which 216 shock probationers were released in 1969-1970, studied by Swingle (1972). - Louisiana [organization]: Authorizes split sentence with up to one year without hard labor for felony. - Maine [organization]: Authorizes split sentence; state prison confinement not to exceed 30 days. - Maine Bureau of Corrections [organization]: Maine state corrections agency; Deputy Director Richard P. Haskell provided input on split sentencing. - Maryland [organization]: Authorizes split sentence; court may modify sentence within 90 days. - Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services [organization]: Maryland state agency; Chief of Program Development Robert Renshaw Jr. provided input on split sentencing. - Massachusetts [organization]: State where probation use in the United States began in the late 1800s. - McCarthy [person]: Researcher cited regarding pre-arrangement of shock probation (1976). - Michigan [organization]: Authorized split sentences in 1931 with up to 60 days county jail as probation condition. - Mieczyslaw Rudnick [person]: Author of Polish-language work on social effectiveness of imprisonment, 1970. - Minnesota [organization]: Authorizes split sentence with up to 90 days confinement. - Mississippi [organization]: State where incarcerated people are not paid for most prison work. - Model Penal Code [legislation]: Legal code developed by the American Law Institute in 1962, addressing the split sentence in Section 301.1(3). - National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals [organization]: Set the 1973 standard of 150 felonies per year per attorney. (aka: NAC) - National Commission on Reform of Federal Criminal Laws [organization]: Federal commission that published a final draft of proposed criminal law reforms in 1971. - National Criminal Justice Reference Service [organization]: Federal service providing access to criminal justice research publications, including the IPS evaluation Research in Brief. (aka: NCJRS) - Ned Woodruff [person]: Chief Probation Officer, Franklin County (Ohio) Court of Common Pleas; commented on expected higher revocation rates for shock probationers. - Nevada [organization]: Authorizes split sentence with confinement to be determined by the court. - New Hampshire [organization]: Authorizes split sentence with up to 60 days, restricted to misdemeanors or class C or D felonies. - New Jersey [organization]: U.S. state that reduced prison population by 26% (1999-2012) and holds 37% fewer people than in 2019. - New Jersey Administrative Office of the Courts [organization]: New Jersey court administrative body; Assistant Director for Probation Fred D. Pant provided input on shock sentencing. - New Mexico [organization]: Authorizes split sentence; has pre-sentence diagnostic testing option up to 30 days (extendable another 30 days). - Nick Gatz [person]: Author of 'Ohio's Shockers... First Shock Probation; Now Shock Parole' in American Journal of Correction, 1975. - North Dakota [organization]: Authorizes split sentence; not authorized for death penalty or subsequent felony conviction cases. - Ohio [organization]: State whose shock probation statute received fairly extensive judicial construction, examined closely in the report. - Ohio Adult Parole Authority [organization]: Described five positive functions of shock probation in 1971. - Ohio shock probation statute [legislation]: Ohio statute passed in 1965 providing for shock probation; extensively judicially construed with strict time limits. (aka: R.C. 2947.061) - Ohio State University Program for the Study of Crime and Delinquency [organization]: Academic program at Ohio State University that published shock parole research in 1975. (aka: Ohio State University) - Ohio Supreme Court Rule 13 [legislation]: Ohio Supreme Court rule adopted July 11, 1973, requiring shock probation hearings within six days of filing and rulings within ten days. (aka: Rules of Superintendence Rule 13) - Oklahoma [organization]: Authorizes split sentence with up to 120 days confinement; court may reduce sentence within 120 days. - Paul C. Friday [person]: Researcher and author on shock probation; published multiple works including the Ohio shock probation experience study and articles on race as a factor in shock probation use. - People v. Ramos [case]: California case, 251 P. 941 (Calif. 1926); led to California legislature authorizing split sentences in 1927. - People v. Robinson [case]: Michigan judicial decision ruling that a condition of probation requiring service of a jail sentence was unauthorized, prompting the 1931 Michigan split sentence statute. (aka: 253 Mich. 507, 235 N.W. 236 (1931)) - People v. Warren [case]: New York case (360 N.Y.S. 2d at 965, 1974) from which Judge Louis Wallach's quote on split sentencing is taken. - Porter v. Gillmore [case]: Georgia case, 148 Ga. 261, 96 S.E. (1918); cited on validity of split sentence provisions. - President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice [organization]: Federal commission that published a Task Force Report on Corrections in 1967. - Probation Act of 1925 [legislation]: Federal statute governing probation; interpreted by U.S. Supreme Court in 1928 as not permitting probation after commitment begins. - Republic of South Africa Department of Foreign Affairs [organization]: Published 'Prison Administration in South Africa' in 1969. - Richard Hartshorne [person]: Author of 'The 1958 Federal Split-Sentence Law' in Federal Probation, 1959. - Richard P. Haskell [person]: Deputy Director of the Maine Bureau of Corrections in 1977; stated split sentencing had been extremely successful. - Robert Renshaw Jr. [person]: Chief of Program Development for the Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services in 1977. - Sheldon Glueck [person]: Editor of 'Probation and Criminal Justice', originally 1933, reprinted 1974. - Sol Rubin [person]: Author of 'The Law of Criminal Correction', 1973. - South Carolina [organization]: State where incarcerated people are not paid for most prison work. - State ex rel. Dallman v. Court of Common Pleas [case]: Ohio case, 32 Ohio App. 2d 102, 288 N.E. 2d 303 (1972); established ten-day period for shock probation rulings and jurisdictional limits. - State v. Crawford [case]: Ohio case, 34 Ohio App. 2d 137, 296 N.E. 2d 578 (1973); ruled ignorance of shock probation statute does not relieve time limit requirement. - State v. Fuentes [case]: Arizona case (549 P. 2d at 232, 1976) from which Judge Jacobson's dissent is quoted regarding legislative grant of power for county jail incarceration as a condition of probation. - State v. Jones [case]: Florida case, 327 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 1976); supported liberal interpretation of probation statutes to include split sentences. - State v. Marshall [case]: South Dakota case, 247 N.W. 2d 484 (S. Dak. 1976); Justice Wollman's dissent supported liberal interpretation for split sentences. - State v. Nuss [case]: Nebraska Supreme Court case, 190 Neb. 755, 212 N.W. 2d 565 (1973), supporting liberal interpretation of probation statutes to include split sentences. - State v. Veigel [case]: Ohio case, 17 Ohio Misc. 1, 242 N.E. 2d 751 (1968); ruled shock probation could only be used at time of passing sentence, nearly destroying statute's intended effect. - Stewart v. State [case]: Georgia case, 27 S.E. 2d 240 (Ga. 1943); court lacks jurisdiction to modify sentence after execution begins. - Stockton v. State [case]: Georgia case, 27 S.E. 2d 240 (Ga. 1943); suspension order considered informal grant of probation. - Texas [organization]: State where incarcerated people are not paid for most prison work. - U.S. Congress [organization]: Passed Public Law 85-741 in 1958 authorizing federal split sentences. (aka: 85th Congress) - U.S. Department of Justice [organization]: Federal agency that published October 2024 findings report on unconstitutional conditions in Georgia prisons. (aka: DOJ) - U.S. Federal Probation [organization]: Federal probation system; Chief Wayne P. Jackson commented on split sentence decline factors. - United States ex rel. Spellman v. Murphy [case]: Federal case, 217 F. 2d 247 (C.A. 1954); ruled mixed sentences undesirable but within District Court power. - United States v. Murray/Cook v. United States [case]: U.S. Supreme Court case, 275 U.S. 347, 48 S.Ct. 146, 72 L.Ed. 309 (1928), ruling courts cannot grant probation after commitment begins under the Probation Act of 1925. - United States v. Wittmeyer [case]: Federal case, 16 F. Supp. 1000 (D.C. 1936); held District Court could reserve jurisdiction and order probation after partial service of sentence. - Waldridge v. Womble [case]: Georgia case, 157 Ga. 64, 120 S.E. 620 (1923); cited on validity of split sentence provisions. - Wayne P. Jackson [person]: Chief, U.S. Federal Probation; identified factors contributing to decline in federal split sentence use. - White v. Burke [case]: Federal case, 43 F. 2d 329 (C.C.A. 1930); Judge Cotteral's dissent first supported mixed sentences in federal courts. - Wyoming [organization]: Allows court to modify or reduce a sentence within a specified period of time, effectuating a split sentence. SOURCES (68) ---------------------------------------- - 18 U.S.C.A. Sec. 3651 (Federal Split Sentence Statute), United States Code (1958-01-01) [legislation, primary] - A New Look at Sentencing, Part II (McGee, 1974), Federal Probation, Vol. 38, No. 3 by McGee, Richard A. (1974-01-01) [academic, primary] - A Study of Adult Probation Violations Rates By Means of the Cohort Approach (Davis, 1964), Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science, Vol. 55, No. 1 by Davis, George (1964-01-01) [academic, primary] - Adult Probation and Parole in Ohio (Denton, 1972), International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, Vol. 17, No. 1 by Denton, George F. (1972-01-01) [academic, primary] - An Economic Analysis of Correctional Institutions in Ohio (Thompson, 1975), Ohio State University by Thompson, Roger D. (1975-01-01) [academic, primary] - Angelino et al. (1975) - Study of Ohio Shock Probationers Released 1966-1970 by Angelino, et al. (1975-01-01) [academic, primary] - Angelino, 1975 by Angelino (1975-01-01) [academic, secondary] - Archer v. Snook, 10 F.2d at 57n (D.C. 1926) (1926-01-01) [legal_document, primary] - Attorney General's Survey, 1939, Attorney General's Survey (1939-01-01) [official_report, primary] - Barkin, 1967 by Barkin (1967-01-01) [academic, secondary] - Beran and Allen, 1973 by Beran and Allen (1973-01-01) [academic, secondary] - Bernsten and Christiansen, 1965 by Bernsten and Christiansen (1965-01-01) [academic, secondary] - Bohlander (1973) - Study of Shock Probation in Franklin County, Ohio by Bohlander (1973-01-01) [academic, primary] - Bohlander, 1973 by Bohlander (1973-01-01) [academic, secondary] - Campbell, 1960 by Campbell (1960-01-01) [academic, secondary] - Carter, et. al., 1975 by Carter, et. al. (1975-01-01) [academic, secondary] - Chandler, 1950 by Chandler (1950-01-01) [academic, secondary] - Chappell, 1947 by Chappell (1947-01-01) [academic, secondary] - Compendium of Corrections Legislation and Standards and Judicial Decisions (LEAA, 1975), U.S. Government Printing Office by U.S. Department of Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration (1975-01-01) [official_report, primary] - Conditions of Probation: An Analysis (Best and Birzon, 1963), Georgia Bar Journal, Vol. 51 by Best; Birzon (1963-01-01) [academic, primary] - Criminal Law - Split Sentence - Trial Judge in North Carolina Not Permitted to Impose Sentence Active in Part and Suspended in Part (Bullock, 1962), North Carolina Law Review, Vol. 40 by Bullock (1962-01-01) [academic, primary] - Denton et al. (1971) - Study of Shock Probation Success Factors in Ohio by Denton, et al. (1971-01-01) [academic, primary] - Denton, et.al., 1971 by Denton, et. al. (1971-01-01) [academic, secondary] - Doyle, 1953 by Doyle (1953-01-01) [academic, secondary] - Dwoskin, 1962 by Dwoskin (1962-01-01) [academic, secondary] - Emory Law Journal, 1975, Emory Law Journal (1975-01-01) [academic, secondary] - Federal Judicial Center, 1976, Federal Judicial Center (1976-01-01) [official_report, primary] - Federal Practice and Procedure - Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (Wright, 1969), West Publishing Company by Wright, Charles Alan (1969-01-01) [legal_document, primary] - Federal Sentencing Problems and the Model Sentencing Act (Rubin, 1969) by Rubin, Sol (1969-01-01) [legal_document, primary] - Fifth Judicial District, 1973, Fifth Judicial District (1973-01-01) [official_report, primary] - Final Draft of the National Commission on Reform of Federal Criminal Laws (1971), National Commission on Reform of Federal Criminal Laws (1971-01-01) [legal_document, primary] - Friday and Petersen et al. (1974) - Statewide and Countywide Study of Shock Probation in Ohio by Friday, Petersen, et al. (1974-01-01) [academic, primary] - Friday, et.al., 1974 by Friday, et. al. (1974-01-01) [academic, secondary] - Hearings on H.R. 6238 and H.R. 7260 before Subcommittee No. 3 of the Committee of the Judiciary (1958), House of Representatives, 85th Congress, 2nd Session (1958-01-01) [legal_document, primary] - In Opposition to Probation With A Jail Sentence (Senyon, 1959), Federal Probation, Vol. 23, No. 2 by Senyon, J. (1959-01-01) [academic, primary] - Jayne, 1956 by Jayne (1956-01-01) [academic, secondary] - Johnson, 1974 by Johnson (1974-01-01) [academic, secondary] - Judicial Review of Probation Conditions (Columbia Law Review, 1967), Columbia Law Review, Vol. 67 (1967-01-01) [academic, primary] - Legal Problems in Sentencing (Barkin, 1972), 54 F.R.D. 285 by Barkin, Eugene N. (1972-01-01) [legal_document, primary] - Limitations Upon Trial Court Discretion in Imposing Conditions of Probation (Polonsky, 1974), Georgia Bar Journal, Vol. 8 by Polonsky, Louis E. (1974-01-01) [academic, primary] - McCarthy (1971) - Study on Shock Probation Limitations by McCarthy (1971-01-01) [academic, primary] - McCarthy (1976) - Study of Shock and Straight Probationers by McCarthy (1976-01-01) [academic, primary] - Model Penal Code, American Law Institute, 1962, American Law Institute by American Law Institute (1962-01-01) [legal_document, primary] - National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals, 1973, National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals (1973-01-01) [official_report, primary] - Paine and Bohlander - Study of First Five Weeks of Incarceration at Kentucky State Reformatory by Paine, Bohlander (1975-01-01) [academic, primary] - People v. Warren, 360 N.Y.S. 2d at 965 (1974) (1974-01-01) [legal_document, primary] - Petersen and Friday (1975) - Study of Shock Probation at Medium Security Prison for Male Offenders by Petersen, Friday (1975-01-01) [academic, primary] - Remington and Newman, 1962 by Remington and Newman (1962-01-01) [academic, secondary] - Rudnick, 1970 by Rudnick (1970-01-01) [academic, secondary] - Scott and Kramer - Conclusions on Shock Probation by Scott, Kramer [academic, primary] - Scudder, 1959 by Scudder (1959-01-01) [academic, secondary] - Seminar and Institute on Disparity of Sentences for the Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth Circuits (1962), 30 F.R.D. 401, 445, 459 (1962-01-01) [legal_document, primary] - Sentencing the Automobile Thief (Hoffman, 1962), 30 F.R.D. 185 by Hoffman, Walter E. (1962-01-01) [legal_document, primary] - Shock Parole Research - Progress Report II (Scott and Kramer, 1975), Ohio State University, Program for the Study of Crime and Delinquency by Scott, Joseph E.; Kramer, Ronald C. (1975-01-01) [academic, primary] - Shock Parole: A Preliminary Evaluation (Vaughan et al., 1976), International Journal of Criminology and Penology, Vol. 4 by Vaughan, Diane et al. (1976-01-01) [academic, primary] - Shock Probation Literature Abstracts (NCJRS), National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice, National Criminal Justice Reference Service [official_report, primary] - Some Factors in the Use of Jail as a Condition of Probation (Adams and Narloch, 1959), California Youth Authority by Adams, S.; Narloch, R. (1959-01-01) [academic, primary] - State and County Probation Systems in Crisis (GAO, 1976), U.S. Government Printing Office by Comptroller General of the United States (1976-01-01) [official_report, primary] - State v. Fuentes, 549 P. 2d at 232 (Arizona, 1976) (1976-01-01) [legal_document, primary] - Swingle (1972) - Survey of Shock Probationers from Lebanon Correctional Institution by Swingle (1972-01-01) [academic, primary] - Task Force Report: Corrections (President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice, 1967), U.S. Government Printing Office by Task Force on Corrections, President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice (1967-01-01) [official_report, primary] - The Application of Shock Probation in Judicial Practice (Michalowski and Bohlander, 1977), International Journal of Offender Therapy, Vol. 21, No. 1 by Michalowski, Raymond J.; Bohlander, Edward W. (1977-01-01) [academic, primary] - The Attorney General's Survey of Release Procedures, Volume II, Probation (U.S. Department of Justice), U.S. Government Printing Office by U.S. Department of Justice (1970-01-01) [official_report, primary] - The Nature, Use and Impact of the Split Sentence in the Federal Jurisdiction (Parisi), Criminal Justice Research Center, Albany, New York by Parisi, Nicolette [academic, primary] - Thompson (1975) - Economic Impact Study of Ohio Shock Probation Program by Thompson (1975-01-01) [academic, primary] - United States Code, Title 18 - Crimes and Criminal Procedure (1970), U.S. Government Printing Office (1970-01-01) [legal_document, primary] - Utilization of the Split Sentence and Shock Probation as Sentencing Alternatives and Implications for Their Expanded Use in Georgia (NCJ 52262, 1978), Georgia Department of Offender Rehabilitation, Planning Section by Georgia Department of Offender Rehabilitation, Planning Section (1977-11-01) [official_report, primary] URL: https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/52262NCJRS.pdf - When and How Should A Sentencing Judge Use Probation (Herlands, 1964), 35 F.R.D. 381 by Herlands, William B. (1964-01-01) [legal_document, primary]