U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Justice and Parole - The Oregon Experience (From Justice as Fairness, P 100-117, 1981, David Fogel and Joe Hudson, ed. - See NCJ-76564)

NCJ Number
76569
Author(s)
I Blalock
Date Published
1981
Length
18 pages
Annotation
This article describes the development of parole board reform in Oregon in which release dates are set early in the term according to published guidelines.
Abstract
At the start of the guideline development process, the Oregon board was a traditional parole board, differing only from other parole boards in that it was willing to examine its role and to adopt explicit criteria and rules to govern its decisionmaking. In the few months between July 1975 and the early part of 1976, the board developed and adopted explicit release guidelines and criteria, moving in the direction of the justice model. This was in response to the failure of the rehabilitation model with its concurrent indeterminate sentences. Two other ways of looking at the criminal justice system (besides rehabilitation or the justice model) are also discussed: the crime control model and just deserts. The Oregon legislation for the new guidelines accomplished these objectives: (1) it delegated to the parole board the authority to fix sentences through parole decisionmaking, and (2) it removed the parole board's exemption under the State's Administrative Procedures Act and required the board to follow the rulemaking procedures of that act. These two procedures reduced the disparity in prison terms by making the rules explicit and public knowledge. The guidelines are displayed in five tables and computation of the history/risk score is explained, including guidelines on revocation of parole. Finally, the necessary elements of the justice-as-fairness approach requires that the term of actual incarceration should be related to the severity of the offense and the offender's criminal history, and that the term itself should be established at or shortly after the sentence is imposed. A total of 22 footnotes are provided.

Downloads

No download available

Availability