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

ALASKA - PAROLE GUIDELINES

NCJ Number
65596
Date Published
1979
Length
350 pages
Annotation
AN ATTEMPT TO PROVIDE PAROLE GUIDELINES AND 'SALIENT FACTOR' RESEARCH FOR USE BY THE ALASKA BOARD OF PAROLE IS ANALYZED. PREDICTION OF PAROLE RISK IS EMPHASIZED.
Abstract
THE DATA ANALYZED COMPRISED 665 CASES PAROLED BY THE ALASKA BOARD OF PAROLE FROM 1971 THROUGH EARLY 1979. BASED ON COMPUTER ANALYSIS, 22 STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT FACTORS THAT CORRESPOND TO THE ASSESSMENT OF RISK OUT OF A POSSIBLE 50 FACTORS CONSIDERED WERE IDENTIFIED. THESE 22 SIGNIFICANT FACTORS WERE COMPARED WITH THE EMPIRICAL BASE RATE OF 75 PERCENT NONFAILURES ON PAROLE AND 25 PERCENT FAILURES AND WERE REDUCED TO 19 ITEMS GROUPED ON THE RISK EVALUATION SCORE SHEET. THESE 19 ITEMS NOW REPRESENT THE FACTORS WHICH THE PAROLE BOARD HAS CHOSEN TO EVALUATE RISK OF PAROLE VIOLATION. THE PROCESS WILL RESULT IN A MATRIX WITH RISK GRADUATED ON ONE SIDE AND TERMS OF IMPRISONMENT ON THE OTHER. FOR THE BOARD TO COMPLETE ITS MATRIX, IT MUST NOW ASSIGN TERMS OF IMPRISONMENT TO VARIOUS LEVELS OF CRIMES THAT ARE COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEW CRIMINAL CODE. THE ASSUMPTION UPON WHICH THE STUDY IS BASED IS THAT PAROLE GUIDELINES TECHNOLOGY CAN AID IN PREDICTING PAROLE RISK USING A SMALL SET OF BACKGROUND FACTORS SUCH AS AGE, SEX, PRIOR OFFENSES, RACE, MARITAL STATUS, AND EMPLOYMENT HISTORY. GUIDELINES DO NOT ENTIRELY ELIMINATE BOARD DISCRETION BUT DO PROVIDE THE BOARD WITH STRUCTURE, CONTROL, AND NUMERICAL VALUES FOR ASSISTANCE. THE SEVEN MAJOR PAROLE DECISIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS WHICH ARE AMENABLE TO HELP FROM GUIDELINES INCLUDE GRANTING PAROLE, DENYING PAROLE, CONTINUATION, PROGRAM/PLANNING, PROGRAM REVIEW, REVOCATION, AND DISCHARGE. ALTHOUGH VARIOUS PAROLE RELEASE DECISION MODELS EXIST, MANY AUTHORITIES BELIEVE THAT A MATRIX MODEL ELIMINATES UNCERTAINTY AND ENSURES CONSISTENCY. PART OF THIS RESEARCH EFFORT WAS TO EVALUATE PAROLE RELEASE DECISION MODELS OF OTHER JURISDICTIONS INCLUDING MINNESOTA, OREGON, WISCONSIN, PENNSYLVANIA, AND MICHIGAN. EXTENSIVE TABLES AND FOOTNOTES ARE INCLUDED. APPENDIXES PRESENT GUIDELINES FOR THE FIVE STATES (INCUDING A SAMPLE WASHINGTON STATE MATRIX) AND RELATED MATERIAL. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)