skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 78627 Find in a Library
Title: Cooperation Among Courts for Executing Sentences, Parole of Probation Officers, and Supervision Agencies
Journal: Bewaehrungshilfe  Volume:27  Issue:2  Dated:(1980)  Pages:152-158
Author(s): G Kastenhuber
Date Published: 1980
Page Count: 7
Format: Article
Language: German
Country: West Germany (Former)
Annotation: Problems interfering with cooperation among courts for execution of sentences, probation officers, and corrections institutions, as well as other supervision agencies are discussed and improvements proposed.
Abstract: When courts for execution of sentences were introduced in West Germany in the late 60's, probation officers hoped that closer contact with judges would foster a balance between normative and individual justice. Indeed, the new courts have led to greater uniformity of court decisions. However, the cooperative efforts of probation officers and courts have been hindered by delays in notification of probation officers about impending release, incomplete information about releasees, and impractical or unclear instructions from judges to probation officers. The effectiveness of the court-probation officer relationship also suffers when the courts fail to assign individual probation officers to probationers or parolees, when probation officers' reports are ignored by judges and when judges' orders for special supervision of probationers or parolees are unspecific or excessive. Supervisory agencies appear to work well with probation officers, but have failed to coordinate their efforts with those of the courts. To remedy the various problems, the author proposes that release recommendations be sent by prisons to both courts and probation officers, that prisoners be given prerelease furloughs to confer with probation officers, and that probation officers be allowed to undertake official prison visits. Judges are to consult with probation officers about hearing results and probable orders. Further decisions about probationers are to be forwarded to the appropriate courts. Finally, individual probation officers are to be assigned to probationers and parolees, unless the remainder of the parolees' sentences are so short that no supervision is required. Specific recommendations of a work group on cooperation among courts for executing sentences, parole or probation officers, and supervision agencies are included.
Index Term(s): Germany; Interagency cooperation; Judicial discretion; Parolees; Prerelease programs; Probation or parole agencies; Probation or parole officers; Probation or parole services; Services effectiveness
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=78627

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.