skip navigation


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: 93959 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: Experiment in Bail Reform - Evaluating Pretrial Release Service Agencies in Federal District Courts
Author(s): L A Sherwood-Fabre
Date Published: 1984
Page Count: 536
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
Washington, DC 20531
US Dept of Justice NIJ Pub
Washington, DC 20531
Grant Number: 82-IJ-CX-0052
Type: Thesis/Dissertation
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This dissertation examines the impact of the Bail Reform Act of 1966 and the creation of 10 experimental pretrial services agencies (PSA) on bail decisions in the Federal district courts. It also explores two other proposed reforms, elimination of surety bonds and preventive detention of dangerous defendants.
Abstract: The analysis of the effects of PSA's and any differences between PSA's supervised by the probation office and those under an independent board was based on information obtained during site visits and data the PSA's were required by Congress to collect. The final data set included three groups: convicted defendants both before and after the PSA's began operating (1975-81), convicted defendants in five comparison districts (1973-74 and 1975-76), and nonconvicted defendants interviewed by the PSA's during and after 1976. The PSA's did increase release rates and the use of own recognizance as desired by the congressional mandate. However, programs under an independent board were more effective in achieving this goal than those supervised by the probation office. The study also compared the pretrial experiences of defendants in one district located in a State which has eliminated surety bonds with defendants prosecuted in other districts having the same type of pretrial agency. Overall, the results suggested that a 10 percent deposit bond, and in some cases release on recognizance, did not differ from surety bonds in effectiveness in deterring pretrial misconduct. Analysis of definitions of dangerousness in a Washington, D.C., preventive detention law and a proposed Federal law indicates that such statutes cannot provide the needed formal law that would affect rates of pretrial misconduct. Tables, research instruments, and approximately 150 references are supplied.
Index Term(s): Bail bonds; Bail reform; Federal Bail Reform Act; Pretrial services agencies; Preventive detention
Note: Indiana University doctoral dissertation
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*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.