The Use of Alternative Sentencing in Reducing Recidivism

Introduction 

Sentencing in the criminal justice system can take many forms including prison, as well as, alternative sentences if a defendant has been convicted of a crime. The use of alternative sentencing has been noted as a critical measure towards reducing the rate of congestion within the prisons, which has been pointed out as a vital issue of concern (Estelle & Phillips, 2018). However, one of the significant challenges that the justice system faces is on the subject of recidivism or reoffending in which offenders released back into the society engage in the same criminal behaviors. In the United States, for example, the rate of recurrence has been on the rise with some of the factors contributing to this issue including the inability for societal integration.

That has promoted the need for having to come up with an alternative approach through which criminal offenders would be able to receive alternative sentences, which do not prompt them to go to jail or prison for specific periods. Aguiar and Leavell (2017) argue that the use of alternative sentencing is viewed as a critical approach through which to ensure that people are adopted back into society without having to spend time in jails. The use of suspended sentences is considered as essential strategies towards dealing with the issue of criminal offending with the view being towards providing offenders with specific guidelines that they must abide by while serving their sentences. The main question of concern is how the use of alternative sentencing may help towards reducing the rates of recidivism or reoffending, thus, creating the need for having to engage in a study to assist in identifying the correlation.

Research Question 

The research question that will govern this particular research study is:

Do alternative sentences play any significant roles in reducing the rate of recidivism as opposed to traditional sentences? 

Hypothesis 

From the research question, the hypothesis that may be considered will be that indeed the use of alternative sentences may play a critical role in ensuring that the convicted offenders reduce their rates of engagement in criminal behaviors. The hypothesis assumes that alternative sentences create a platform for reform among the offenders considering that this provides them with an alternative of having to remain within the society. Thus, this acts as a guarantee that indeed these offenders would be in a better position of having to reduce their rates of engagement in criminal behavior.

Methods 

To help in testing the hypothesis, this research study embarks on an analysis of court observations made concerning the use of alternative sentences with the sole focus being towards highlighting their effectiveness in reducing recidivism rates. The study focuses on three criminal courts in which judges have focused on the use of alternative sentences as one of the critical approaches through which to punish offenders for their crimes. The selection of the three courts focused more on identifying the extensive use of alternative sentences, especially when focusing on minor criminal offenses. Additionally, the variety of the courts to use as samples for the study was brought about by their consideration of alternative sentences as one of the critical forms of sentencing within the understanding of the criminal justice system.

The researcher embarked on a process of having to examine court documents with the sole focus being towards identifying specific cases in which the judges opted for alternative sentences as the vital form of sentencing. In every court case, a judge is expected to file particular documents that highlight every aspect associated with the case including the evidence presented and the sentences given by the judges. Specifically, the researcher sought to select documents that focused on alternative sentences as the primary form of sentencing given by the judge. Additionally, the analysis also goes ahead to examine the number of offenders that were brought within the same court due to their reoffending after receiving alternative sentencing. The analysis of the court documents is essential in examining how the use of this particular sentencing approach may help towards improving the criminal justice system focusing on the area of reduced reoffending rates.

The evaluation of the court documents also reflected on the need for having to examine the specific type of alternative sentence that the judges offer. That was an essential part of the study, as it seeks to determine whether the use of particular types of alternative sentencing may have impacts towards reducing rates of recidivism when compared to others. Some of the necessary alternative sentencing approaches that have been identified as part of the study included suspended sentences, probation, fines, restitution, and court-ordered community service among others (Hamdamiyan & Behniafar, 2016). From this analysis, it is essential to take note of the fact that indeed the use of alternative sentencing is viewed as one of the notable approaches towards offering a platform for reforms for convicted felons. Additionally, this is considered as a critical expectation towards ensuring that convicted felons would be able to serve their sentences while in the society, which limits the issue of rejection occurring after a prison sentence.

Results 

From the analysis of the data collected, it can be noted that the issue of recidivism remains as one of the critical challenges that each of the three courts was facing with some of the courts experiencing rates of up to 48.9%. The court documents also show the fact that the use of alternative sentencing, although considered as being a viable mode of sentencing, does not have any significant impacts on the rates of recidivism. This can be noted from the fact that the majority of the people that have reoffended within the same courts were previously handed alternative sentences. The most common alternative sentences offered in the majority of the cases identified are fines and community service.

In cases where offenders have been fined for their engagement in criminal behavior, the rate of recidivism is between 25% and 30% in each of the courts. The variation in the prices of recurrence depends wholly on the magnitude of the fines given to the offender after they have been convicted as criminal offenders. In some of the notes that the judges have made when making second or third judgments, one of the common factors is the fact that the use of this alternative approach to sentencing does not affect the offenders. Thus, this creates the need for having to ensure that the offenders would be taken through the criminal justice system as a way of promoting reforms.

On the other hand, the use of community service as an alternative to the traditional sentences has a recidivism rate of between 35% and 40%, which acts as a clear indication of the fact that indeed this particular sentencing approach is failing to meet its expected outcomes. Judges giving community service tend to believe that the convicted felons would be in a better position through which to examine their criminal behaviors as they engage in providing services to the community. Ultimately, this means that it would become much easier for people to experience a significant shift in their behaviors, which is according to the views that have been presented by individual judges. However, the rate of recidivism indicates that this is not the case considering that majority of the offenders often engage in the same criminal behaviors or actions that resulted in them receiving community service.

Discussion 

The focus for the study was to try to create a link between alternative sentences and reduced rates of recidivism with the view that indeed this would work as one of the notable approaches through which to minimize cases of reoffending. The results, as have been presented above, disprove the hypothesis for this particular study with the view that alternative sentencing does not have any significant impacts in reducing the rates of recidivism. This can be noted from the fact that indeed judges that often use alternative sentencing approaches tend to find themselves facing the same offenders for similar criminal behaviors (Tiedt & Sabol, 2015). Thus, this builds on the general understanding that indeed alternative sentencing only acts as a critical form of sentencing that serves to advance the rate of reoffending further, as it does not pave the way for reforms among the convicted felons.

Caudill and Trulson (2016) take note of the fact alternative sentencing only reflect on the need for having to minimize the possibilities of having to go to prison with the view that some of these offenses are minor. However, the results from this study tend to create the understanding that the use of alternative sentencing only seeks to create a negative knowledge of reforms according to the criminal justice system. Often, the use of the alternative sentences is seen as a key strategy through which to minimize the number of people that are accommodated within the prisons and other criminal justice institutions. Consequently, this acts as a guarantee that indeed the rate of recidivism will most likely increase significantly attributed to the significant lack of platforms for reforms within the alternative sentences.

The results also point to the fact that the use of different forms of alternative sentences may result in differentiated rates of recidivism. That is an aspect of great consideration with the view that some of the alternative sentences do not seek to create any form of challenge for the offenders. An example is in cases where offenders involved in offenses that would demand prison sentences of between 6 months and two years having to serve community service for a two month period as a critical form of alternative sentencing. Although this may be viewed as an analytical framework through which to minimize the possibility of having to go to prison, it also creates a significant risk concerning the issue of recidivism. The punishments offered for such offenses do not match the actual criminal offenses, thus, creating the belief that such persons may not have reformed. Ultimately, this paves the way for increased cases of recidivism, which in most cases goes in line with the same criminal behaviors.

Conclusion 

In summary, one of the crucial issues facing the criminal justice system revolves around the issue of recidivism or reoffending. The use of alternative sentencing has been noted as a critical measure towards reducing the rate of congestion within the prisons. The main question of concern is how the use of alternative sentencing may help towards reducing the rates of recidivism or reoffending. The hypothesis assumes that alternative sentences create a platform for reform among the offenders. The court documents also show the fact that the use of alternative sentencing, although considered as being a viable mode of sentencing, does not have any significant impacts on the rates of recidivism. The results disprove the hypothesis for this particular study with the view that alternative sentencing does not have any significant effects in reducing the rates of recurrence.

References

Aguiar, C. M., & Leavell, S. (2017). A Statewide Parenting Alternative Sentencing Program: Description and Preliminary Outcomes. Smith College Studies in Social Work, 87 (1), 78-93.

Caudill, J. W., & Trulson, C. R. (2016). The hazards of premature release: Recidivism outcomes of blended-sentenced juvenile homicide offenders. Journal of criminal justice, 46 , 219-227.

Estelle, S. M., & Phillips, D. C. (2018). Smart sentencing guidelines: The effect of marginal policy changes on recidivism. Journal of Public Economics, 164 , 270-293.

Hamdamiyan, A., & Behniafar, A. R. (2016). Alternative Theoretical Foundations of Penal Sentences in Criminal Law concerning Iran's Islamic Penal Code 1392. J. Pol. & L., 9 , 40.

Tiedt, A. D., & Sabol, W. J. (2015). Sentence length and recidivism among prisoners released across 30 states in 2005: Accounting for individual histories and state clustering effects. Justice Research and Policy, 16 (1), 50-64.