The U.S. Parole Commission in 1974, initiated parole decision guidelines articulating a national cohort justice parole policy model which theoretically reduced criticism of arbitrary and capricious decision-making. In 1976, reparole guidelines were implemented which unlike the parole guidelines, were not founded upon scientific research. Reparole is the procedure whereby a conditional release violator is considered for reparole supervision. / This dissertation examines reparole decision-making and attempts to demonstrate an alternative policy which would reduce criticism of "fixed and mechanical" decision-making, and the potential for the appearance of unfairness in weighting parole violation accountability. Additionally, this dissertation examines "relative improvement" as it relates to the efficacy of parole decision-making and supervision. Relative improvement is defined as the commission of a "less" serious parole violation compared to the original imprisoned behavior. / Lastly, the study attempts to discover if by the employment of decision-making parole guidelines, there is produced an unwelcomed policy by-product, what Robert Merton calls goal displacement. He expresses goal displacement as strict adherence to agency policies, which originally conceived as a means, then becomes transformed into an end-in-itself. / The study findings demonstrated that generally the introduction of violation guidelines structured discretion well and did not appear to have a "chilling effect" on the exercise of discretion where warranted. / In respect to the efficacy of pre-quideline (clinical) parole decision-making and supervision, recidivism data failed to demonstrate "relative improvement", to the contrary data suggested an increase in reported crime severity violation behavior. / Lastly, an alternative reparole policy is suggested by the writer which incorporates an existing parole risk "Burgess" type actuarial instrument that should reduce the potential criticism of "fixed and mechanical" decision-making, as well as the potential for the appearance of unfairness in weighting parole violation accountability. / Unfortunately for the U.S. Parole Commission the development of a cohort justice model for parole decision-making may have created an unwelcomed dysfunctional agency by-product of power emasculation, in that pending congressional determinate sentencing legislation has transferred the decision-making scheme to the judiciary for administration. / Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 43-05, Section: A, page: 1699. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1982.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:fsu.edu/oai:fsu.digital.flvc.org:fsu_74824 |
| Contributors | MILLER, CLOUD HICKLEN, III., Florida State University |
| Source Sets | Florida State University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Text |
| Format | 279 p. |
| Rights | On campus use only. |
| Relation | Dissertation Abstracts International |
Page generated in 0.0019 seconds