The requirement to submit to drug testing is either a standard or special condition of adult community correctional supervision in most jurisdictions. Positive drug test results are one of the most common violations of probation that result in official action by a supervising officer. This study examines the relationship between individual characteristics, drug test results, and federal supervision outcomes. Results indicate that individual risk score and offense category are associated with positive drug tests. Furthermore, testing positive for hard drugs is associated with revocation for new crimes and non-drug technical violations, but testing positive for cannabis only is not associated with supervision revocation for either reason.

Research Summary For several decades, critics have argued that civil forfeiture laws create incentives for law enforcement to increase departmental revenue by “policing for profit.” By using data on federal equitable sharing payments to nearly 600 local law enforcement agencies between 2000 and 2012, we examine the relationship between the characteristics of state forfeiture laws and equitable sharing payments to local agencies. Our results indicate that agencies in states with state laws that are more restrictive or less rewarding to police collect more in federal equitable sharing. This finding supports the critics’ argument that police behavior in regard to forfeiture activities is influenced by the financial rewards and burdens involved. Policy Implications Our results reveal that the findings of investigative journalism and case study research, that is, that police forfeiture activities are influenced by financial rewards, may be more generalizable to law enforcement than previously thought. Despite recent state‐level reforms, federal equitable sharing and most state forfeiture laws provide limited due process protections and have minimal accountability or reporting requirements. Concerns about the impact of civil forfeiture practices on perceptions of procedural justice and police legitimacy are discussed, and possible policy reforms are reviewed.

This study examines the relative importance of the different learning objectives for criminal justice education as identified by the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences (ACJS). Three different populations (students, faculty, and professionals) completed a survey exercise in which they were required to rank order hypothetical job applicants who varied in competency on each of the ACJS learning objectives. In addition, students completed the same exercise pre- and post-completion of their required internship to determine if experience in the field affected their responses. Conjoint analysis was used to identify the relative importance of different learning objectives. While results indicate some similarities in responses across all three populations, several interesting differences were observed, and these may have important curricular implications for criminal justice programs.

THE IMPLEMENTATION of evidence-based practices (EBP) into community corrections has become one of the most important initiatives in the field. Although the early focus was on effective programs for offenders, more recent emphasis has been on the skills needed for probation officers to provide effective supervision. This shift was partially due to a meta-analysis indicating that community supervision, as currently practiced, had virtually no effect on recidivism rates (Bonta, Rugge, Scott, Bourgon, & Yessine, 2008). However, Bonta et al. also noted that many officers were not practicing the riskneed-responsivity (RNR) principles, which is crucial to impacting recidivism rates. Prior meta-analytic reviews of treatment programs (see Andrews & Bonta, 2010) have found that not following RNR principles actually results in an increase in recidivism, while preliminary studies of officers randomly assigned to training in RNR show those offenders supervised by officers who adhere to the RNR model had lower recidivism rates. Given the potential for substantial reductions if the principles are followed, a number of training programs have been developed, including the Strategic Training Initiative in Community Supervision (STICS), Effective Practices in Community Supervision (EPICS), and Staff Training Aimed at Reducing Rearrest (STARR). All of these programs aim to teach officers specific skills related to the risk-need-responsivity principles, with a particular emphasis on the use of cognitive-behavioral techniques. However, implementation research in a variety of settings has indicated that formal training alone is not effective in changing professional behavior, and research to date on the implementation of these programs shows similar results (Bonta et al., 2008). Research in other helping professions has noted the need for follow-up support to ensure that skills learned in training result in changes during actual practice (Miller, Yahne, Moyers, Martinez, & Pirritano, 2004; Walters, Matson, Baer, & Ziedonis, 2005). There is a substantial body of literature on the effectiveness of correction interventions and practices (see McGuire, 2000; Taxman, Shepardson, & Byrne, 2005; White and Graham, 2010) and works that highlight specific Principles of Correctional Interventions (National Institute of Corrections, n.d.) as central to evidence-based practices with offenders (see also Crime and Justice Institute, 2009; Lowenkamp, Latessa, & Smith, 2006; Taxman et al., 2005). As noted by Rhine, Mawhorr, & Parks (2006), however, weak implementation can derail an otherwise effective program. The present study describes the strategy utilized by a federal probation district office in the implementation of the STARR training program. The purpose of this study is to highlight one district’s efforts to protect program integrity, the challenges faced by those efforts, and the outcomes of those efforts. The hope is that this information will help other federal probation offices improve their own implementation of the STARR program, as well as other criminal justice agencies seeking to implement similar programs or practices.

Collaborative research partnerships between criminal justice agencies and universities are vital to providing more effective and efficient services to the community by connecting research with practice. Unfortunately, such partnerships are not frequently sought. The tradition of autonomous research is often at least partially rooted in the perception that barriers to collaboration cannot be successfully mitigated. As external factors are increasing the pressure to collaborate, it is constructive to recognize the known barriers and strategies to overcome these hurdles. The present paper discusses an ongoing collaboration between the university researchers and a federal probation district in the assessment of an ongoing training program to improve officer interactions with offenders. Best practices are outlined and suggestions for future projects are discussed.

Criminal Justice faculty collaborated with undergraduate and graduate students to evaluate federal probation officers' use of evidence-based skills following the implementation of a new training program designed to improve officer supervision skills and offender outcomes. The project resulted in the coding of over 100 audio recordings of actual officer-offender interactions based upon a developed assessment instrument. Overall, officers demonstrated high levels of adherence to training program skills. This article describes the process used to form a faculty-student collaborative research project and the benefits, challenges, and recommendations for similar projects at other institutions.

Purpose: Critics of asset forfeiture claim that forfeiture laws create financial incentives that inappropriately influence police behavior. The present study examines the relationship between measures of the financial incentive and legal burdens for civil asset forfeiture on federal equitable sharing payments to local law enforcement to determine whether police behavior is affected by different statutory incentives for forfeiture activity.Methods: Using LEMAS and DOJ forfeiture data, this study addresses some of the limitations of previous research by using a multi-year average for forfeiture activity, an improved measure of financial incentives for law enforcement, and multiple measures of statutory burdens to law enforcement to determine the impact of forfeiture laws on forfeiture activity.Results: Consistent with anecdotal reports and limited prior research, findings indicate that agencies in jurisdictions with more restrictive state forfeiture laws receive more proceeds through federal equitable sharing.Conclusions: Results suggest that state and local law enforcement agencies use federal equitable sharing to circumvent their own state forfeiture laws when state laws are more burdensome or less financially rewarding to these agencies, providing additional evidence that police operations are influenced by financial incentives. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Using data from the Baldus, Woodworth, and Pulaski (1990) study of Georgia's death penalty system, we examine the influence of victim gender in death penalty cases. Furthermore, to improve our understanding of the meaning of victim gender, we consider 1) the joint effects of victim gender and victim race, 2) victimization characteristics that might explain victim gender effects, and 3) the impact of victim gender at different decision-making stages in the death penalty case process. We find that both victim gender and race are associated with death sentencing outcomes and that an examination of the joint effects of victim gender and race reveals considerable differences in the likelihood of receiving a death sentence between the most disparate victim race–gender groups. In particular, it seems that black male victim cases are set apart from all others in terms of leniency afforded to defendants. We also show that the effect of victim gender is explained largely by gender differences in the sexual nature of some homicides. An examination of prosecutorial and jury decision making reveals that although victim gender has little impact on prosecutorial decisions, it has a meaningful impact on jury decisions.

Criminologists and criminal justice researchers have neglected the behavior of regulatory agencies. Furthering the goal of focusing on the behavior of regulatory agencies, this article analyzes the reporting practices of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on its activities as found in two publications produced by that agency: FDA Enforcement Report, its official data report, and FDA Consumer, a public information magazine. Results suggest that the FDA uses these mediums to construct different images of its activities. The authors examine reasons why the FDA engages in image management and the differences across different FDA publications. The authors also introduce the idea of public health justice to identify the social control concerns of agencies ostensibly charged with protecting the public’s health.

Criminologists and criminal justice researchers have neglected the behavior of regulatory agencies. Furthering the goal of focusing on the behavior of regulatory agencies, this article analyzes the reporting practices of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on its activities as found in two publications produced by that agency: FDA Enforcement Report, its official data report, and FDA Consumer, a public information magazine. Results suggest that the FDA uses these mediums to construct different images of its activities. The authors examine reasons why the FDA engages in image management and the differences across different FDA publications. The authors also introduce the idea of public health justice to identify the social control concerns of agencies ostensibly charged with protecting the public’s health.

Several death penalty studies examine whether victim race is associated with differential death sentencing outcomes; however, these studies tend to ignore the potential interaction of victim race and victim gender on decision-making outcomes. The present article examines the impact of the interaction of victim race and gender on death sentences in Ohio. When victim race and gender were considered, those homicides with White female victims were significantly more likely to result in a death sentence than homicides with other victim characteristics. This finding expands on previous research by identifying a specific victim gender-race combination, White female victim, as an extralegal factor that may partially explain previously identified race-of-victim disparities in death sentencing.

Empirical studies of the death penalty continue to find that the race and gender of homicide victims are associated with the severity of legal responses in homicide cases even after controlling for legally relevant factors. A limitation of this research, however, is that victim race and gender are examined as distinct and independent factors in statistical models. In this study, we explore whether the independent examination of victim race and gender masks important differences in legal responses to homicides. In particular, we empirically test the hypothesis that defendants convicted of killing white females are significantly more likely to receive death sentences than killers of victims with other race-gender characteristics. Findings indicate that homicides with white female victims were more likely to result in death sentences than other victim race-gender dyads. We posit that this response may be unique and result in differential sentencing outcomes.

ABSTRACT Correctional administrators have traditionally had a number of disciplinary tools at their discretion to maintain institutional control. Following the virtual elimination parole and good time credits, the State of Ohio created a unique penal policy to strengthen prison quthorities’ ability to respond to prison violations. This paper reviews the passage of the bad time statute and its eventual demise at the hands of the state's supreme court. The study illustrates how correctional discretion is often manipulated to serve perceived political and institutional needs and the consequences of altering that discretion.

The use of the death penalty has resulted in a number of studies attempting to determine if its application is consistent with the guidelines established by the United States Supreme Court. In particular, many studies have assessed whether there are racial disparities in the imposition of death sentences. This study examined the imposition of death sentences in Ohio, a state largely ignored by previous research and that, until 1999, had not executed an inmate since 1963. Drawing from previous studies that have examined the issue in other states, this study assessed the likelihood that a particular homicide would result in a death sentence, controlling for race of defendant and victim and other relevant factors. Results indicated both legal and extralegal factors (including race of victim) were significant predictors of a death sentence, supporting many previous studies that concluded that race plays a role in the imposition of the death penalty.