One-Year
Project Aims to Assist States, Particularly Those Seeking to
End Reliance on Mandatory Minimum Sentencing for Drug-Involved Offenders
Douglas B. Marlowe,
J.D., Ph.D. has joined with Professor Steven Chanenson of the Villanova
University School of Law to develop an empirically-derived model for states
seeking to reform sentencing guidelines for drug involved offenders. The
model will help states sort offenders into legal tracks matched to their
assessed risk to society and need for treatment and/or judicial or correctional
supervision.
The project comes as pressures increase on states to end mandatory minimum
sentencing for drug-possession offenses, a legacy of the 1980s “War
on Drugs.” In addition to Constitutional challenges to the federal
sentencing guidelines on which many of the state laws are based, fiscal
pressures have mounted in recent years to contain correctional costs and
curb high rates of criminal recidivism and return to drug use when incarcerated
offenders are released to the community.
“If the last ten to fifteen years have taught us anything,” Marlowe said, “it is that a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach to the drug-involved offender does not work and can squander public dollars. Approaches that indiscriminately tilt toward ‘jail for all’ or ‘treatment for all’ – or some in-between combination - ignore scientific evidence that offenders have a better chance for success when their dispositions are matched to the severity of their addiction as well as their predisposition to criminal activity and anti-social tendencies.”
In 2003, Marlowe’s research on drug court models was the first to demonstrate that outcomes for high-risk offenders improve substantially when treatment is combined with judicial supervision, whereas lower risk offenders do just as well under the less expensive, treatment-without-judges model. His more recent work has concentrated on the effects of sentencing based on standardized assessment of offender risk and need.
In California, Marlowe’s findings directly influenced that State Legislature and Governor to reform its Proposition 36 diversion program for offenders. His research was also influential in a ruling by the Supreme Court of California dismissing an appeal in a case involving jail sanctions for drug-addicted parents in child abuse proceedings.
Professor Chanenson is a nationally recognized expert on sentencing laws and penology. With Marlowe and others at TRI providing the underlying logic, Chanenson will supply expert knowledge of the constitutional and statutory issues that must be addressed in sentencing guidelines.
In addition to a model statute, Marlowe and Chanenson will develop a law-review or law-journal article explaining the logic and scientific evidence supporting the model and an executive summary and Power Point presentation for dissemination to state and federal lawmakers.
For more information on this or other projects on drug-involved offenders, contact Douglas Marlowe at DMarlowe@tresearch.org.
