Biometrics Unit Technical Reports: Number BU-1508-M: A Stochastic Study of Incarceration Times for Narcotic Distributors in a City Under the "Three Strike" Law (original) (raw)

Modeling the response of illicit drug markets to local enforcement

Socio-economic Planning Sciences, 1993

Local-level enforcement has been cited as an effective drug enforcement strategy by some policy makers and experts. A more intensive tactic, with focus on a specific target area and referred to as "crackdowns", has been implemented in some cities. In this paper, we analyze a mathematical model due to Caulkins, to study the effect of focussed enforcement on drug markets. Specifically, we consider both fixed and dynamic enforcement policies. Our analysis suggests that drug dealing can be effectively controlled only if enforcement resources exceed a certain threshold level, and that the success of a crackdown operation may be lost fairly quickly if care is not taken to prevent the market from returning. This should provide enforcement officials with analytically derived "rules of thumb" to help make improved policy decisions.

Long-Run Trends in Incarceration of Drug Offenders in the United States

Crime & Delinquency, 2006

Estimates are developed for the number of people incarcerated in the United States for drug law violations between 1972 and 2002, broken down by type of institution (federal prison, state prison, or jail) and, to the extent possible, by nature of drug offense (possession or use, trafficking, or other). These time series are compared to trends in drug use indicators, revealing at best weak correlations, and the absolute levels are compared to different market indicators to draw various inferences. For example, even though about 480,000 people are incarcerated for drug law violations, on average retail sellers spend less than 2 hours behind bars per sale. Still, full-time sellers might expect to spend 3 months incarcerated per year of selling, suggesting that there are roughly four active drug sellers for every one who is incarcerated.

Kingpins or Mules: An Analysis of Drug Offenders Incarcerated in Federal and State Prisons

Criminology <html_ent glyph="@amp;" ascii="&"/> Public Policy, 2004

Drug policy reformers and defenders contest the extent to which lowlevel drug offenders are being sent to prison and for how long. Using data from the Survey of Inmates in Federal and State Correctional Facilities, 1997 (BJS, 2000), we assess the seriousness of incarcerated drug offenders along dimensions of dangerousness, culpability, and harm-specifically, functional role and drug group participation, type and amount of drugs, firearms involvement, and criminal conviction and arrest history. We find that only about 1.6% of federal and 5.7% of state inmates can be described as "unambiguously low-level. " Alternatively, not many are "kingpins." Rather, most fall into a middle spectrum representing different degrees of seriousness that depend on what factors are emphasized. Policy Implications: Our findings dampen hopes of dramatically reducing prison populations by getting out of prison those who are unambiguously low-level drug offenders. They simply do not represent the majority of incarcerated drug offenders. I n particular, most played some role in distribution, so eliminating prison terms for users (decriminalization) would not have affected many now in prison. Indeed, if decriminalization increased demand, it could plausibly increase prison populations by increasing the number of suppliers still subject to imprisonment. On the other hand, "drug courier exceptions" to sentencing laws that apply to minor role offenders possessing large quantities could have a greater prison reduction impact.

The Impact of Macroeconomic Indicators on Recidivism in Drug-Related Crimes (1979-2006)

research on addiction, 2016

Objective: Due to the growing trend of recidivism in drug-related crimes and the notable contribution of these crimes to the committed crimes, the aim of this study was to investigate crime dimensions, especially the economic dimension of crimes in the field of macroeconomic and criminal policy making. Method: The relationship of inflation and unemployment with recidivism in drug-related crimes was investigated using inferential and descriptive statistics and ordinary least squares of regression technique during 1979-2006. Results: Unemployment and inflation were found to hold a positive relationship with the dependent variable. Unemployment and inflation could explain 16% and 74% of the criterion variable, respectively. Conclusion: Therefore, inflation and unemployment are among the economic indicators that can account for 85% of the changes into the recidivism in economic crimes while Gini coefficient, education, and urbanization had no effect on recidivism in economic crimes.

Simulated evidence on the prospects of treating more drug-involved offenders

Journal of Experimental Criminology, 2010

Despite a growing consensus among scholars that substance abuse treatment is effective at reducing offending, strict eligibility rules and budgetary considerations greatly limit the impact that current models of therapeutic jurisprudence can have on public safety in the United States. A question of pressing importance for U.S. drug policy is whether it is beneficial to expand application of this model to treat every offender in need and, if so, whether a set of evidence-based, going-to-scale strategies can be developed to prioritize participation. We use evidence from several sources to construct a synthetic dataset for answering the question: What are the benefits we can reasonably expect by expanding treatment to drug-involved offenders? We combine information from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) and the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program to estimate the likelihood of various arrestee profiles having drug addiction or dependence problems. We use the same sources to also develop prevalence estimates of these profiles among arrestees nationally. We use information in the Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study (DATOS) to compute expected crimereducing benefits of treating various types of drug-involved offenders under different treatment modalities. We find that annually nearly 1.5 million (probably guilty) arrestees in the U.S. are at risk of abuse or dependence and that treatment alone could avert several million crimes that these individuals would otherwise commit. Results vary by treatment modality and arrestee traits and those results are described herein.

The Effect of Imprisonment on Recidivism Rates of Felony Offenders: A Focus on Drug Offenders*

Criminology, 2002

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the deterrent effect of imprisonment. Using data on offenders convicted of felonies in 1993 in Jackson County (Kansas City), Missouri, we compare recidivism rates for offenders sentenced to prison with those for offenders placed on probation. W e find n o evidence that imprisonment reduces the likelihood of recidivism. Instead, we find compelling evidence that offenders who are sentenced to prison have higher rates of recidivism and recidivate more quickly than d o offenders placed on probation. We also find persuasive evidence that imprisonment has a more pronounced criminogenic effect on drug offenders than on other types of offenders. KEYWORDS Recidivism, imprisonment, drug offenders. In Malign Neglect, Michael Tonry (199581) contends that "Drugoffense sentences are the single most important cause of the trebling of the prison population in the United States since 1980." Statistics concerning state and federal prison populations support this conclusion. The percentage of state prisoners incarcerated for a drug offense nearly quadrupled from 1980 (6%) to 1996 (23%). Similarly, the percentage of federal offenders serving time for a drug offense increased from 25% in 1980 to 60% in 1996. In fact, the increase in drug offenders accounted for nearly three-quarters of the total increase in federal inmates and one-third of the total increase in state inmates during this 16-year period (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1998). These statistics reflect a crime control policy premised on a theory of * This manuscript is based on work supported by a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Points of view are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. We are grateful for the helpful comments of the editor and the anonymous reviewers on earlier drafts of the paper. CRIMINOLOGY VOLUME 40 NUMBER 2 2002 329 330 SPOHN AND HOLLERAN deterrence that Skolnick (1997:411) characterizes as "superficially persuasive." The assumption is that sentencing drug offenders to prison for long periods of time will deter current and prospective offenders, leading eventually to a reduction in drug abuse and drug-related crime. As numerous commentators have observed, however, this assumption rests on the false premise that altering criminal penalties will alter behavior (Irwin and Austin, 1997; Paternoster, 1991, 1987; Tonry, 1995). In fact, scholarly research generally concludes that increasing the severity of penalties will have little, if any, effect on crime. This conclusion also is applicable to offenders convicted of drug offenses. As Cohen and her colleagues (19981260) recently noted, "Observers of the criminal justice system who in general agree on little else have joined in arguing that increased penalties for drug use and distribution at best have had a modest impact on the operation of illicit drug markets, on the price and availability of illicit drugs, and on consumption of illicit drugs." The purpose of this study is to evaluate the deterrent effect of incarceration, with a particular focus on drug offenders. Using data on offenders convicted of felonies in Jackson County (Kansas City), Missouri, in 1993, we compare recidivism rates for offenders sentenced to prison with those for offenders sentenced to probation. Using multiple definitions of recidivism, we examine recidivism rates for drug offenders, drug-involved offenders, and offenders convicted of nondrug offenses, controlling for the offender's background characteristics, prior criminal record, and other relevant factors. PRIOR RESEARCH EVIDENCE REGARDING THE DETERRENT EFFECT OF PUNISHMENT The crime control policies pursued in the context of the War on Drugs rest largely on the philosophy of deterrence. As developed by eighteenthcentury utilitarian philosophers such as Jeremy Bentham (1948) and Cesare Beccaria (1963 [1764]), deterrence theory suggests that crime results from a rational calculation of the costs and benefits of criminal activity: Individuals commit crimes when the benefits outweigh the costs. Because an important "cost" of crime is apprehension and punishment, deterrence theorists suggest that "persons will refrain from committing offenses if they perceive that they are certain to be punished, with a severe penalty, and soon after the crime has been committed" (Paternoster, 1991:219). Deterrence can be either specific or general. Specific deterrence occurs when those who have been punished "cease offending, commit less serious offenses, or offend at a lower rate because of the fear of some future sanction" (Paternoster and Piquero, 1995:251). General

The Incarceration of Drug Offenders

Commission on Narcotic Drugs will set the course of international drug policy for at least the next decade, the BFDPP, in partnership with the International Centre for Prison Studies at Kings College London, revisits the topic of the incarceration of drug offenders. Here we provide an overview of some of the available incarceration data from around the world and bring together much contemporary research on the topic. A great deal of the discussion concerns one of the most enthusiastic supporters of incarceration as a drug prevention measure. However, we suggest that the results of policy within the United States should be used as evidence to encourage other member states not to follow this route, and we call for an adjustment of the UN system to make it easier for them to find other ways of managing the problem.