Probation Revocation and Its Causes: Profiles of State and Local Jurisdictions

In the Alpha Phase of the Robina Institute's research of probation revocation practices, the Probation Revocation project team examined and reported on the range of contemporary probation practices in six jurisdictions. While the project was centered on the impact of the revocation decision, the scope of inquiry included earlier stages of the sentencing and probation supervision process in an effort to understand how cases reach the point of revocation. Research includes examining the type and number of conditions typically imposed on probationers, policies and procedures for violations, viewpoints of probation officers, judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and probationers, as well as rates of revocation for both criminal and non-criminal violations.

Included below are the published reports from the Alpha Phase of Robina's research.

Probation Revocation and Its Causes: Profiles of State and Local Jurisdictions, Bell County, Texas

01.08.16

and

This profile describes the structure and operations of probation in one county in Texas. It presents the perspectives of the individuals who participate in the county's probation system and how they navigate issues surrounding probation violations and revocations. The picture it paints is one of a complex system, tasked with ensuring that those under supervision abide by a lengthy list of conditions and remain crime-free, all while working within the realities of probationers' daily lives. Though many of the probationers had limited financial means, the probation system in Bell County—and across the state—is largely funded by probationers' fees, turning probation officers into "bill collectors" to finance the system and burdening the probationers who already struggle with financial instability.

Suggested Citation: Mariel Alper and Ebony Ruhland, Robina Institute of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, Bell County, Texas in Probation Revocation and Its Causes: Profiles of State and Local Jurisdictions (2015).

Probation Revocation and Its Causes: Profiles of State and Local Jurisdictions, Wharton and Matagorda Counties, Texas

04.11.16

and

This profile is published as part of the Robina Institute’s Probation Revocation project, and is the result of the completion of the project’s “Alpha Phase” in Wharton and Matagorda Counties in Texas.

During the “Alpha Phase” of the project, the research team reviewed and collected data from the jurisdiction as well as reviewed probation practices and probation revocation practices. This research provides a comprehensive understanding of how probation and probation revocation works in this jurisdiction.

In addition to researching probation practices, data and statistics, as well as state and local policies and procedures, the team also interviewed probation officers, judges, and other criminal justice professionals, and individual probationers. The findings in the report include data from the research and highlights from the interviews that identify some potential factors that could lead to probation revocation. These factors include: conditions, supervision fees, length of probation, and sanctions for violations.

We want to express our sincere gratitude to Roxane Marek, Department Director, and the Matagorda County Community Supervision and Corrections Department, for their cooperation and partnership during this research.

Suggested Citation: Mariel E. Alper and Ebony L. Ruhland, Robina Institute of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, Wharton and Matagorda Counties, Texas in Probation Revocation and Its Causes: Profiles of State and Local Jurisdictions (2016).

Probation Revocation and Its Causes: Profiles of State and Local Jurisdictions, Ramsey County, Minnesota

08.16.16

and

This profile describes how probation violations and revocations work in Ramsey County. Due to the size of the county, the interviews are only from a sample of representatives involved in probation violations and revocations. Interviewees commented that because Ramsey is a large county with over 12,000 individuals on probation, caseloads can be high, and at times there can be a great deal of work. Interview participants shared the importance of all players in the criminal justice system working as a team to handle the high volume of cases. However, working together and being on the same page was sometimes a challenge. When the interview participants were asked what they would like to change about how probation violations are currently handled in Ramsey County, many expressed an interest in improving the relationships between probation officers, attorneys, and judges. One probation officer stated they would like to have increased communication with judges and that they would like judges to trust the probation department more – specifically, to trust that the probation department is using evidence-based practices to the best of their ability.

Suggested Citation: Ebony Ruhland and Mariel Alper, Robina Institute of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, Ramsey County, Minnesota in Probation Revocation and Its Causes: Profiles of State and Local Jurisdictions (2016).

Probation Revocation and Its Causes: Profiles of State and Local Jurisdictions, Hennepin County, Minnesota

11.01.16

and

This profile describes the structure and operations of probation violations in Hennepin County. Hennepin County Probation is a large department with over 900 probation staff, 65 judges and many more public defenders, city and county attorneys. Interviews were only conducted with a small sample of professionals and probationers involved in probation violations and revocations. The county attorneys are also not represented in this profile as they declined participation in the interviews.

Suggested Citation: Ebony L. Ruhland and Jason P. Robey, Robina Institute of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, Hennepin County, Minnesota in Probation Revocation and Its Causes: Profiles of State and Local Jurisdictions (2016).