Virginia Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2013 Report June 10, 2013
description
Transcript of Virginia Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2013 Report June 10, 2013
Virginia Sentencing GuidelinesPreliminary FY2013 Report
June 10, 2013
FY 2013 - Cases Coded and Keyed
2
JAN 607 607FEB 1 1
MAR 1 1APR 4 4
MAY 0 0JUN 0 0JUL 1886 1886
AUG 2114 2114SEP 1952 1952OCT 2114 2114NOV 1765 1765DEC 1397 1397
TOTAL 11228 613 11841*
*11,553 certified for compliance analysis
Preliminary FY2013 ReportGuideline Worksheets Keyed as of 05/31/2013
(n=11,553)
3
Preliminary FY2013 Report:General Compliance
Preliminary FY2013 ReportJudicial Agreement
with Guideline Recommendations
General Compliance:
The degree to which judges agree with the overall guidelines recommendation.
5
N=11,553
Preliminary FY2013 Report Judicial Agreement
with Type of Recommended Disposition
Dispositional Compliance:
The degree to which judges agree with the type of sanction recommended.
6
N=11,553
Preliminary FY2013 Report Judicial Agreement with Sentence Length
Durational Compliance:
The degree to which judges agree with the sentence length in cases in which defendants are recommended for jail/prison and receive at least one day incarceration.
Median 9 months
belowmidpoint
7
N=7,856
Preliminary FY2013 Report:Departure Reasons
Aggravation (n=1130)
•Plea agreement 292 (18%**)
•Flagrancy of offense/facts of case 156 (14%**)•Severity/type of prior record 141 (13%**)
•Multiple counts involved in event 70 (6%**)•Poor rehabilitation potential 67 (6%**)
•SG Recommendation too low 58 (5%**)
•Recommendation of jury 54 (5%**)
•Sentenced to alternative 49 (4%**)
n=264 (23%) missing a departure reason
Mitigation (n=1347)
•Plea agreement 490 (37%*)•Sentenced to alternative 118 (9%*)•Judicial discretion 107 (8%*)•Cooperated with Authorities 107 (8%*)•Facts of the case 91 (7%*)
•Recommendation of CA 89 (7%*)
•Court Proceeding: Serve sentence in other case 81 (6%*)•No or limited prior record 61 (3%*)
n=304 (23%) missing a departure reason
Preliminary FY2013 ReportMost Frequently Cited Departure Reasons
* Of mitigating cases requiring departure reason ** Of aggravating cases requiring departure reasons9
Preliminary FY2013 Report:Compliance by Circuit
Circuit Name Circuit Compliance Mitigation Aggravation Number of Cases
Chesapeake 1 79.9% 8.7% 11.3% 538
Virginia Beach 2 83.8% 9.6% 6.5% 612
Portsmouth 3 71.3% 16.2% 12.5% 272
Norfolk 4 80.1% 13.1% 6.8% 443
Suffolk Area 5 83.5% 7.3% 9.2% 260
Sussex Area 6 82.4% 10.0% 7.6% 170
Newport News 7 79.4% 11.7% 8.9% 316
Hampton 8 76.1% 18.3% 5.5% 218
Williamsburg Area 9 79.1% 8.0% 12.9% 287
South Boston Area 10 76.8% 12.8% 10.4% 289
Petersburg Area 11 78.9% 13.5% 7.6% 171
Chesterfield Area 12 80.5% 11.1% 8.4% 523
Richmond City 13 71.4% 21.4% 7.2% 669
Henrico 14 74.7% 12.9% 12.4% 427
Fredericksburg Area 15 74.9% 8.7% 16.4% 677
Charlottesville Area 16 72.7% 15.0% 12.2% 319
Arlington Area 17 72.5% 12.4% 15.2% 178
Alexandria 18 79.6% 14.5% 5.9% 152
Fairfax 19 77.7% 12.2% 10.1% 565
Loudoun Area 20 88.4% 5.5% 6.1% 310
Martinsville Area 21 78.4% 16.8% 4.8% 167
Danville Area 22 73.9% 6.9% 19.2% 276
Roanoke Area 23 75.0% 15.0% 10.0% 448
Lynchburg Area 24 77.5% 14.6% 7.9% 467
Staunton Area 25 76.0% 15.7% 8.3% 363
Harrisonburg Area 26 81.8% 9.8% 8.4% 716
Radford Area 27 87.5% 6.3% 6.3% 559
Bristol Area 28 85.6% 7.9% 6.5% 278
Buchanan Area 29 71.1% 10.5% 18.4% 381
Lee Area 30 73.4% 11.8% 14.8% 169
Prince William Area 31 86.9% 6.9% 6.3% 320
Preliminary FY2013Preliminary FY2013
Most cases received:
-Circuit 26 (Harrisonburg Area)
-Circuit 15 (Fredericksburg Area)
-Circuit 13 (Richmond)
11
Preliminary FY2013Preliminary FY2013
Most cases received:
-Circuit 15 (Fredericksburg Area)
-Circuit 26 (Harrisonburg Area)
-Circuit 13 (Richmond)
Highest compliance:-Circuit 20 (Loudoun Area) 88.4%-Circuit 27 (Radford Area) 87.5%Lowest compliance:-Circuit 29 (Buchanan Area) 71.1%Circuit 3 (Portsmouth) 71.3%Circuit 13 (Richmond) 71.4%
12
Circuit Name Circuit Compliance Mitigation Aggravation Number of Cases
Chesapeake 1 79.9% 8.7% 11.3% 538
Virginia Beach 2 83.8% 9.6% 6.5% 612
Portsmouth 3 71.3% 16.2% 12.5% 272
Norfolk 4 80.1% 13.1% 6.8% 443
Suffolk Area 5 83.5% 7.3% 9.2% 260
Sussex Area 6 82.4% 10.0% 7.6% 170
Newport News 7 79.4% 11.7% 8.9% 316
Hampton 8 76.1% 18.3% 5.5% 218
Williamsburg Area 9 79.1% 8.0% 12.9% 287
South Boston Area 10 76.8% 12.8% 10.4% 289
Petersburg Area 11 78.9% 13.5% 7.6% 171
Chesterfield Area 12 80.5% 11.1% 8.4% 523
Richmond City 13 71.4% 21.4% 7.2% 669
Henrico 14 74.7% 12.9% 12.4% 427
Fredericksburg Area 15 74.9% 8.7% 16.4% 677
Charlottesville Area 16 72.7% 15.0% 12.2% 319
Arlington Area 17 72.5% 12.4% 15.2% 178
Alexandria 18 79.6% 14.5% 5.9% 152
Fairfax 19 77.7% 12.2% 10.1% 565
Loudoun Area 20 88.4% 5.5% 6.1% 310
Martinsville Area 21 78.4% 16.8% 4.8% 167
Danville Area 22 73.9% 6.9% 19.2% 276
Roanoke Area 23 75.0% 15.0% 10.0% 448
Lynchburg Area 24 77.5% 14.6% 7.9% 467
Staunton Area 25 76.0% 15.7% 8.3% 363
Harrisonburg Area 26 81.8% 9.8% 8.4% 716
Radford Area 27 87.5% 6.3% 6.3% 559
Bristol Area 28 85.6% 7.9% 6.5% 278
Buchanan Area 29 71.1% 10.5% 18.4% 381
Lee Area 30 73.4% 11.8% 14.8% 169
Prince William Area 31 86.9% 6.9% 6.3% 320
Circuit Name Circuit Compliance Mitigation Aggravation Number of Cases
Chesapeake 1 79.9% 8.7% 11.3% 538
Virginia Beach 2 83.8% 9.6% 6.5% 612
Portsmouth 3 71.3% 16.2% 12.5% 272
Norfolk 4 80.1% 13.1% 6.8% 443
Suffolk Area 5 83.5% 7.3% 9.2% 260
Sussex Area 6 82.4% 10.0% 7.6% 170
Newport News 7 79.4% 11.7% 8.9% 316
Hampton 8 76.1% 18.3% 5.5% 218
Williamsburg Area 9 79.1% 8.0% 12.9% 287
South Boston Area 10 76.8% 12.8% 10.4% 289
Petersburg Area 11 78.9% 13.5% 7.6% 171
Chesterfield Area 12 80.5% 11.1% 8.4% 523
Richmond City 13 71.4% 21.4% 7.2% 669
Henrico 14 74.7% 12.9% 12.4% 427
Fredericksburg Area 15 74.9% 8.7% 16.4% 677
Charlottesville Area 16 72.7% 15.0% 12.2% 319
Arlington Area 17 72.5% 12.4% 15.2% 178
Alexandria 18 79.6% 14.5% 5.9% 152
Fairfax 19 77.7% 12.2% 10.1% 565
Loudoun Area 20 88.4% 5.5% 6.1% 310
Martinsville Area 21 78.4% 16.8% 4.8% 167
Danville Area 22 73.9% 6.9% 19.2% 276
Roanoke Area 23 75.0% 15.0% 10.0% 448
Lynchburg Area 24 77.5% 14.6% 7.9% 467
Staunton Area 25 76.0% 15.7% 8.3% 363
Harrisonburg Area 26 81.8% 9.8% 8.4% 716
Radford Area 27 87.5% 6.3% 6.3% 559
Bristol Area 28 85.6% 7.9% 6.5% 278
Buchanan Area 29 71.1% 10.5% 18.4% 381
Lee Area 30 73.4% 11.8% 14.8% 169
Prince William Area 31 86.9% 6.9% 6.3% 320 13
Preliminary FY2013Preliminary FY2013
Most cases received:
-Circuit 15 (Fredericksburg Area)
-Circuit 26 (Harrisonburg Area)
-Circuit 13 (Richmond)
Highest compliance:-Circuit 20 (Loudoun Area) 88.4%-Circuit 27 (Radford Area) 87.5%Lowest compliance:-Circuit 29 (Buchanan Area) 71.1%Circuit 3 (Portsmouth) 71.3%Circuit 13 (Richmond) 71.4%
Highest aggravation:-Circuit 22 (Danville Area) 19.2%Highest mitigation:-Circuit 13 (Richmond City) 21.4%
Preliminary FY2013 Report:Compliance by Offense Type
Preliminary FY2013 ReportCompliance by Type of Offense
15
1,082 2,774 718 3,115 818 238 402 268 686 117 276 567 368 75 49
1,082 2,774 718 3,115 818 238 402 268 686 117 276 567 368 75 49
Preliminary FY2013 ReportCompliance by Type of Offense
16
Highest Mitigation RatesRobbery (22.3%) n=82
Most frequent departure reasons: Plea agreement Cooperation with authorities CA/Joint recommendation
Kidnapping (20.4%) n=10 Most frequent departure reasons:
Plea agreement Offender’s health CA/Joint recommendation
Highest Aggravation Rate Murder (21.4%) n=11
Most frequent departure reasons: Flagrancy of the offense Vulnerability of victim Jury recommendation
Rape (20.0%) n=13 Most frequent departure reasons:
Flagrancy of the offense Vulnerability of victim Recommendation of jury
Preliminary FY2013 Report:Nonviolent Offender
Risk Assessment
Preliminary FY2013 ReportNonviolent Risk Assessment
Risk assessment applies in drug, fraud, & larceny cases
Offender must meet eligibility criteria
− Recommended for incarceration− No current or violent felony conviction− Did not distribute an ounce or more of cocaine − Not convicted of crime requiring mandatory
minimum term of incarceration
Purpose: To recommend alternative sanctions for offenders who are statistically less likely to recidivate
Type of alternative at discretion of judge
18
Nonviolent OffenderRisk Assessment
19
1 0
7 1 4
20
Preliminary FY2013 ReportNonviolent Offenders Eligible for Risk Assessment
by Type of Offense
21
7,689 Drug, Fraud & Larceny Cases - 4,601 Excluded: Ineligible, Errors, 1260 Missing 3,088 Analyzed
Preliminary FY2013 Nonviolent Offenders Eligible for Risk Assessment
Fraud
Larceny
All Risk Cases 8%
8%
8%
Drug 7%
23%
11%
37%
28%
62%
75%
51%
56%
7%
6%
4%
9%
3,088
1,141
496
1,451
Offense Mitigation
Compliance
AggravationNumberof CasesAlternative Traditional
85%
86%
88%
84%
22
Recommended and Received an Alternative 22.8% n= 703
Recommended and Incarcerated 30.4% n= 937
Not Recommended and Received Alternative 12.4% n= 382
Not Recommended and Incarcerated 34.5% n= 1,065
Preliminary FY2013 Nonviolent Offenders Eligible for Risk Assessment
23
Preliminary FY2013 ReportMost Frequent Sanctions Imposed in Risk Assessment Cases
Recommended for and Receiving Alternative Sanctions
Median 7 months
24
Preliminary FY2013 Report:Sex Offender Risk Assessment
SEX OFFENDER RISK ASSESSMENT
Preliminary FY2013 ReportSex Offender Risk Assessment
27
Level 3
50%
Level 2
100%
Level 1
300%
Preliminary FY2013 Report Sex Offender Risk Assessment Outcomes
* Excludes Other Sexual Assault cases missing risk assessment and cases in which risk assessment is not applicable (e.g., child pornography and child solicitation offenses)
** Excludes Rape cases missing risk assessment
29
Preliminary FY2013 Report Compliance Rates by Risk Level for Rape Offenders
(n=74*)
Very High Risk
High Risk
Moderate Risk 0%
27%
0%
No Level 20%
81%
53%
100%
51%
13%
7%
0%
---
6%
13%
0%
29%
16
15
2
41
Risk Level Mitigation
Compliance
AggravationNumber of CasesTraditional Adjusted
94%
60%
100%
30
51%
Preliminary FY2013 ReportCompliance Rates by Risk Level for Other Other Sexual Assault Offenders
(n=173*)
Very High Risk
High Risk
Moderate Risk 7%
11%
0%
No Level 11%
74%
56%
0%
59%
12%
33%
0%
---
7%
0%
0%
30%
42
18
0
113
Risk Level Mitigation
Compliance
AggravationNumberof CasesTraditional Adjusted
86%
89%
0%
* Excludes Other Sexual Assault cases missing risk assessment and cases in which risk assessment is not applicable (e.g., child pornography and child solicitation offenses) 31
59%
Preliminary FY2013 Report:Jury Sentencing
Parole System
FY1986 – Preliminary FY2013Percentage of Guidelines Cases Adjudicated by Jury Trials
Parole System versus Truth-in-Sentencing System
Truth-in-Sentencing
33
Fiscal Year
Preliminary FY2013 Report Jury Recommendation vs. Non-Jury Sentencing
Median departure 2 years and 9 months
above high end of guidelines range
34
Preliminary FY2013 Report:Additions/Changes to the
Guidelines Effective July 1, 2013
35
36
New Guidelines Offenses (FY2013) Compliance Mitigation Aggravation
§ 18.2-51.4(A): DWI results in permanent impairment 40.0% (n=2) 20.0% (n=1) 40.0% (n=2)
§ 18.2-272(A): Third offense in 10 years after forfeiture of license 69.2% (n=9) 23.1% (n=3) 7.7% (n=1)
§ 18.2-248(C): Third or subsequent distribution of Schedule I/II drug 70.0% (n=21) 10.0% (n=3) 20.0% (n=6)
§ 18.2-248(C1): Manufacture methamphetamines 82.8% (n=24) 13.8% (n=4) 3.4% (n=1)
Preliminary FY2013 ReportAdditions/Changes to the Guidelines Effective July 1, 2013
Virginia Sentencing GuidelinesPreliminary FY2013 Report
June 10, 2013
Sentencing Revocation Reports &Probation Violation Guidelines (FY2012)
Sentencing Revocation Report is completed for all cases involving felony violations of:
•Probation
•Post-release terms administered by the court
•Good behavior
•Suspended sentence
•Community-based programs
New Law Violation:
Condition 1
Technical Violations:
Conditions 2 – 11 & Special Conditions
4
Sentencing Revocation Reports Received for Technical and New Law Violations
FY1998 - FY2012 (Preliminary)
Note: FY12 includes cases received by September 1, 2012
53%
47%
Sentencing Revocation Reports Received
by Judicial CircuitFY2012 (Preliminary)
Highest Number Received
•Circuit 4 - Norfolk
•Circuit 29 - Buchanan Area
•Circuit 15 – Fredericksburg Area
Circuit Area Number1 Chesapeake 4862 Virginia Beach 2283 Portsmouth 2574 Norfolk 8875 Suffolk Area 3346 Sussex Area 697 Newport News 2658 Hampton 3469 Williamsburg Area 291
10 South Boston Area 21611 Petersburg Area 9612 Chesterfield Area 34913 Richmond City 31814 Henrico 43115 Fredericksburg Area 65616 Charlottesville Area 26817 Arlington 12618 Alexandria 19719 Fairfax 56720 Loudoun Area 21921 Martinsville Area 15922 Danville Area 47923 Roanoke Area 33224 Lynchburg Area 40125 Staunton Area 32126 Harrisonburg Area 55027 Radford Area 56628 Bristol Area 38829 Buchanan Area 72830 Lee Area 13131 Prince William Area 193
Total 10,854** Includes all forms received, including those found not in violation or missing information
Sentencing Revocation Reports ReceivedDispositions for Technical and New Law Violations
FY2012 (Preliminary)
Actual Disposition Received
Probation Jail <= 12 mos. Prison >= 1yr.
NEW LAW VIOLATOR1124 (21%)2348 (43%) 1937 (36%)
TECHNICAL VIOLATOR 1155 (24%)2521 (52%) 1176 (24%)
TOTAL* 2279 (22%) 4869 (48%) 3113 (30%)
*The disposition was missing in 249 cases
6
7
Sentencing Revocation Reports ReceivedNew Law Violations by Type of New Crime
FY2012 (Preliminary)
Cases = 5,536The disposition was missing in 127 cases
8
VCC ID Frequency Percent
Missing 512 9.2A1 1 .0A2 3 .1A3 4 .1A5 3 .1A6 7 .1A9 16 .3C4 1 .0C6 3 .1C9 16 .3F2 11 .2F3 51 .9F4 42 .8F5 491 8.9F6 802 14.5F9 1080 19.5I9 23 .4M1 1962 35.4M2 65 1.2M3 13 .2M4 157 2.8M9 150 2.7S9 123 2.2
Total 5536 100.0
Sentencing Revocation Reports ReceivedNew Law Violations by Type of New Crime
FY2012 (Preliminary)
Felonies
Misdemeanors
Traffic Infractions
Type Not Clear
9
Sentencing Revocation Reports Received by Type of Violation and Sanction Received
FY2012 (Preliminary)
Probation
Jail
Prison
Median 6 mos.
Median 6 mos.Median 5 mos.
Median 1.75 yrs. Median 1.7 yrs.
Median 2.0 yrs.
10
* Cases are not included in compliance analysis if the guidelines do not apply (the case involves a parole-eligible offense, first offender violation, misdemeanor original offense, or the offender was not on supervised probation), if the guidelines forms were incomplete, or if outdated forms were prepared.
Sentencing Revocation Reports Received FY2012 (Preliminary)
Violator Type Unknown
167Found Not in
Violation178
Probation Violation Guidelines Cases – “Technicals”by Type of Original Offense
FY2012 (Preliminary)
11
12
Types of Violations Cited in Probation Violation Guidelines Cases – “Technicals”
FY2012 (Preliminary)
Percentages do not total 100% because there may be multiple violations cited for each defendant
Financial 48%Substance abuse treatment 23%Alternative programs 9%Sex offender restrictions 5%
FY2008-2012 WorksheetFY2006-FY2007 Worksheet
New factors were added
Existing factors were adjusted
Point values were increased
14
N = 4,643 N = 5,584N = 4,860 N = 5,067 N = 4,216
Probation Violation Guidelines – “Technicals” Compliance and Direction of Departures
FY2005 – FY2012 (Preliminary)
N = 4,705 N = 4,323
RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION
ACTUAL DISPOSITION
ProbationJail up to 12 Months
Prison 1 Year or More
Probation 45.0% 42.7% 12.3%Jail up to 12 Months 17.5% 66.9% 15.7%Prison 1 Year or More 18.2% 36.1% 45.7%
52
Probation Violation Guidelines Dispositional Compliance and Direction of DeparturesFY2012 (Preliminary)
Probation Violation Guidelines Most Frequently Cited Departure ReasonsFY2012 (Preliminary)
Mitigation (25.1%)
Most frequently cited: No Reason
(48.7%) Sentenced to Alternative
(7.1%) Judicial Discretion
(6.0%) Recommendation of CA
(4.3%)
Aggravation (24.1%)
Most frequently cited: No Reason
(45.2%) 2nd or subsequent revocation
(8.2%) Poor rehabilitation potential
(4.8%) Fail to follow instructions
(4.8%)
15
Sentencing Revocation Reports &Probation Violation Guidelines (FY2012)