Examining Kansas SB 123: Mandatory Probation and Treatment Don Stemen, Loyola University Chicago The Honorable Richard Smith, Kansas Sentencing Commission Kelly Goodwin, Johnson County Public Defender’s Officer Thomas J. Drees, Ellis County Attorney’s Office.
Don Stemen, Loyola University Chicago
The Honorable Richard Smith, Kansas Sentencing Commission
Kelly Goodwin, Johnson County Public Defender’s Officer
Thomas J. Drees,Ellis County Attorney’s Office
National Association of Sentencing Commissions Conference
Chicago, August 6, 2012
This research is funded by NIJ grant # 2006-IJ-CX-4032
Mandatory Treatment Initiatives
Increased Treatment Initiatives
Change sentencing practices to divert drug offenders from prison at sentencing.
Increase the availability of treatment for drug offenders.
Reduce the number of drug offenders in prison.
Improve outcomes for drug offenders by reducing recidivism and substance abuse.
Small or narrowly-defined target populations
Front-end and back-end net-widening
Traditional focus on supervision/enforcement rather than treatment
Creates mandatory sentence of up to 18 months of community corrections supervision and treatment.
Eligibility restricted to 1st- or 2nd- offense drug possession w/out a prior conviction for a person, drug sale, or drug manufacture offense.
Relies on a network of existing community-based drug treatment providers.
Seeks to create a treatment focused approach to community-based sentences for drug possessors.
Implementation of SB 123
3+ property offenses implementation
No criminal historySome SB 123-eligible cases do not receive treatment
3+ violent offenses implementation
3+ property offenses
No criminal historySome SB 123-ineligible cases receive treatment
SB 123 increased the provision of treatment to target population of drug possessors
SB 123 helped achieve a shift in perspective within probation
SB 123 helped achieve a shift in perspective among courtroom actors
SB 123 encouraged innovation among local communities
Disagreement about program goals across system actors
Gatekeepers emphasized system-level goals; administrators emphasized individual-level goals
“One size fits all” approach has both benefits and drawbacks
Geographic diversity necessitated flexibility in implementation; but it also affected fidelity
Maintain mandatory probation without mandating a particular form of probation
Allow traditional judicial discretion to determine type of probation based on risk/needs assessment; preserve intensive supervision for those with higher levels of risk
Preserve mandatory treatment only for those assessed to need treatment
Allow probation discretion to determine mandatory treatment based on substance abuse assessment; preserve mandatory treatment only for those with high needs
Changes in prison admissions due to programs
Estimated savings due to SB 123 programs