VOLUME 20, ISSUE 1, PAGES 71–84 (2019) Criminology, Criminal Justice Law, & Society

E-ISSN 2332-886X Available online at https://scholasticahq.com/criminology-criminal-justice-law-society/

Procedural Justice and Police Encounters with Homeless Injecting Drug Users

Maryanne Aldersona and Dina Perroneb a University of California Irvine b California State University Long Beach

A B S T R A C T A N D A R T I C L E I N F O R M A T I O N

The recent decline in police legitimacy (Gallup Poll, 2015) has increased the need for procedural justice. Law enforcement agencies that employ procedural justice can restore legitimacy, build trust, and enhance public satisfaction. This paper is a methodological pilot that assesses procedural justice during police encounters with homeless injection drug users, using secondary data collected from 99 homeless injecting drug users in Skid Row, . Findings suggest that despite the legal outcome of a police encounter (i.e., arrest, citation), when officers utilize procedural justice (e.g., act fairly, treat the individual with respect), public satisfaction is positive. Further research is needed to unpack this relationship to inform policing practices.

Article History: Keywords:

Received April 23, 2018 policing, procedural justice, injection drug use, homeless Received in revised form February 20, 2019 Accepted February 25, 2019

© 2019 Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society and The Western Society of Criminology Hosting by Scholastica. All rights reserved.

Corresponding author: Maryanne Alderson, University of California, Irvine. University of California, Irvine. 2340 Social Ecology II, Irvine, California, 92697-7080, USA. Email: [email protected] 72 ALDERSON & PERRONE

Police legitimacy ensures that the public abides by the law and cooperates with law enforcement when Literature Review necessary (Tyler, 1988). With recent instances of arrest-related deaths (Bureau of Justice Statistics, Procedural Justice 2016) and police corruption (Cato Institute, 2016), police legitimacy and trust has been declining (Gallup Procedural justice theory asserts the importance Poll, 2015). According to a 2015 Gallup Poll, of extra-legal factors in determining police legitimacy confidence in the police reached its “lowest [(52%)] in (Tyler, 1988). The theory posits that regardless of the 22 years” (Gallup Poll, 2015, para. 1). To re-establish legal outcome of the interaction, police legitimacy is police legitimacy, many police departments, including largely influenced by the behavior of the officer during Oakland, Salinas, and (Gilbert, Wakeling, & the interaction (e.g., did the officer exhibit fairness, Crandall, 2015), began adhering to the principles respect, and active listening). Procedural justice is outlined in procedural justice (Tyler, 1988). employed to improve police-civilian interactions and Procedural justice theory posits that regardless of the increase police legitimacy. legal outcome of a police encounter (i.e., arrest, Procedural justice is a well-tested theory that citation), satisfaction and trust in the police is Thibaut and Walker derived in 1974 from Rawl’s influenced primarily by the officer’s non-legal actions, (1971) concept of justice as fairness. Rawls developed such as acting fairly, treating individuals with respect, his theory of justice as fairness to describe how to and treating them similarly to others. When procedural construct a fair and just society. Although Rawls was justice is employed, trust and legitimacy in law mainly concerned with the primary institutions of enforcement can be maintained (Tyler, 1988). society, Thibaut and Walker expanded Rawls’ Although numerous studies have lent support for principles to apply to both substantive and procedural procedural justice theory (Dai, Frank, & Sun, 2011; law (Thibaut, Walker, LaTour, & Houlden, 1974). In Gau & Brunson, 2010; Mazerolle, Antrobus, Bennett, a study using a mock trial, Thibaut and colleagues & Tyler, 2013; Van den Bos, van der Velden, & Lind, (1974) demonstrated that overall respondents’ 2014), none have analyzed procedural justice during satisfaction and perception of justice was not based on interactions between law enforcement and injecting the components of the trial but on the fairness drug users (IDU) and law enforcement and those portrayed by those with whom they interacted. This experiencing – groups that experience study provided the foundation for procedural justice high levels of police interactions. This study fills that theory. gap by investigating the interactions between law In 1976, Leventhal used Thibaut and colleagues’ enforcement and homeless injection drug users to (1974) work and created six rules by which an assess if procedural justice practices can affect the individual judges procedural fairness: the consistency views of those deeply marginalized from mainstream rule, the bias suppression rule, the accuracy rule, the society and who often have very negative views of the correctability rule, the representativeness rule, and the police. ethicality rule. Leventhal explained that each of these Research has demonstrated the benefits of rules may not have similar meanings and values across procedural justice on police-community relations and individuals. Each individual may understand these overall satisfaction with police among a variety of rules differently, and one individual may determine populations (see Dai et al., 2011; Gau & Brunson, one rule or measure as being more significant than 2010; Sunshine & Tyler, 2003). However, most of another. Thus, each of the six justice rules may be these studies rely on community surveys that do not applied selectively and disparately depending on the capture those who have negative interactions with individual. police, are the most marginalized from mainstream Modern procedural justice theory is derived from institutions, and have multiple police encounters. This those aspects of Thibaut and colleagues’ (1974) and methodological pilot targets that population by Leventhal’s (1976) theories that were related to assessing the use of procedural justice in interactions criminal justice. Tyler (1988) specifically applied both between police and IDU in Skid Row, Los Angeles. Thibaut and colleagues’ conclusion that the fairness Using secondary data from a quantitative survey portrayed by those with whom individuals interacted administered to IDU in Skid Row, our findings show is of value and Leventhal’s justice judgment rules to support for procedural justice theory, revealing that develop seven aspects of procedural justice that police officer behavior and treatment of the individual contribute to the perception of fairness and overall greatly impact satisfaction with police. satisfaction with legal authorities, primarily the police and the courts. Those aspects are

Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 1 POLICE ENCOUNTERS WITH HOMELESS IDU 73

[1] the effort of the authorities to be fair, [2] their perceived as procedurally just, then that person will honesty, [3] whether their behavior is consistent with view the police force as legitimate (Mazerolle et al., ethical standards, [4] whether opportunities for 2013). And, when the police are perceived as representation are given, [5] the quality of the decision legitimate, compliance with the law is more likely (Dai made, [6] whether opportunities to appeal decisions et al., 2011; Gau & Brunson, 2010; Tankebe, 2012). exist, and [7] whether the behavior of the authorities Studies across various populations and contexts show bias. (Tyler, 1988, p. 121) support the relationship between procedural justice Similarly to Leventhal, Tyler (1988) argued that and police legitimacy and law adherence. Tyler and measures of procedural fairness, and resulting Fagan (2008) found, among a random sample of New procedural justice, vary by individual perceptions of York City residents who completed a phone survey, the interaction. These perceptions of fairness influence that procedural justice significantly impacts overall satisfaction with the encounter and provide cooperating with police. Sunshine and Tyler (2003) legitimacy to that agency (e.g., police). Tyler (1988) also conducted a study among New York residents, explained that satisfaction and legitimacy ultimately both Whites and people of color, and found that “the depend on the aspects of procedural justice and not the key antecedent of legitimacy is the fairness of the outcome of the interaction. procedures used by the police” (p. 513). Tyler and Several studies have lent support for Tyler’s Wakslak (2004) conducted telephone interviews with (1988) procedural justice theory and found that racial minority residents of Oakland and Los Angeles procedural justice is important for establishing trust to assess procedural justice and police legitimacy and between the public and government institutions (see racial profiling. They found that the fairness used by Hinds & Murphy, 2007; Sunshine & Tyler, 2003; police directly correlates with an individual’s Tankebe, 2012). These government institutions interpretation of the interaction as racial profiling and include law enforcement, court systems, and procedurally unjust. Nuño’s (2018) study of Hispanic correctional facilities (Van den Bos, van der Velden, and White arrestees in Arizona also demonstrates a & Lind, 2014). significant relationship between procedural justice and police legitimacy. Procedural Justice and Policing Several studies have assessed procedural justice Interactions between law enforcement and the and its impact on perceptions of police legitimacy and public are especially pertinent to the discussion of law compliance outside of the United States (e.g., see procedural justice. According to the tenets of Akinlabi & Murphy, 2018; Hinds & Murphy, 2007; procedural justice, the public needs to view police Jackson et al., 2012; Murphy, Mazerolle, & Bennett, interactions as fair and just in order to accept the 2014; Reisig, Tankebe, & Mesko, 2014; Sahin, Braga, outcome of the interaction. Van den Bos and Apel, & Brunson, 2017). Using a nationally colleagues (2014) state that “citizens are more inclined representative sample from England and Wales, to trust the government and its institutions if they feel Jackson and colleagues (2012) found that procedural that their decisions are fair and just” (p. 2). This trust justice is significantly linked to both legitimacy and fosters a relationship in which the public is more likely compliance. Reisig and colleagues (2014) also to cooperate with the police in future interactions concluded from their survey of young adult Slovenians (Mazerolle et al., 2013). The effects of procedural that procedural justice impacts both perceptions of justice are evident especially when the outcome of the police legitimacy and law compliance. Similarly, a interaction is not in the civilian’s favor, such as when survey of southwest Nigerians demonstrated that the person is arrested (Van den Bos et al., 2014). procedural justice affects law compliance (Akinlabi & Because police require public cooperation to be Murphy, 2018). Via a mail survey to an Australian effective, and trust in police is crucial for maintaining sample, Hinds and Murphy (2007) found that those public order, the perception of interactions between who believe that police utilize procedural justice when the officer and the civilian has consequences performing their duties are more likely to view the (Mazerolle et al., 2013). When harsh and derogatory police as legitimate and be satisfied with their services. language, threats, raised voices, or force are used, it is Murphy and colleagues (2014) conducted a more likely that the interaction will be perceived randomized control trial of procedural justice in traffic negatively. If the interaction is negative, then that stops also in Australia. They discovered that drivers individual is less likely to accept the legal outcome. who were stopped by those police officers employing This could harm police-community relations, lead to a procedural justice were more likely to trust the police loss of faith in government institutions, and result in and view them as legitimate than those drivers who large-scale protests to push for social change (Van den were stopped by police officers employing business as Bos et al., 2014). Conversely, if an individual usual tactics. Sahin and colleagues (2017) had similar experiences an encounter with a police officer that is findings in their randomized controlled trial of

Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 1 74 ALDERSON & PERRONE procedurally just policing tactics during traffic stops in civilian interactions during ride-alongs in a suburban Adana, Turkey. Clearly, procedural justice impacts U.S. city. Apart from these two studies (both of which perceptions of police legitimacy and compliance with support the relationship between procedural justice law across the globe. and legitimacy and compliance), the methodologies Procedural justice is also a more robust predictor employed to examine procedural justice, policing, and of police legitimacy than other historically significant public perceptions fail to capture the perceptions of antecedents, including distributive justice, police those most impacted by, or in contact, with the police. effectiveness, and collective efficacy. Wolfe, Nix, Studies assessing the impact of procedural justice on Kaminski, and Rojek’s (2016) survey of residents in a police legitimacy among those individuals who are southeastern U.S. city demonstrate that procedural most likely to have a police encounter – that is, justice has a stronger effect on police trust and marginalized, impoverished, homeless, drug-using, legitimacy than do police effectiveness and and the target of get-tough policing strategies (e.g., distributive justice. In fact, when including procedural zero-tolerance policing) – have been absent from the justice measures, the relationship between distributive literature. justice and trust in police is no longer significant. Nix, Wolfe, Rojek, & Kaminski (2015), likewise, found in Zero-Tolerance Policing and Procedural Justice their mail survey of residents that collective efficacy Police departments throughout the U.S., since the (i.e., neighborhood cohesion and shared values among 1980s, for the most part, have employed law and order, neighborhood residents; Sampson, Raudenbush, & zero-tolerance policing, at the expense of procedural Earls, 1997) plays a role in police trust, but procedural justice tactics. Zero-tolerance policing is based on the justice remains statistically significant and directly tenets outlined in Wilson and Kelling’s (1982) broken linked to trust in police. Thus, the independent and windows theory. Broken windows theory argues that direct effect of procedural justice on police trust, urban decay results in an increase in crime if left legitimacy, cooperation, and even satisfaction, is quite unchecked. While Wilson and Kelling (1982) did not robust. specify how police should address urban decay, they Despite the multitude of studies demonstrating the stressed that the police should maintain order, as relationship between procedural justice and police “failing to do anything about a score of drunks or a legitimacy, some have argued that the relationship is hundred vagrants may destroy an entire community” merely a correlation, or as Worden and McLean (p. 35). Thus, the broken windows theory has been (2017) describe, a mirage. According to their study, cited to support zero-tolerance and other order- increased procedural justice will do very little to maintenance policing tactics. For example, New York improve police-community relations. Nagin and Telep City police commissioner William Bratton became (2017) and Murphy (2017) support that argument, as one of the first to implement zero-tolerance policing, they stress that experimental studies demonstrating a with the Mayor’s office reporting a causal link between procedurally just policing and law significant decline in crime (Greene, 1999; Newburn compliance and police legitimacy are lacking. & Jones, 2007; Zimring, 2012). However, attributing Relying on perceptions via self-report surveys or the reduction in crime solely to zero-tolerance policing interviews makes it difficult to conclude a causal is problematic (Fagan & MacDonald, 2012). Research relationship. However, Tyler (2017) contends that demonstrates that other factors contributed to the perceptual studies of procedural justice are the most crime decline in both New York and Los Angeles important and telling: One’s perceptions of the police (Fagan & MacDonald, 2012). The crime drop in Los encounter will shape future determinations of Angeles, which occurred shortly after the crime drop legitimacy. in New York, is partially attributed to the adoption of Most of the studies, then, examining procedural a community policing model (Fagan & MacDonald, justice and police legitimacy, compliance, and trust in 2012). Other cities across the nation experienced a police rely on perception surveys. With few similar, if not greater, drop in crime during the same exceptions, most of the perception studies are period without implementing zero-tolerance policing community-based, which are administered via the mail methods (Greene, 1999), and those cities that were or the telephone, to those with home addresses and tolerant of low level offenses and implemented registered phone numbers. Nuño’s (2018) study in diversion to social service agencies experienced a Arizona is one exception. Her study assessed more significant crime drop (Dixon & Coffin, 1999). perceptions and procedural justice among a sample of Furthermore, in New York City, complaints against arrestees. Jonathan-Zamir, Mastrofski, and Moyal’s officers for police misconduct and excessive use of (2015) study is another notable exception. They force significantly increased (Greene, 1999), created an observation protocol for both police and impairing police legitimacy. civilian behavior and systematically observed police-

Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 1 POLICE ENCOUNTERS WITH HOMELESS IDU 75

Nonetheless, zero-tolerance policing became the of force, during these interactions (Cooper, Moore, primary response to drug markets (Aitken, Moore, Gruskin, & Krieger, 2004; Hayashi et al., 2013). An Higgs, Kelsall, & Kerger, 2002; Kerr, Small, & Wood, ethnographic study that took place in 2005) and homelessness (e.g., Beckett & Herbert, revealed “numerous observations of police 2009; Stuart, 2014) throughout the late 1980s, the 90s, misconduct, including instances of excessive force, and the early 2000s. Under zero-tolerance policing of arbitrary arrest, harassment, and illegal searches” drug markets, the number of police officers patrolling during a police crackdown on a local drug market areas of high drug activity increases (Aitken et al., (Small, Kerr, Charette, Schechter, & Spittal, 2006, p. 2002; Stuart, 2014). These officers focus their efforts 86). Aitken and colleagues (2002) found similar on lower level drug offenses, such as possession and patterns of police misconduct in Melbourne, Australia, -level sales, utilizing a variety of tactics, documenting harassment, intimidation, unlawful including increased surveillance and frequent confiscation, and overall mistreatment. This undercover drug buys (Dixon & Coffin, 1999). contradicts the tenets of procedural justice and The results of this policing strategy were not as consequently disrupts police-community relations, predicted. While arrests grew, zero tolerance policing decreases police legitimacy (Dixon & Coffin, 1999; had a negligible effect on the sales and use of drugs in Kochel, 2011), and reduces the likelihood that the these areas (e.g., Corsaro, Brunson, & McGarrell, public will comply with the law (Gau & Brunson, 2009; Wood et al., 2004) and on drug prices and drug 2010). purity. In fact, the Office of National Drug Control Although no studies have explicitly analyzed Policy (ONDCP) reported that the increase in procedural justice during police interactions with interdiction and enforcement spending between 1981 homeless drug users, Maher and Dixon (2001) and and 2007 has led to an inverse relationship with drug Dixon and Maher (2002) have conducted studies in prices and drug purity. As interdiction and Sydney, Australia, investigating the impact of police enforcement spending increased, drugs became interactions with users. Based on their cheaper and purer (ONDCP, 2015). interviews with users and observations, negative The zero-tolerance policing tactics used to combat police interactions and harassment from police were drug markets are paralleled in their effort to address typical. These interactions with police increased their homelessness (Stuart, 2014). As per broken windows risky drug use, threatened public health, and harmed theory, police target homeless populations to reduce police-community relations. public disorder and urban decay. In , Washington, for example, police used trespass laws The Current Study and exclusion orders to banish those individuals experiencing homelessness from certain public spaces, Given the findings in the existing literature, the such as parks (Beckett & Herbert, 2009). Police in current study seeks to add to the dialogue on Ottawa, utilized nuisance laws to banish procedural justice by conducting a methodological individuals who are homeless from public spaces pilot analyzing police interactions with homeless IDU (Walby & Lippert, 2012). In Los Angeles, CA, where in Skid Row, Los Angeles, where levels of public the current study takes place, the Los Angeles Police disorder and drug offenses are high. Skid Row Department hired George Kelling to consult on issues comprises a four-square mile area in downtown Los surrounding homelessness and vagrancy (Deener, Angeles, CA. Nestled in between some of the most Brie, Kogan, & Stuart, 2013). Under Kelling’s visited tourist areas, including the downtown business advisement, the LAPD increased policing in Skid district, the Arts district, and Little Tokyo, Skid Row Row, the epicenter of homelessness and drug use in is home to roughly 3,000 individuals who suffer from Los Angeles. There, the police relied on ordinances homelessness (“The Visual Theme,” n.d.). Drug prohibiting sitting on the street, sleeping in public past crimes, prostitution, robbery, theft, and vandalism are 6:00 a.m., panhandling, loitering, and blocking prevalent in Skid Row (Berk & MacDonald, 2010). To business entrances with one’s belongings (National address this, Los Angeles instituted the Safer Cities Law Center on Homelessness and , 2009). Initiative (SCI) in 2006, which sought to reduce Despite these practices used to address homelessness, homeless-related crime by ousting homeless rates of homelessness persist. Since the 1980s, when encampments in the area (Culhane, 2010). Foot patrol zero-tolerance policing began, homelessness has officers increased, and special units designed to target continued to rise across the United States (Burt, 1991). open-air drug activity and prostitution were deployed In addition, several studies on zero-tolerance (Culhane, 2010). Although SCI was hailed as a policing of drug markets and individuals suffering success by its creators, homelessness, drug use, and from homelessness have documented police crime are still prevalent in Skid Row. Moreover, no misconduct, such as police harassment and police use study has assessed how these policing tactics impacted

Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 1 76 ALDERSON & PERRONE police-community relations in this area. While many encounter. If they responded yes, they were offered to community surveys have been conducted on participate in the study. If they responded no, they perceptions of police and police-community relations were not offered to participate. Given that respondents in Los Angeles, the homeless IDU of Skid Row were are equally likely to have a memorably negative police not included. Given they do not have registered phone encounter as a memorably positive police encounter, numbers or home addresses, they are excluded from this sampling method produced an unbiased sample, community surveys. This study fills that gap by albeit one that was not sampled randomly. Those obtaining surveys via a Skid Row syringe exchange individuals over the age of 18 who had experienced a center to answer the following research question: How police encounter in Los Angeles County in the last six does officer behavior (procedurally just or unjust) months were included in the study. All survey affect IDUs’ overall satisfaction of their interaction respondents were offered a small bag of chips and with police? This study hypothesizes that when police small Gatorade for their participation. act fairly and justly (procedurally just), positive Surveys were administered to individual overall satisfaction with police is more likely. participants in confidential rooms of the needle exchange program. Surveys were read to participants Method and subsequently filled out by a member of the HHCLA staff or a PhD student who assisted with the This methodological pilot study is a secondary project. Both the staff and the research assistant were data analysis of a survey administered to homeless trained by the lead researcher on proper survey IDU (n=99) at Homeless Healthcare Los Angeles administration to ensure standardization. (HHCLA) Center for , a syringe Sample Demographics exchange program in Skid Row in Los Angeles, CA. HHCLA designed and administered a survey to track HHCLA Center for Harm Reduction primarily rates of police confiscation of clients’ syringes and services homeless IDU (Homeless Healthcare Los prescribed naloxone. The survey instrument contains Angeles, 2016). Although not all clients of the syringe close-ended questions assessing demographics, exchange are homeless, most are. Some live in outcomes of the police encounter, procedural justice affluent communities. The clients who visit the needle variables, and overall satisfaction. exchange range in age from 18 years of age to 80 years of age. Most are African American or Hispanic, but Sampling all ethnicities are represented in the clientele HHCLA utilized convenience sampling to collect (Homeless Healthcare Los Angeles, 2016). survey data on approximately 100 English-speaking The sample contains 99 participants, most of clients who were not suffering from severe co- whom are male and homeless, with a rather equal mix occurring disorders. To avoid unnecessary duress or of White, African American, and Hispanic other harms, HHCLA excluded those clients suffering respondents (see Table 1). The sample ranged in age from severe co-occurring mental health disorders that from 22 to 63 years old (x̅ =41.79). These sample could be triggered by the questions in the survey. demographics, although not representative of the When HHCLA was not understaffed or busy population of Skid Row, are representative of those (weekdays for the first two hours of business and who HHCLA serves. (The study’s sample was between the hours of 12:00 p.m. and 1:00 p.m.), compared to HHCLA intake data that track HHCLA collected surveys about their clients’ demographic information of clients served). interactions with police. While HHCLA serves many non-English speaking clients, these clients were only included when staff able to translate was available. HHCLA used three methods to gather survey respondents: (1) A sign was posted at the front desk in the lobby to allow clients to volunteer to participate in the study; (2) clients who came into the exchange and voluntarily informed a member of the staff about a police encounter were offered the opportunity to complete a survey about their experience; and (3) when possible, staff asked clients if the police had recently stopped them and if they would like to complete a survey about it. It is important to note that all clients were asked if they had a recent police

Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 1 POLICE ENCOUNTERS WITH HOMELESS IDU 77

Table 1: Descriptive Statistics of Study Variables

Variables Frequency Gender (n=) Male 74.0% Female 24.0% Transgender MtF 2.0% Race (n=) African American/Black 34.7% White 29.5% Hispanic 28.4% American Indian/Alaskan Native 1.1% Multi-Racial/Other 6.3% Homelessness (n=) Yes 84.2% No 15.8% Age (n=) x̅ =41.79 Range 22-63 SD 11.250 Satisfaction (n=98) Very Satisfied 24.49% Satisfied 17.35% Dissatisfied 13.27% Very Dissatisfied 44.9%

Procedural Justice Index (n=98) 0 (absence of procedural justice) 24.21% 1 10.53% 2 10.53% 3 20.0% 4 34.74% x̅ = 2.31 SD=1.61 Police Outcome (n=99) Confiscated Syringes 5.05% Respondent Given Ticket 25.25% Respondent Given Arrest 7.07% > 1 Disciplinary Outcome 32.32% > 1 Disciplinary Outcome No Disciplinary Action 30.30% No Disciplinary Action

Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 1 78 ALDERSON & PERRONE

Dependent Variables Instrument The dependent variable is respondent overall satisfaction of the police interaction. Respondent The survey instrument is a 36-item questionnaire. Satisfaction is used as a proxy to determine police It begins with eligibility questions to determine if the legitimacy, which follows the original Tyler (1988) police interaction occurred in Los Angeles County, if model for procedural justice and the Rosenbaum et al. the interaction involved the Los Angeles Police (2015) study. Respondent satisfaction was originally Department or a different law enforcement agency, coded as a Likert scale with the following options: (1) and if the client previously completed a survey about very satisfied, (2) satisfied, (3) dissatisfied, and (4) that police encounter. The first set of questions queries very dissatisfied. For this study, it was dummy coded the stop by police and the interaction between the as (0) not satisfied and (1) satisfied. respondent and the officer, including the behavior of the respondents when they were stopped, if their Control Variables probation or parole status was queried, if they were Control variables contain both demographic searched and what was confiscated, and the behavior variables and aspects of the police encounter. of the police officer, as it relates to procedural justice. Demographic variables include race, age, gender, and If syringes were confiscated, the respondents were homelessness. Race is dummy coded as (1) White and asked how he or she injected their next dose of drugs (0) non-White. Gender is dummy coded as (1) female (e.g., using an old syringe, borrowing a used syringe, and (0) male, with transgender respondents (n=2) borrowing a new syringe, buying a syringe off the grouped according to the gender with which they street, or obtaining a clean syringe from a needle identify. Lastly, homelessness was coded as (1) exchange). The outcome of the stop (arrest or ticket homeless and (0) not homeless. and the corresponding charge) and the respondents’ Police encounter outcome variables represent the overall satisfaction with the police interaction are the second set of control variables. The respondents were final questions about the stop. The last section of the asked if anything was and what was confiscated (e.g., survey contains four questions regarding demographic legal items such as unused syringes, used syringes in a information (age, gender, and race, and if they biohazard container, medication, and weapons; and consider themselves homeless). illicit items, such as drugs, used syringes not in a Measures biohazard container, and weapons), if a citation/ticket was issued, and if an arrest was made. A mutually This study contains a variety of variables that exclusive coding scheme was created with 1= capture demographic factors, components of the police respondent arrested, 2= respondent ticketed, and encounter, aspects of procedural justice, and 3=syringes confiscated. A combination of two or satisfaction with the police encounter. more outcomes was coded as (1), with a reference Independent Variable category of no disciplinary action being taken by the officer. Procedural justice is the independent variable. Procedural Justice is a unidimensional measure that Analysis includes both positive and negative procedural justice Univariate analyses are provided for a description components. Questions querying procedural justice of the variables. Logistic regression was then utilized consistent with the procedural justice literature were to assess the relationship between procedural justice derived from Rosenbaum, Lawrence, Hartnett, and satisfaction when controlling for other factors McDevitt, & Posick’s (2015) study on procedural related to the encounter. Data were analyzed using the justice. Procedural justice is measured using four Stata statistical program. Given the small sample size variables coded as Yes= 1 and No= 0: officer being (n=99), results from this study should be read with fair, being respectful, listening to the respondent, and caution and used as a foundation upon which further treating the respondent as others would be treated. studies can be built. Consistent with past research (Hinds & Murphy, 2007; Sunshine & Tyler, 2003; Tyler, 1988), an index was generated for procedural justice by summing the Results values of the four procedural justice variables (α=.8316). This approach aligns with the theoretical Univariate analyses revealed that the majority of rationale that the greater number of procedural justice the sample was dissatisfied with their interaction with variables present during an interaction, the more likely the officer and reported a lack of procedural justice someone is to perceive the encounter as satisfactory. actions. Additionally, when controlling for demographic variables and police encounter outcome

Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 1 POLICE ENCOUNTERS WITH HOMELESS IDU 79 variables, such as being given a ticket or having been Multivariate Analysis arrested, a logistic regression model revealed that Three logistic regression models assessed the procedural justice significantly predicts respondent relationship between demographics, police encounter satisfaction with the police encounter. outcomes, procedural justice, and satisfaction. The Descriptives first model assessed demographic variables and satisfaction (R2=.0524). In this model, both race and Satisfaction. Most of the sample (~58%) were homelessness were negatively associated with dissatisfied (13%) or very dissatisfied (45%) with their satisfaction, indicating that individuals who are interaction with the police (see Table 1). homeless and non-White were more likely to report Procedural justice. Respondents reported police dissatisfaction with the interaction, though this behaviors were mixed between procedurally just and relationship was not significant. The second model procedurally unjust. Most of the respondents indicated added the procedural justice index to demographic that the police officer engaged in moderate variables and satisfaction (R2=.4482). In this model, procedurally just behaviors (x = 2.3; SD=1.61). ̅ procedural justice and satisfaction were positively The police encounter. Analyzing the police associated (p<.001), indicating that a higher number of encounter demonstrates that when stopped, about procedural justice variables present during the 76.3% of respondents were asked about their encounter, the more the respondent was satisfied with probation/parole status, and almost 70% were the interaction. The final model included the police searched. About 7% of respondents were solely encounter outcomes, demographic variables, the arrested, 25.25% of respondents were given a ticket, procedural justice index, and satisfaction (R2=.4750). 5.05% had their syringes confiscated, and 32.32% had In this model, procedural justice remained the only more than one of the above disciplinary outcomes. significant predictor of satisfaction (p<.001). Although law enforcement confiscated syringes from

5% of the sample, it is legal to carry syringes in Los

Angeles.

Table 2: Logistic Regression Analysis of Procedural Justice on Satisfaction

Variables Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Age .0128 .0203 .0161 (.0190) (.0262) (.0298) Race -.0253 -.1820 -.1848 (.0434) (.1990) (.1996) Gender .0974 .2634 .2386 (.0895) (.4172) (.2811) Homelessness -.0269 -.0430 -.0151 (.0472) (.4420) (.2057) PJ Index - 1.4986*** 1.703*** (.3252) (.3933) Syringes Confiscated - - -1.424 (1.472) Ticket - - -1.432 (.8401) Arrest - - -1.118 (1.295) >1 Police Outcome - - -.6091 (.9718) ***p>.001; Model 1 R2=.0524; Model 2 R2=.4482; Model 3 R2=.4750

Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 1 80 ALDERSON & PERRONE

communities, especially in Skid Row, Los Angeles, Discussion officer training should include the most effective methods that promote fairness and legitimacy. Despite The data show that among homeless IDU in Skid this need, the current presidential administration’s Row, procedural justice significantly impacts position on policing may create a potential roadblock. satisfaction with police interactions. Most of the President Trump and former Attorney General (AG) sample reported to be very dissatisfied with their Jeff Sessions have clearly moved away from previous interaction with police, and the majority of the sample Obama-era policing policies. Former AG Sessions indicated a moderate to low score for the procedural stated that the federal government will no longer justice index. While controlling for demographics and provide oversight to local police departments, which police encounter outcomes, procedural justice was a tenet of President Obama’s policy (Lichtblau, significantly predicted satisfaction with the police 2017). Moreover, in a DOJ memo, Sessions (2017) encounter. As it relates specifically to this sample, a stated that the federal government will not issue lack of procedural justice variables significantly guidance mandates to local police departments on their predicted a lack of satisfaction. procedures and practices. A federal mandate for Thus, the majority of homeless IDU in this sample procedural justice reforms, then, is unlikely to be identified a lack of procedural justice and a resulting imposed under this administration. Instead, President dissatisfaction with their encounter with the police. Trump and former AG Sessions have advocated for Regardless of the outcome from the police encounter, policies that return to a War on Drugs-zero-tolerance- satisfaction is largely influenced by the way an officer policing-approach that punitively targets drug users acts towards the individual. Both given these findings (Breuninger, 2018). Thus, the statements made by and because homeless IDU have an increased Trump, his administration, and former AG Sessions likelihood of experiencing a police interaction, have created a tension for the implementation of the researchers should continue this line of inquiry. Using Obama Administration’s Presidential Pillars of this methodology, a more rigorous study with a larger Policing, which emphasized procedural justice sample of this population can yield generalizable policing practices. findings and influence police practices to improve Future research, then, should attempt to relations and better serve these communities. understand any potential changes that have occurred in policing as it relates to procedural justice since the Limitations Trump administration. However, researchers should make every effort to move beyond traditional This study contains several limitations. The community surveys to capture perceptions of trust and sample size is small, 99 respondents, and they were legitimacy of police (i.e., conducting observations, gathered via convenience sampling. Though the interviews, or targeted surveys), particularly of those sample was not representative of the population of least connected to government institutions, heavily residents in Skid Row, it was representative of the policed, and whose voices and experiences are not HHCLA clientele. Both the small sample size and the captured in those surveys. Continuing to assess the non-probabilistic sampling model prevent the results relationship between police practices, procedural from being generalizable. Data were gathered via a justice, and satisfaction among homeless injection self-reported survey that relied heavily on subjective drug users in Skid Row and other locations across the interpretations and recall. Although self-report nation like Skid Row could expand the applicability, surveys are often criticized for issues with validity and generalizability, and scope of procedural justice in accuracy of recall, they are common in procedural policing and police legitimacy and trust. justice studies. The tenets of procedural justice rely on the subjective viewpoint of the respondents and their Conclusion interpretation of the police interaction. Moreover, the survey instrument used was based on a valid Re-establishing trust and legitimacy in the police procedural justice measurement (see Rosenbaum et is crucial to ensure the safety of a community. One al., 2015). way in which police legitimacy can be re-established is by implementing the tenets outlined in procedural Implications and Future Research justice theory. The extra-legal factors that occur during their interaction with civilians, such as being Procedural justice has been consistently respectful, being fair, and taking the time to listen to supported in the literature, but no study has directly the individual, have a greater impact on satisfaction assessed procedural justice with the homeless IDU than the outcome of the interaction – this is even the population. Given the increase in policing of these case for homeless injecting drug users – those most

Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 1

POLICE ENCOUNTERS WITH HOMELESS IDU 81 marginalized from mainstream institutions and heavily Corsaro, N., Brunson, R. K., & McGarrell, E. F. policed. Thus, it is not necessarily what the officer (2009). Problem-oriented policing and open air does but how he/she does it that matters. drug markets: Examining the Rockford pulling levers deterrence strategy. Crime and Delinquency, 59(7), 1085–1107. doi: References 10.1177/0011128709345955 Alozie, N. O., & McNamara, C. (2008). Anglo and Culhane, D. P. (2010). Tackling homelessness in Los Latino differences in willingness to pay for urban Angeles’ Skid Row. Criminology and Public public services. Social Science Quarterly, 89(2), Policy, 9(4), 851–857. 406–427. doi: 10.1111/j.1540- Dai, M., Frank, J., & Sun, I. (2011). Procedural justice 6237.2008.00539.x during police-citizen encounters: The effects of Akinlabi, O. M., & Murphy, K. (2018). Dull process-based policing on citizen compliance and compulsion or perceived legitimacy? Assessing demeanor. Journal of Criminal Justice, 39, 159- why people comply with the law in 168. doi: 10.1016/j.crimjus.2011.01.004 Nigeria. Police Practice & Research, 19(2), 186– Deener, A., Brie, S. P., Kogan, V., & Stuart, F. (2013). 201. doi: 10.1080/15614263.2018.1418170 Planning Los Angeles: The changing politics of Aitken, C., Moore, D., Higgs, P., Kelsall, J., & Kerger, neighborhood and downtown development. In D. M. (2002). The impact of a police Halle & A. A. Beveridge (Eds.) New York and Los crackdown on a street drug scene: Evidence Angeles: The uncertain future (pp. 385–412). from the street. International Journal of Drug Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Policy, 13, 193–202. doi: 10.1016/S0955- Dixon, D., & Coffin, P. (1999). Zero tolerance 3959(02)00075-0 policing of illegal drug markets. Harm Reduction Beckett, K., & Herbert, S. (2009). Banished: The new Digest, 18, 477–486. doi: social control in urban America. New York, NY: 10.1080/09595239996338 Oxford University Press. Dixon, D., & Maher, L. (2002). Anh Hai: Policing, Berk, R., & MacDonald, J. (2010). Policing the culture, and in a street heroin homeless: An evaluation of efforts to reduce market. Policing and Society, 12(2), 93–110. homeless related crime. Criminology and Public doi: 10.1080/10439460290029957 Policy, 9(4), 813–840. doi: 10.1111/j.1745- Fagan, J., & MacDonald, J. (2012). Policing, crime, 9133.2010.00673.x and legitimacy in New York and Los Angeles: Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2016). Arrest-related The social and political contexts of two historic deaths, 2015-2016. Retrieved from crime declines. Public Law and Legal https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/ardprs1516 Theory Working Paper Group, 1–58. pf_sum.pdf Gallup Poll. (2015). Honesty and ethics in professions. Burt, M.R. (1991). Causes of the growth of Retrieved from homelessness during the 1980s. Housing Policy http://www.gallup.com/poll/1654/honesty-ethics- Debate, 2(3), 903-916. doi: professions.aspx 10.1080/10511482.1991.9521077 Gau, J. M., & Brunson, R. K. (2010). Procedural Breuninger, K. (2018). Attorney General Jeff Sessions justice and order maintenance policing: A study outlines when to use death penalty on drug of inner‐city young men’s perceptions of police traffickers. Retrieved from legitimacy. Justice quarterly, 27(2), 255–279. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/21/attorney- doi: 10.1080/07418820902763889 general-jeff-sessions-outlines-death-penalty-use- Gilbert, D., Wakeling, S., Crandall, V., & California for-drug-crimes.html Partnership for Safe Communities. (2015). Cato Institute. (2016). National Police Misconduct Procedural justice and police legitimacy: Using Reporting Project. Retrieved from training as a foundation for strengthening http://www.policemisconduct.net community police relationships. Retrieved from Bureau of Justice Assistance website: Cooper, H., Moore, L., Gruskin, S., & Krieger, N. https://www.bja.gov/bwc/pdfs/Procedural- (2004). Characterizing perceived police violence: Justice-and-Police-Legitimacy-Paper-CPSC-Feb- Implications for public health. American Journal 2015.pdf of Public Health, 94(7), 1109–1118.

Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 1 82 ALDERSON & PERRONE

Greene, J. A. (1999). Zero-tolerance: A case study of 13(1), 5–22. doi: police policies and practices in New York City. 10.1080/10345329.2001.12036213 Crime and Delinquency, 45(2), 171–187. doi: Mazerolle, L., Antrobus, E., Bennett, S., & Tyler T. 10.1177/0011128799045002001 (2013). Shaping citizen perceptions of police Hayashi, K., Ti, L., Csete, J., Kaplan, K., legitimacy: A randomized field trial of procedural Suwannawong, P., Wood, E., & Kerr, T. (2013). justice. Criminology, 51(1), 33–64. doi: Reports of police beating and associated 10.1111/j.1745-9125.2012.00289.x harms among people who inject drugs in Murphy, K. (2017). Procedural justice and its role in Bangkok Thailand: A serial cross-sectional promoting voluntary compliance. In P. Drahos study. BMC Public Health, 13(733), 1–8. doi: (Ed.), Regulatory theory: Foundations and 10.1186/1471-2458-13-733 applications (pp. 43–58). Canberra: Australian Hinds, L., & Murphy, K. (2007). Public satisfaction National University Press. with Police: Using procedural justice to improve Murphy, K., Mazzerolle, L., & Bennet, S. (2015). police legitimacy. Australian & New Zealand Promoting trust in police: Findings from a Journal of Criminology, 40(1), 27–42. doi: randomised experimental field trial of procedural 10.1375/acri.40.1.27 justice policing. Policing and Society: An Homeless Healthcare Los Angeles. (2016). Monthly International Journal of Research and Policy, report [Unpublished Raw Data]. 24(4), 405–424. doi: 10.1080/10439463.2013.862246 Jackson, J., Bradford, B., Hough, M., Myhill, A., Quinton, P., & Tyler, T.R. (2012). Why do people Nagin, D. S., & Telep, C. W. (2017). Procedural comply with the law? British Journal of justice and legal compliance. Annual Review of Criminology, 52, 1051–1071. doi: Law and Social Sciences, 13, 5–28. doi: 10.1093/bjc/azc032 10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-1103160113310 Jonathan-Zamir, T., Mastrofski, S., & Moyal, S. National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty. (2015). Measuring procedural justice in police- (2009). Homes not handcuffs: The citizen encounters. Justice Quarterly, 32, 845–71. criminalization of homelessness in U.S. doi: 10.1080/07418825.2013.845677 cities. Retrieved from www.nlchp.org Kerr, T., Small, W., & Wood, E. (2005). The public Newburn, T., & Jones, T. (2007). Symbolizing crime health and social impacts of drug market control: Reflections on zero-tolerance. enforcement: A review of the evidence. Theoretical Criminology, 11(2), 221–243. International Journal of Drug Policy, 16, doi: 10.1177.1362480607075849 210–220. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2005.04.005 Nix, J., Wolfe, S. E., Rojek, J., & Kaminski, R. J. Kochel, T. R. (2011). Constructing hot spots policing: (2015). Trust in the police: The influence of Unexamined consequences for disadvantaged procedural justice and perceived collective populations. Criminal Justice Policy Review, efficacy. Crime and Delinquency, 61(4), 610– 22(3), 350–374. doi: 640. doi: 10.1177/0011128714530548 10.1177/0887403410376233 Nuño, L. E. (2018). Hispanics’ perceived procedural Leventhal, G. S. (1976). What should be done with justice, legitimacy, and willingness to cooperate equity theory? New approaches to the study of with the police. Police Practice & fairness in social relationships. In K. J. Gergen, Research, 19(2), 153–167. doi: M. S. Greenberg, & R.H. Willis (Eds.), Social 10.1080/15614263.2018.1418160 exchange (pp. 27–55). New York, NY: Springer Office of National Drug Control Policy. (2015). Price Publishing. and purity of illicit drugs. Retrieved from Lichtblau, E. (2017). Sessions indicates justice https://www.whitehouse.gov/ondcp/price- department will stop monitoring troubled police and-purity agencies. New York Times. Retrieved from Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/28/us/politics Belknap Press. /jeff-sessions-crime.html Reisig, M. D., Tankebe, J., & Mesko, G. (2014). Maher, L., & Dixon, D. (2001) The cost of Compliance with the law in Slovenia: The role of crackdowns: Policing Cabramatta’s heroin procedural justice and police legitimacy. market. Current Issues in Criminal Justice,

Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 1 POLICE ENCOUNTERS WITH HOMELESS IDU 83

European Journal on Criminal Policy and The Visual Theme. (n.d.). Swallowed by a city: A Research, 20(2), 259–276. doi: 10.1007/s10610- rhetorical analysis of the film Los Angeles Skid 013-9211-9 Row is my home. Retrieved from https://apowell123.wordpress.com/statistics/ Rosenbaum, D. P., Lawrence, D. S., Hartnett, S. M., McDevitt, J., & Posick, C. (2015). Measuring Tyler, T. R. (1988). What is procedural justice? procedural justice and legitimacy at the local Criteria used by citizens to assess the fairness of level: The police-community interaction survey. legal procedures. Law and Society Review, 22(1), Journal of Experimental Criminology, 11(3), 103–135. 335–366. doi: 10.1007/s11292-015-9228-9 Tyler, T. R., & Fagan, J. (2008). Legitimacy and Sahin, N., Braga, A.A., Apel, R., & Brunson, R. K. cooperation: Why do people help the police fight (2017). The impact of procedurally-just policing crime in their communities? Ohio State Journal of on citizen perceptions of police during traffic Criminal Law, 6, 231–275. stops: The Adana randomized controlled trial. Tyler, T. (2017). Procedural justice and policing: A Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 33(4), 701– rush to judgment? Annual Review of Law and 726. doi: 10.1007/s10940-016-9308-7 Social Science, 13, 29–53. doi: 10.1146/annurev- Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. lawsocsci-110316-113318 (1997). Neighborhoods and violent Tyler, T., & Wakslak, C.J. (2004). Profiling and police crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. legitimacy: Procedural justice, attributions of Science, 277, 918–924. doi: motive, and acceptance of police authority. 10.1126/science.277.5328.918 Criminology, 42(2), 253-281. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-9125.2004.tb00520.x Sessions, J. (2017). Memorandum: Prohibition on improper guidance documents. Retrieved from Van Den Bos, K., Van Der Velden, L., & Lind, E. A. Office of the Attorney General, Department of (2014). On the role of perceived Justice website: procedural justice in citizens’ reactions to https://www.justice.gov/opa/press- government decisions and the handling of release/file/1012271/download conflicts. Utrecht Law Review, 10(4), 1–26. Small, W., Kerr, T., Charette, J., Schechter, M. T., & Walby, K. & Lippert, R. (2012) Spatial regulation, Spittal, P. M. (2006). Impacts of intensified dispersal, and the aesthetics of the city: police activity on injection drug users: Evidence Conservation officer policing of homeless people from an ethnographic investigation. The in Ottawa, Canada. Antipode, 44(3), 1015–1033. International Journal of Drug Policy, 17, 85–95. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8330.2011.00923.x doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2005.12.005 Wilson, J. Q., & Kelling, G. L. (1982). Broken Stuart, F. (2014). From rabble management to windows: The police and neighborhood safety. recovery management: Policing homelessness in The Atlantic Monthly, p. 29–38. a marginal urban space. Urban Studies, Wolfe, S. E., Nix, J., Kaminski, R., & Rojek, J. (2016). 51(9), 1909–1925. doi: Is the effect of procedural justice on police 10.1177/0042098013499798 legitimacy invariant? Testing the generality of Sunshine, J., & Tyler, T. R. (2003). The role of procedural justice and competing antecedents of procedural justice and legitimacy in shaping legitimacy. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, public support for policing. Law and Society 32, 253–282. doi: 10.1007/s10940-015-9263-8 Review, 37(3), 513–548. doi: 10.1111/1540- Wood, E., Spittal, P. M., Small, W., Kerr, T., Li., K., 5893.3703002 Hogg, R. S., . . . Schechter, M. T. (2004). Tankebe, J. (2013). Viewing things differently: The Displacement of Canada’s largest public illicit dimensions of public perceptions of police drug market in response to a police crackdown. legitimacy. Criminology, 51(1), 103-135. doi: Canada Medical Association Journal, 170(10), 10.1111/j.1745-9125.2012.00291.x 1551–1556. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.1031928 Thibaut, J., Walker, L., LaTour, S., & Houlden, P. Worden, R. E., & McLean, S. J. (2017). The mirage of (1974). Procedural justice as fairness. Stanford police reform. Oakland: University of California Law Review, 26(6), 1271-1289. Press.

Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 1 84 ALDERSON & PERRONE

Zimring, F. E. (2012). The city that became safe: New York’s lessons for urban crime and its control. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

About the Authors

Maryanne Alderson is a PhD student in Criminology, Law, and Society at University of California, Irvine. Her research interests include drug use, homelessness, social justice, and law and society. Dina Perrone, PhD is an Associate Professor of Criminology and Criminal Justice at California State University, Long Beach. Her research interests include drug use, drug policy, deviance, and ethnographic and qualitative research methods.

Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society – Volume 20, Issue 1