The Effect of Collateral Consequence Laws on State Rates of Returns to Prison
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report: Document Title: The Effect of Collateral Consequence Laws on State Rates of Returns to Prison Author(s): Tracy Sohoni Document No.: 247569 Date Received: July 2014 Award Number: 2012-IJ-CX-0006 This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this Federally- funded grant report available electronically. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. ABSTRACT Title of Document: THE EFFECT OF COLLATERAL CONSEQUENCE LAWS ON STATE RATES OF RETURNS TO PRISON Tracy WP Sohoni, Doctor of Philosophy, 2013 Directed By: Professor Raymond Paternoster Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice Formal restrictions on a person following arrest or conviction are referred to as “collateral consequence laws” and exist in all states in the US. In recent years, scholars, policy makers and advocacy groups have expressed concern that many of these laws hinder reintegration, increasing the likelihood of future crime. In addition, these laws may interfere with the ability of former offenders to meet conditions of release following incarceration, such as maintaining stable employment and housing or paying child support. In this dissertation I examine the effect of states’ collateral consequence laws in the categories of voting, access to public records, employment, public housing, public assistance, and driver’s licenses. I examine the impact of these laws on state rates of returns to prison, as measured by percent of prison admissions that were people on conditional release when they entered prison, the percent of exits from This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. parole that were considered unsuccessful due returning to incarceration; the percent of exits from parole that were returned to incarceration for a new sentence, and the percent of exits from parole that were returned to incarceration for a technical violation. I also run an additional fixed effects analysis on the effect of restrictions on Temporary Assistance for Needy Children (TANF) over a seven year period. Ultimately, limitations in the data restrict the conclusions that can be drawn regarding the impact of these laws. Results from the analysis are mixed, indicating that these laws may not have a uniform impact. Surprisingly, these analyses give some indication that collateral consequences may be related to lower rates of returns to prison for technical violations, however future research is needed to confirm this relationship. Possible explanations for these relationships are discussed, as are future research possibilities that would address limitations in the data. Data from the fixed- effects analysis does indicate preliminary support that states that imposed harsh restrictions on TANF saw an increase in state rates of returns to prison, however the analysis will need to be expanded to include state-level controls in order to draw any firm conclusions. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. THE EFFECT OF COLLATERAL CONSEQUENCE LAWS ON STATE RATES OF RETURNS TO PRISON By Tracy WP Sohoni Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Maryland, College Park, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2013 Advisory Committee: Professor Raymond Paternoster, Chair Professor Brian Johnson Professor Melissa Kearney Professor Sally Simpson Professor Charles Wellford This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. © Copyright by Tracy WP Sohoni 2013 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Acknowledgements I am grateful for the support I received from the National Institute of Justice Dissertation Fellowship NIJ_2012-IJ-CX-0006. When I returned to graduate school, I did not anticipate the magnitude or significance of the social and academic relationships that I would find there. I am grateful for the support of the faculty that have assisted me throughout this process, my fellow graduate students that so greatly influenced my experience, and of course my family who have always been my greatest support. I am profoundly grateful to my advisor and chair, Ray Paternoster, who has had a tremendous impact on my academic development. Ray helped make sure that I never got lost in the details, and I keep his advice “When in Doubt, Write” in the forefront of my mind when I am working. It was a great comfort to have access to Ray’s depth and breadth of knowledge during this process, and his ability to highlight and challenge the underlying assumptions within the field has made me a better scholar. From Ray I have gained an appreciation for how a love of puzzles opens up a perpetual stream of fascinating academic pursuits. Brian Johnson has been a tremendous help since I first arrived at UM, and I cannot thank him enough for his support. I admire the clarity with which he approaches research and teaching. I also thank Jean McGloin, with her blend of sensible advice and humorous commentaries, Kiminori Nakamura who was so generous with his knowledge and help, Sally Simpson, with her clear and direct questions and comments that brought clarity to the issue at hand, Charles Wellford, with his pragmatic approach and challenging questions, Graham Ousey, who was ii This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. always willing to find the time to listen to the current challenges and offer advice, and Brenda Uekert, who has offered support from the beginning. I am also grateful to John Laub, I remain deeply impressed with the interest and consideration he shows his students and I appreciate his intellectual perspective. My participation in HALT was one of the highlights of my experience at UM, and I am grateful for the intellectual and emotional benefits of this group. I am so grateful that during my time at UM I was surrounded by talented and generous graduate students that enriched my academic experience and that became wonderful friends. While many of my fellow-graduate students have helped and inspired me along the way, I am particularly indebted to my erudite study mates Melissa Rorie and Amy Sariti. They made the return to graduate school a far more enjoyable and meaningful experience than I ever could have expected, and I feel incredibly grateful that they are part of my life. I am incredibly fortunate to have had the benefit of a supportive family. I thank my parents for all they have given me – they provided the foundation of intellectual curiosity, the confidence to pursue this career, the freedom to choose my own path, and their continual encouragement and support along the way. I am also incredibly lucky to have a sister like the incomparable Tara Peters who inspires me with her outlook on life and whose pragmatism provided a much needed balance in my life during this process. She has always supported my choices with complete loyalty and understanding. I thank my children, Asher and Kiera. They have made the journey worthwhile, they have given the process meaning, and they have provided much iii This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. needed joyful distractions from my work. Moreover they provided a strong motivation to just finish it. Above all others, I thank my husband for his support, academically, emotionally, and completely. Without his full, unwavering participation in caring for our home and children, I could never have completed this process. I feel very fortunate that I had the added bonus of a husband that could also contribute his own academic insights. Many of my breakthroughs in this dissertation came from an extra book he picked up at the library or a source that he suggested. He has been a diligent reader of drafts, a provider of second opinions, a methodological sounding board, and has provided validation every step of the way. He has been a constant pillar of support, and I am eternally grateful. iv This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department.