Federal Probation A Decade of Experimenting With Intermediate Sanctions: What Have We Learned? . .Joan Petersilia Electronic Monitoring: What Does the Literature Tell Us? . .Annesley K. Schmidt When an Employee Dies: Managing the Aftermath of a Critical Incident . .Mark J. Maggio Loren A.N. Buddress Organizational Probation Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines . .Gary S. Green Operation Spotlight: The Community Probation- Community Police Team Process . .Harold B. Wooten Herbert J. Hoelter A Continuum of Sanctions for Substance-Abusing Offenders . .Sam Torres The Impact of Treatment: The Jefferson County (Kentucky) Drug Court Program . .Gennaro F. Vito Richard A. Tewksbury What Do We Know About Anger Management Programs in Corrections? . .Pamela Stiebs Hollenhorst Correctional Officer Stress: A Cause for Concern and Additional Help . .Peter Finn Successful Mentoring in a Correctional Environment . .Peter M. Wittenberg “Up to Speed”—Exploring the Implications of Four Sanctioning Orientations for Community Corrections . .M. Kay Harris “Looking at the Law”—The Imposition of Restitution in Federal Criminal Cases . .Catharine M. Goodwin DECEMBER 1998 A D V I S O R Y C O M M I T T E E Federal Special Advisers: Russ Immarigeon Hillsdale, New York Richard A. Chappell Probation Merrill A. Smith Magdeline Jensen United States Probation Office Members: Tucson, Arizona A JOURNAL OF Dan Richard Beto Correctional Management Jolanta Juszkiewicz CORRECTIONAL Institute of Texas Pretrial Services Resource PHILOSOPHY Huntsville, Texas Center Washington, DC AND PRACTICE Honorable James G. Carr United States District Court Honorable David D. Noce Toledo, Ohio United States District Court St. Louis, Missouri Alvin W. Cohn Published by Administration of Justice Joan Petersilia Services, Inc. University of California, Irvine THE ADMINISTRATIVE Rockville, Maryland Irvine, California OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES COURTS Ronald P. Corbett, Jr. Martin Rudenko Office of the Commissioner of Bournemouth Probation Office Leonidas Ralph Mecham, Probation Dorset, England Director Boston, Massachusetts Toby D. Slawsky Eunice R. Holt Jones, Chief Michael Goldsmith United States Third Circuit Federal Corrections and Brigham Young University Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Supervision Division Law School Provo, Utah Richard D. Sluder Federal Probation (ISSN 0014- Central Missouri State 9128) is dedicated to informing its M. Kay Harris University readers about current thought, Temple University Warrensburg, Missouri research, and practice in correc- Phildelphia, Pennsylvania tions and criminal justice. The Gina Wood journal welcomes the contributions Office of Juvenile Justice and of persons who work with or study John M. Hughes juvenile and adult offenders and United States Probation Delinquency Prevention invites authors to submit articles Office Washington, DC describing experience or significant Phoenix, Arizona findings regarding the prevention and control of delinquency and crime. A style sheet is available from the editor. Federal Probation is published E D I T O R I A L S T A F F semiannually in June and Decem- ber. Permission to quote is granted on the condition that appropriate Karen S. Henkel Federal Probation credit is given the author and Fed- Editor Administrative Office of the eral Probation. For information U.S. Courts about reprinting articles, please Janice G. Barbour Washington, DC 20544 contact the editor. Editorial Secretary Subscriptions to Federal Proba- Telephone: (202) 502-1600 tion are available from the Super- Fax: (202) 502-1677 intendent of Documents at an an- nual rate of $6.50 ($8.15 foreign). Please see the subscription order form on the back inside cover of Postmaster: this issue for more information. Please send address changes to the editor at the address above. Federal Probation VOLUME LXII DECEMBER 1998 NUMBER 2 This Issue in Brief TO THE READERS: CONTENTS We are pleased to welcome as a member of Federal A Decade of Experimenting Probation’s advisory committee the Honorable David D. With Intermediate Sanctions: Noce, magistrate judge of the United States District What Have We Learned? . .Joan Petersilia 3 Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. Judge Noce, a magistrate judge since 1976, served as Electronic Monitoring: What Does the Literature Tell Us? . .Annesley K. Schmidt 10 chief magistrate judge from 1989 to 1997. He holds a law degree from the University of Missouri-Columbia. When an Employee Dies: His previous experience includes teaching business law Managing the Aftermath of in college and serving as a legal officer in the United a Critical Incident . .Mark J. Maggio States Army. He also worked as a law clerk for two dis- Loren A.N. Buddress 20 trict judges of the federal district court in St. Louis and as an assistant United States attorney, prosecuting fed- Organizational Probation Under eral criminal cases. the Federal Sentencing Guidelines . .Gary S. Green 25 Judge Noce currently teaches a course on jury instruc- tions at both St. Louis University School of Law and Operation Spotlight: The Community Probation-Community Police Washington University School of Law. He has served on Team Process . .Harold B. Wooten the Judicial Conference Committee on Criminal Law Herbert J. Hoelter 30 and on the Circuit Council of the Eighth Circuit. A Continuum of Sanctions for KAREN S. HENKEL Substance-Abusing Offenders . .Sam Torres 36 Editor The Impact of Treatment: *** The Jefferson County (Kentucky) Drug Court Program . .Gennaro F. Vito Richard A. Tewksbury 46 A Decade of Experimenting With Intermediate Sanctions: What Have We Learned?—Intensive su- What Do We Know About pervision, home confinement, community service, boot Anger Management Programs camps, and day fines — these and other intermediate in Corrections? . .Pamela Stiebs Hollenhorst 52 sanctions have been put forth in recent years as panaceas in corrections. Have they had an impact on Correctional Officer Stress: A Cause program costs, recidivism, and prison crowding? Have for Concern and Additional Help . .Peter Finn 65 they delivered what they promised? Author Joan Peter- Successful Mentoring in a silia reviews what we have learned about intermediate Correctional Environment . .Peter M. Wittenberg 75 sanctions after a decade of experience with them and how they have influenced current practice. Departments Electronic Monitoring: What Does the Litera- Up to Speed . .81 ture Tell Us?—Electronic monitoring (EM) has been Looking at the Law . .95 available to corrections as a supervision tool for almost Juvenile Focus . .109 20 years. During that time, much has been written International Developments in Criminal Justice . .113 Reviews of Professional Periodicals . .119 about EM in journals, magazines, newspapers, text- Your Bookshelf on Review . .124 books, and other sources. Author Annesley K. Schmidt It Has Come to Our Attention . .131 offers a review of the EM literature, which ranges in Indexes of Articles and Book Reviews . .132 1 Vol. 62, No. 2 2 FEDERAL PROBATION December 1998 scope from discussion of equipment, to program de- drug treatment program. The strategy presented is scriptions and evaluations, to commentaries on the based on the tenet that offenders must be held ac- technology, to explanation of laws and regulations. countable for their decision to use drugs. When an Employee Dies: Managing the After- The Impact of Treatment: The Jefferson County math of a Critical Incident.—Unforeseen tragedy— (Kentucky) Drug Court Program.—Authors Gen- be it an act of nature, a terrorist action, or the sudden naro F. Vito and Richard A. Tewksbury present the re- death of an employee—may strike any organization at sults of an impact evaluation of the Jefferson County any time. How well organizations prepare for these “crit- Drug Court Program. The research revealed that ical incidents” may determine how well they cope with African American defendants were most likely to com- them. Authors Mark J. Maggio and Loren A.N. Buddress plete the program successfully, drug court graduates— explain the wisdom of instituting a critical incident re- compared to nongraduates and a comparison group— sponse policy and tell how the probation office in the had the lowest rate of reconviction, and program Northern District of California responded to the violent completion was the best predictor of success. The re- and unexpected death of its PC systems administrator. sults support the conclusion of other studies that treat- Organizational Probation Under the Federal ment programs can effectively reduce recidivism rates. Sentencing Guidelines.—Probation as a criminal What Do We Know About Anger Management sanction for organizations was codified into federal law Programs in Corrections?—This article explores the in 1991, when the U.S. Sentencing Commission added content, application, effectiveness, and propriety of Chapter 8 to the sentencing guidelines. Author Gary S. anger management programs and concludes that such Green discusses the legal background for organiza- programs merit additional study to maximize their po- tional probation and offers an analysis of Sentencing tential for preventing violence. Author Pamela Stiebs Commission data on 271 organizations sentenced Hollenhorst focuses on anger management programs in under Chapter 8 from 1993 through 1996. He describes correctional settings in Madison, Wisconsin, and distin- the types of organizations, their offense types, and their guishes between anger management and domestic vio- sentences. lence prevention programs. Operation