A new report finds no relationship between offenders released from county jails and under county supervision to California’s recent rise in crime.
The report shows from 1993 to 2011 there was a declining crime rate of 63 percent. However, during the first six months of 2012, there was a slight increase in violent and property crimes in most large California cities.
The report analyzes whether the 46,000 offenders diverted to county control between Jan.1 through June 30, 2012 contributed to the increase in urban offenses during that period.
Some critics blame Gov. Jerry Brown’s prison reduction plan (realignment) for increased crime.
If realignment contributed to the increase in offenses in the first half of 2012, “one would expect counties with higher percentages of realigned offenders to show the biggest increase in crime,” asserts the report by California Juvenile and Criminal Justice titled California’s Urban Crime Increase in 2012: Is “Realignment” to Blame? The conclusion is no.
Realignment keeps low-level offenders in local jurisdictions rather than sending them to state prison. After release, the plan also changes the responsibility of supervision to county officials, instead of state parole agencies.
The report found that counties handling fewer low-level offenders had higher increases in crime than counties handling more low-level offenders. Furthermore, counties that had decreased crime rates had a greater number of low-level offenders than counties reporting rising crime rates.
Another report analyzing San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, and Redlands arrests checked to see if the arrestees were on probation or parole.
The report by the Council of State Governments found that 78 percent of those taken into custody were not under parole or probation supervision at the time of arrest; moreover, 62 percent had no history of parole or probation.
People under probation or parole were involved in one in six arrests for violent crimes, while someone accused of a drug crime and under probation or parole supervision accounted for one in three arrests, the study shows.
Analysis of newly released offenders deemed low-risk for reoffending was also examined.
In January 2010, California prison officials began a parole supervision policy called NonRevocable Parole. To be eligible for NRP, a person released from prison had to be assessed as having low-risk of reoffending and could not have a criminal record containing a number of offenses deemed serious. Since its inception, there have been about 9,000 NRP releases, according to the CSG study.
Of the 170,336 arrests in the four cities during the 15-month period of the study, 216 arrests were people on NRP, which accounts for less than 0.2 percent of the total arrests.
The CSG recommends:
• Local governments use validated risk assessments tools to determine people who are most likely to re-offend.
• Improve coordination between law enforcement, probation, and parole agencies.
• Local governments use targeted, evidence-based supervision and treatment strategies for high-risk individuals.
• Local governments continue analyses of arrest and supervision information to track how people under supervision contribute to arrests.
• Improve the ability for local and state governments to share and analyze information.
