Suchergebnisse

"Cover" -- "Half Title" -- "Title Page" -- "Copyright Page" -- "Preface" -- "Acknowledgments" -- "Contents" -- "About The Author" -- "Chapter 1 Criminal Justice Perspectives" -- "Social Control" -- "Types of Social Control" -- "Criminal Justice as Social Control" -- "Perspectives on Criminal Justice" -- "Criminal Justice Theory" -- "Disciplinary Analyses" -- "Comparison Analyses" -- "Process Analyses" -- "Thematic Analyses" -- "Systems Analyses" -- "Choosing an Approach" -- "Systems Theory and the Systems Approach" -- "The System of Criminal Justice" -- "Types of Systems" -- "The Nonsystem of Criminal Justice" -- "The Environment of Criminal Justice" -- "The Material Environment of Criminal Justice" -- "Raw Materials" -- "Means of Production" -- "The Ideological Environment of Criminal Justice" -- "Value Conflicts" -- "Federalism and Uniformity" -- "Vengeance and Assistance" -- "Individual Actors" -- "Examining Criminal Justice" -- "A Parting Comment on Criminal Justice Theory" -- "Preview of Forthcoming Chapters" -- "Review Questions" -- "References" -- "Chapter 2 The Justice Process" -- "The Decision Points of the Criminal Justice System" -- "Detection" -- "Investigation" -- "Arrest" -- "Initial Appearance" -- "Charging" -- "Arraignment" -- "Trial" -- "Sentencing" -- "Revocation" -- "Discharge" -- "The Total Criminal Justice System" -- "Drunk Driving" -- "Homeland Security" -- "The War on Drugs" -- "Domestic Violence Arrest Policies" -- "The Components of Criminal Justice" -- "Law Enforcement" -- "Federal Law Enforcement" -- "State Law Enforcement" -- "Municipal Law Enforcement" -- "Private and Other Public Law Enforcement" -- "Courts" -- "Federal Courts" -- "State Courts" -- "Local Courts" -- "Other Courts" -- "Prosecution" -- "Defense" -- "Witnesses and Jurors" -- "Corrections" -- "Incarceration" -- "Nonincarceration

Parole officers are responsible for supervising offenders conditionally released from prisons into communities. This structural arrangement creates a power relationship, with officers' views providing the foundation for various bases of power and possibly influencing their exercise of discretionary power. This study is an examination of parole officers' perceptions of their bases of power and whether those perceptions influenced officers' use of their power to revoke offenders' parole. Findings revealed that officers identified legitimate and reward power as the primary means by which they gain compliance; however, only legitimate power and expert power were linked to officers' use of power.

A number of studies have examined whether the carceral experience has a criminogenic, deterrent, or null effect on offenders' postrelease behaviors, but it is less clear whether exposure to different types of confinement similarly affects offenders' postrelease behaviors. Using data collected from offenders released under postrelease supervision in Ohio, we examine the impact of exposure to one type of penal environment, supermax confinement, on offenders' odds of recidivism and other postrelease outcomes. The findings revealed that exposure to supermax confinement had no impact on offenders' postrelease behaviors.

Miethe (1982) has recently argued that the consistent findings of wide‐spread consensus in the rankings of the seriousness of crimes may be more a rejection of the methodological approaches used by past researchers than of actual public sentiments. Building on Miethe's insights, this paper examines the extent to which the nature of the techniques employed to analyze data influences seriousness evaluations. The results indicate that consensus is affected by such factors as the rating task given to the subjects, how consensus is measured, and the type of offense under investigation. In turn these methodological considerations caution against using existing research as the bask either for the verification of consensus theories of justice or for the formulation of sanctioning policy.