Victim Appearances at Sentencing Hearings Victims' Bill of Rights

90 Pages·2010·4.99 MB·English

If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov.
u.s. Department of Justice
National Institute of Justice
Victim Appearances at
Sentencing Hearings
Under the California
Victims' Bill of Rights
- --
-- ------------- ~---
About the National Institute of Justice
The National Institute of Justice is a research branch of the U.S. Dt!partment of Justice. The Institute's mission
is to develop knowledge about crime. its causes and control. Priority is given to policy-relevant research that
can yield approaches and information that State and local agencies can use in preventing and reducing crime.
The decisions made by criminal justice practitioners and policymaker~ affect millions of citizens, and crime
affects almost all our public institutions and the private sector as well. Targeting resources, assuring their effective
aliocation. and developing new means cf cooperation between the public and private sector are some of the
emerging issues in law enforcement and criminal justice that research can help illuminate.
Carrying out the mandate assigned by Congress in the Justice Assistance Act of 1984. the National Institute of
Justice:
• Sponsors research and development to improve and strengthen the criminal justice system and related civil
justice aspects, with a balanced program of basic and applied research.
• Evaluates the effectiveness of justice improvement programs and identifies programs that promise to be
successful if continued or repeated.
• Tests and demonstrates new and improved approaches to strengthen the justice system. and recommends
actions that can be taken by Federal. State, and local governments and private organizations and individuals
to achieve this goal.
• Disseminates information from research. demonstrations, evaluations, and special programs to Federal, State,
and local governments. and serves as an international clearinghouse of justice information.
• Trains criminal justice practitioners in research and evaluation findings. and assists practitioners and researchers
through fellowships and special seminars.
Authority for administering the Institute and awarding grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements is vested
in the NIJ Director. In establishing its research agenda, the Institute is guided by the priorities of the Attorney
General and the needs of the criminal justice field. The Institute actively solicits the views of police, courts, and
corrections practitioners as well as the private sector to identify the most critical problems and to plan research
that can help resolve them.
James K. Stewart
Director
u.s.
Department of Justice
National Institute of Justice
Victim Appearances at
Sentencing Hearings
Under the California
Victims' Bill of Rights
by
Edwin Villmoare
and
Virginia V. Neto
March 1987
104915
U.S. Department of Justice
National Institute of Justice
This document has been reproduced exactly as received from the
person or organization originating it. Points of view or opinions stated
In thiS document are those of the authors and do not necessaril
represent the offiCial Position or policies of the National Institute OYf
Justlce.
Permission to reproduce this C~d material has been
granted by
Public Dornain/NIJ
_u. S. Department of Justice
to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS).
Further reproduction outside of the NCJRS system requires permis
sion of the ~t-owner.
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402
National Institute of Justice
James K. Stewart
Director
This project was supported by 83-NI-AX-0007, awarded to the McGeorge
School of Law , University of the Pacific by the National Institute of Justice,
Department of Justice, under the Orrulibus Crime Control and Safe Streets
Act of 1968. as amended. Points of view or opinions stated in this document
are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position
or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• v
LIST OF APPENDICES ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• vi
PROJECT STAFF •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS •.......... viii
eo ••••••• e •••••••••••••••••••••••
ABSTRACT •••• i x
e _ ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
I. INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1
A. Purpose and Scope of the Study •••••••••••••••••••••••• 1
B. Background on Victims' Rights •• •••••••••••••••••••••• 3
~
C. Participation: The Central Issue of Victims' Rights •• 5
II. PROPOSITION 8: THE VICTIMS' BILL OF RIGHTS •••••••••••• ~.12
A. The History of Proposition 8 •••••••••••••••• 12
0 ••••••••
B. The Legal Framework of the Victims' Allocution
Right at Sentencing .•....••..••.•..... 14
c ••••••••• o •• e ••
III. RESEARCH METHODS .•...•.... .•................•........... 24
~
A. Major Areas of Focus ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 24
B. Survey of Agencies .........•..........•...•.......... 24
c.
Survey of Victims ...... 25
c •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
IV. AGENCY IMPLEMENTATION OF VICTIM ALLOCUTION RIGHTS ••••••.•• 32
A. Background ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 32
B. Notification by the Probation Department ••••••••••••• 32
C. Implementation in the Superior Court .•••••••••••••••• 35
D. The Role of the District Attorney •••••••••••••••••••• 35
E. The Role of Victim/Witness Programs ••.••••••••••••••• 35
F. Response to the Question--Was Section 1191.1
Necessary? •••.•• 37
III ••••••••••••••••••• e _ •••••• .- " •••••••
V. VICTIM RESPONSE TO ALLOCUTION RIGHTS ••••••••••••••••••••• 38
A. Characteristics of the Victim Sample ••••••••••••••••• 38
B. Response to Allocution Rights •••••••••••••••••••••••• 42
iii
----------------------~------------~
Page
VI. FACTORS INFLUENCING USE OF THE ALLOCUTION RIGHT •••••••••• 45
A. Previous Studies •..........•..........•.............. 45
B. Defining Victim Participation at Sentencing •••••••••• 46
C. Factors Related to Victim Participation •••••••••••••• 47
D. Involvement and Satisfaction ••••••••••••••••••••••••• 48
VII. EFFECTS OF ALLOCUTION •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 52
A. Victim Utilization .........••.........•..•.•..•...•.. 52
B. Perceived Effects on Judicial Decision-Making •••••••• 55
C. Increase in Workload ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 57
D. Expectations for the Future ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 57
VIlle FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS •••••••••••••••• 59
A. Findings ............... 59
e _ •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Limited Scope of the Rights •••••••••••••••••••••••••• 59
Effects on the Criminal Justice System ••••••••••••••• 59
Impact on Victims •••....•..• .•.••••.•...•••• 59
~ e •••••••
Factors Associated with Victim Participation ••••••••• 60
B. Conclusions •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 61
Effect of Allocution at Sentencing ••••••••••••••••••• 61
Victim Response to Allocution •••••••••••••••••••••••• 61
Benefits of Allocution •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 62
Victim Desire for Information •••••••••••••••••••••••• 62
Notice Problems .•..•••••..•••.•.•••••..•..•.•..•.••.• 62
Limited Scope of Allocution •••••••••••••••••••••••••• 62
Role of Victim Impact Statements ••••••••••••••••••••• 63
The Drafting of the Allocution Provisions •••••••••••• 63
c. Recommendations ..••........••.•••••.•.•••.•.•..•.••.. 63
Research and Experimentation ••••••• 63
s ••••••••••••••••••
Establishing Victims' Rights •••••••••••••••••••••••••• 65
Final Comments ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 67
ADDENDUM: Victim Allocution at Parole Hearings ••••••••••••••••• 68
A. Adult Parole Eligibility Hearings •••••••••••• ~ ••• 68
B. Youthful Offender Parole Board Hearings •••••••••• 70
BIBLIOGRAPHY •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 72
iv
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
3.1 Number of Felony Victims Identified by District
Attorneys and Contacted by Project •••.•••••••••••••••••••• 28
3.2 Number of Victims Contacted, Returning Card
and Interviewed ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.•••••••••••••• 29
3.3 Comparison of Felony Convictions in Study Counties
with Identified Sample and Interviewed Sample by
Selected Crimes in Percent •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 30
5.1 Demographic Characteristics of Victims in Sample •••••••••• 39
5.2 Characteristics of Victimization Experience in Percent •••• 40
6.1 Types of Victim Participation at Sentencing •••••••••••••• 46
6.2 Relationships of Selected Items to Victim
Participation in the Sentencing Process •••••••••• ~ •••••••• 47
7.1 Perceived Reasons for Low Appearance Rates
at Sentencing ••••••••••••••••••••• ••••••••••••••••••••••• 53
~
7.2 Victims' Reports of Type of Sentence by Type
of Victim Participation in Percent .••••••••••••••••••••••• 56
v
LIST OF APPENDICES
Copies of the Appendices may be obtained from the National
Institute of Justice/National Criminal Justice Reference Service
at Box 6000, Rockville, Maryland 20850 or by calling NCJRS at
301-251-5500.
Appendix A: Appendix Tables 1-16
Appendix B: Selected Letters of Notification
Appendix C: Description of Indices and Related Tables
Appendix D: Survey Forms
Appendix E: Victim Allocution at Parole Eligibility
Hearings
vi
PROJECT STAFF
Edwin Villmoare
Project Director
Virginia V. Neto
Project Coordinator
I. J. Shain
Consultant
William Davis
Senior Research Assistant
Nita Dunn
Executive Secretary
Computer Programming Interviewers
Ted Chan Camille Goulet
Robert J. Trombley Richard Hamlin
Susan Hamlin
~iemer
Coding Supervisor Teresa Libertino
Howard Weinberg Carl Mandabach
Berg Moosekian
Coders Mark Powers
Susan Siemer Hamlin Gene D. Pl'ather
Gene D. Prather Todd Watson
Howard Weinberg
Interpreter
John Don
vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to express their appreciation to the
following persons who made this study possible:
Dean Gordon D.. Schaber for his generous support of the
project;
Associate Dean Glenn Fait for his V1S10n in promoting the
project and his assistance in designing it;
I. J. ncy" Shain for his wise guidance and counsel;
Richard M. Rau of the National Institute of Justice for
his patience and valuable suggestions;
The Presiding Judges of the Superior Courts, the Chief
Probation Officers, the District Attorneys, and the
Directors of Victim/Witness Programs who responded to our
requests for information;
The Clerks of the Superior Courts in Alameda, Fresno, and
Sacramento Counties who identified victims exercising the
allocution right;
The District Attorneys in Alameda, Fresno, and Sacramento
Counties who assisted us by contacting victims to
participate in the study;
The County Coroners' Offices in Alameda and Fresno
Counties;
The Board of Prison Terms and the Youthful Offender
Parole Board for their cooperation and interest;
The Probation Departments in Fresno and Sacramento
Counties;
Sacramento State University for access to the Computer
Center;
William Davis for his extensive research into the
historical, social, political, and legal aspects of
victims' rights;
The student assistants for their diligence in data
collection, coding and computer processing;
Nita Dunn for her patience and secretarial skills through
many drafts;
Jeanne Benvenuti for her conscientious edi ting of this
report; and
The victims themselves who so willingly shared their
experiences with us.
viii