Prisoners in Arizona: a profile of the inmate population

              ARIZONA PROSECUTING
ATTORNEYS’ ADVISORY COUNCIL
PRISONERS IN ARIZONA
A Profile of the Inmate Population
Daryl R. Fischer, Ph.D.
March 2010 1
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 2
Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 4
Chapter 1: Crime and Incarceration in Arizona .............................................................................. 6
Chapter 2: Goals and Objectives .................................................................................................... 11
Chapter 3: General Prison Population Profile ............................................................................... 14
Chapter 4: A History of Violence .................................................................................................. 26
Chapter 5: Criminal History ......................................................................................................... 32
Chapter 6: Major Inmate Sub-Populations .................................................................................. 40
Chapter 7: Non-Violent First Offenders-A Closer Look ................................................................ 57
Chapter 8: Gangs and Violence .................................................................................................... 65
Chapter 9: Special Inmate Populations ......................................................................................... 73
Chapter 10: Summary of Findings ................................................................................................. 77
Appendix: Data Collection and Categorization ............................................................................ 80
Curriculum Vitae ............................................................................................................................ 86
2
Executive Summary
This report from the Arizona Prosecuting Attorneys’ Advisory Council provides a detailed statistical profile of the Arizona prison population as it existed on a recent date in history. The goal of the report is to create a body of information that might prove useful to policy-makers, legislators, and other parties interested in the kinds of offenders occupying prison beds in Arizona. Specifically, the report provides an in-depth analysis of the offenses for which inmates are committed, the sentences they are serving, their histories of felony violence, their prior criminal records, and other factors associated with their presence in the prison system. Information is presented for all 40,431 inmates sentenced for crimes committed in Arizona and in the custody of the Arizona Department of Corrections as of September 30, 2009.
Major Findings
The current and prior offense histories and institutional records of inmates in the custody of the Department of Corrections, as recorded by the department’s automated records system, were carefully screened for any history of violence, any indicators of repetitive criminal behavior, and any other factors that might be related to their imprisonment or to the prospects for a successful re-entry to the community. Major findings are as follows:
A. Violent Offenders: Including sex offenses, 21,273 or 52.6% of inmates are currently committed for one or more violent offenses.1 In addition, 11,608 or 28.7% have prior violent felonies. Taking into account both current and prior offenses, 26,457 or 65.4% of inmates may be classified as “violent offenders.”
B. Repeat Offenders: Overall, 33,896 or 83.8% of inmates were found to have one or more prior adult felony convictions or juvenile felony adjudications. Furthermore, 22,639 or 56.0% have two or more prior felonies on their record.
C. Violent and Repeat Offenders: The vast majority of inmates, 38,088 or 94.2% of the total population, are either repeat felony offenders or have a history of felony violence.
D. Non-Violent First Offenders: Factoring out violent and repeat offenders, 2,343 or 5.8% of inmates may be classified as “Non-Violent First Offenders.”
E. Non-Violent First Offenders: A Closer Look: One of the focuses of the present study was to take a close look at this population to determine why they occupy prison beds. We found that most (2,278=97.2%) exhibit clearly identifiable characteristics that explain or otherwise justify the use of scarce prison resources to detain them. Most notably, 1,460=62.3% are drug traffickers, 1,270=54.2% have ICE detainers and are likely undocumented aliens, 419=17.9% carry mandatory prison sentences, and 340=14.5% are technical probation violators.
1 Violent offenses include, among others, offenses prosecuted as dangerous offenses or as dangerous crimes against children, and offenses ADC records indicate involved injury to a victim or weapon use or had a sexual element. 3
F. Drug Possession: 2,563 or 6.3% of inmates are committed for drug possession as their most serious current offense. Across this population, 976 or 38.0% have a history of felony violence and 2,436=95.0% have prior felony records. Just 121 or 4.7% of these inmates are Non-Violent First Offenders, and 78 or 64.4% of the latter are technical probation violators.
G. DUI Inmates: 2,834 or 7.0% of inmates are committed for DUI as their most serious current offense. 1,128 or 39.8% have a history of felony violence, 2,521 or 89.0% have prior felony records, and 2,131 or 83.1% have prior misdemeanor convictions. 295 or 10.4% are Non-Violent First Offenders.
H. Inmates with Sentences of 1 Year or Less: 2,105 or 5.2% of inmates are committed with a sentence (total time to be served) of 1 year or less. 758 or 36.0% have a history of felony violence and 1,531 or 72.7% have prior felonies. 470 or 22.3% are Non-Violent First Offenders. 436 or 20.7% of these inmates are committed for DUI.
I. DUI Inmates with Sentences of 1 Year or Less: 436 or 15.4% of DUI inmates are sentenced to a prison term of 1 year or less, including 334 or 76.6% with a mandatory flat term of 4-8 months. Of the total of 436, 73 or 16.7% have a history of felony violence and 213=48.9% have prior felony records. 218 or 50.0% are Non-Violent First Offenders.
J. Technical Probation Violators: 3,780 or 9.3% of inmates were committed as technical probation violators. 1,985 or 52.5% have a history of felony violence, 3,137 or 83.0% have prior felony records, and 340 or 9.0% are Non-Violent First Offenders.
K. Gang Members: 9,260 or 22.9% of inmates are suspected or validated members of prison and street gangs. 7,400 or 79.9% of gang members have a history of felony violence and 4,219 or 45.6% a history of institutional violence. The comparable percentages for non-gang members are 61.1% and 13.7%. 6,922 or 74.8% of gang members are violent repeat offenders, while just 69 or 0.7% are Non-Violent First Offenders. The comparable percentages for non-gang members are 48.9% and 7.3%.
General Conclusions
The Arizona prison population may be split into four separate groups as follows:
A. 22,265 or 55.1% are Violent Repeat Offenders
B. 4,192 or 10.4% are Violent First Offenders
C. 11,631 or 28.8% are Non-Violent Repeat Offenders
D. 2,343 or 5.8% are Non-Violent First Offenders
The vast majority of current inmates are violent or repeat offenders (94.2%). Of the remaining 2,343 Non-Violent First Offenders, 62.3% are drug traffickers, 54.2% are foreign nationals with active ICE detainers, 17.9% carry mandatory prison sentences, and 14.5% are technical probation violators. Including the above, factors predisposing incarceration or weighing against early release are present for almost all Non-Violent First Offenders (97.2%). 4
Introduction
As of the December 31, 2009, Arizona state prisons housed a total of 40,544 convicted felons. On that date, one out of every 162 residents of the state was behind bars. According to federal reports, Arizona has the sixth highest incarceration rate among the 50 states, exceeded only by five southern states. The prison population has been on a steady upward trend over the last 30 years, averaging 103 additional inmates every month. Growth in the state general population has certainly contributed to growth in the prison population, but the state still houses 4.6 times as many inmates per capita than it did in 1979. As a result of unrelenting growth in the inmate population, the budget of the Arizona Department of Corrections has reached a record $1 billion (FY 2010), approximately 12% of a total state budget 0f $8.4 billion. With this level of investment in the prison system, it is important to know that tax dollars are being spent wisely.
There has been concern in some quarters that Arizona is housing large numbers of low level drug offenders and other low risk felons at taxpayer expense. At a recent legislative hearing, it was stated that about half of Arizona prisoners are non-violent first offenders. If true, this would certainly cast doubt on the utility of the present system of sentencing and corrections in this state. Unfortunately, many of the perceptions regarding the prison population are not grounded in fact. In some cases, previously published data on the inmate population has been misinterpreted. More generally, however, existing data are insufficient to provide good answers to good questions about prisoners. This constitutes a serious problem for the state. Without good information, it is impossible to make sound decisions regarding the use of scarce tax dollars. In this report from the Arizona Prosecuting Attorneys’ Advisory Council (APAAC), we begin to fill the information vacuum by shedding light on who is in prison in Arizona.
In November 2009, APAAC commissioned the present study to answer several important questions about the characteristics of state prisoners, questions that have come up many times in testimony before legislative committees, in the media, and among both critics and advocates of the way Arizona sentences and confines convicted felons. It is the intent to provide answers to such questions as:
● How many inmates have histories of violent or sex crimes?
● How many inmates are first felony offenders, and more specifically how many are non-violent first offenders? What crimes are non-violent offenders in prison for?
● How many inmates are committed for drug possession, how many for drug trafficking, and how many of either group are first felony offenders?
● How many inmates are committed as the result of purely technical violations of probation? What crimes are they committed for?
● How many inmates are committed with sentences of 1 year or less? What crimes are they committed for and what are their criminal histories?
With a $1.4 billion budget shortfall looming, the State of Arizona is looking for ways to save money. Although the state may and likely will find other means to reduce spending, the early 5
release of prisoners is often put on the table as one possible option to achieve this end. Of course, this situation is not unique to Arizona. Many states have faced similar fiscal pressures, and some have been forced to make difficult decisions regarding their inmate populations, as will likely be the case in this state as well. The push to release prisoners early is often exacerbated by prison overcrowding and the desire to avoid expensive prison construction programs. California, Florida, New York, Texas, Illinois, and many other states have considered, and in some cases implemented, early release programs either to save money or to reduce prison overcrowding or both.
In October 2009, facing the possibility of a 15% budget cut (approximately $150 million), the director of the Department of Corrections submitted a tentative plan to release prisoners early among other budget cutting measures, including staff reductions. The plan recognized the fact that a budget cut of this magnitude would likely require a considerable reduction in sentence lengths for large numbers of inmates, the early release of some violent offenders, and a reduction in staff to dangerously low levels. In light of the seriousness of these implications, and especially of the public safety and prison security concerns that accompany reducing the department’s budget to this extent, it is imperative that good information on potential early release candidates be made available before any decisions are made along these lines. Even in a good economic environment, it is to the advantage of the Governor, the Legislature, the criminal justice community, and all interested citizens to know as much as possible about the makeup of the prison population. In a poor economic climate the need to know grows exponentially. It is precisely the goal of this report to fill the information gap regarding the prison population.
6
Chapter 1: Crime and Incarceration in Arizona
According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, only five (5) states incarcerate offenders at a higher rate than Arizona.1 On December 31, 2008, Arizona imprisoned felons with sentences of more than 1 year at the rate of 567 per 100,000 residents. This rate was exceeded only by Louisiana (853), Mississippi (735), Oklahoma (661), Texas (639), and Alabama (634). Arizona’s rate of imprisonment was by far the highest among the 13 western states, with Nevada second at 486. Naturally, there are reasons for the high rate of incarceration in Arizona, not the least of which is the relatively high crime rate in the state.
According to the FBI, Arizona had the fourth highest crime rate among the 50 states during 2008 at 4,738 serious “Part I” crimes per 100,000 residents, trailing only South Carolina (4,964), Florida (4,830), and Tennessee (4,765).2 As a matter of fact, Arizona recorded the highest rate of property crime among the 50 states during 2008 at 4,291 Part I property crimes, burglary, larceny/theft, and motor vehicle theft, for every 100,000 inhabitants. Crime continues to be a major problem in Arizona despite the fact that the crime rate has dropped every year and by a total of 25.8% since 2002.
One concern of state officials and private citizens alike is whether or not Arizona has experienced crime reduction benefits from devoting such a large portion of the state budget to corrections. While this question is difficult to answer definitively, there is evidence that increased use of incarceration contributed to a 42% drop in serious crime from 1995 to 2008. In this chapter, we present the facts regarding crime and incarceration in Arizona. Specifically, we track growth in prison population, growth in the general population, and changes in the crime rate over the last three decades, as well as relationships among the three trends. In subsequent chapters, we take up the general issue of the makeup of the state’s inmate population.
Along with many other states, Arizona has experienced continuing prison population growth over the last three decades. However, Arizona’s experiences in this regard seem to exceed those experienced nationally. Across the nation, from 1980 to 2008, prison population (end-of-calendar-year custody counts) grew from 319,598 to 1,518,559 or by 475%. Over the same time frame, Arizona’s prison population grew from 3,859 to 39,602 or by 1,024%. Clearly, Arizona’s prison population growth problems match and likely exceed those experienced in most other states.
Figure 1 below tracks growth in the state prison population over the period 1979-2009. This span is of interest in part because 1979 was the year following enactment of a new criminal code and the change from indeterminate to “presumptive” sentencing. A number of new mandatory sentences were installed in the eighties followed by the enactment of “Truth-in-Sentencing” in 1994. In any case, over the 30-year period 1979-2009, while the effects of these changes were taking hold, prison population grew from 3,489 to 40,544, a 1,062% or nearly 12-fold increase.
1 Prisoners in 2008, Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice, December 2009.
2 Crime in the United States 2008, Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Department of Justice, September 2009. 7
This level of growth was due to two factors, a 150% increase in the state general population (Figure 2), from 2.6 million to 6.6 million, and a 364% (nearly 5-fold) increase in the state’s incarceration rate (measured as total inmates per 100,00 population—see Figure 3). In 1979, one in every 752 Arizona residents was in prison. By 2009, that ratio had grown to one in every 162. Clearly, prison population was growing at a much faster pace than the general population.
Figure 1: Growth in the State Prison Population, 1979-2009
Figure 2: Trend in the State General Population, 1979-2009
3,489
3,859
4,999
5,991
6,984
7,938
8,623
9,531
11,275
12,580
13,368
14,313
15,464
16,572
17,968
19,864
21,663
22,697
23,866
25,712
26,003
26,747
28,059
29,359
31,170
32,515
33,471
35,795
37,746
39,502
40,544
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
4.0
4.1
4.2
4.5
4.6
4.8
5.0
5.1
5.3
5.5
5.6
5.7
5.9
6.2
6.3
6.5
6.6
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Millions8
While the state is incarcerating far more offenders per capita (Figure 3), the source of this increase is not so clear. Certainly, increased levels of reported crime could not have been the cause as the crime rate has been either relatively steady or decreasing across the 30-year period (Figure 4). In fact, the crime rate has been dropping unevenly but precipitously since 1995.1
Figure 3: Trend in the Arizona Incarceration Rate, 1979-2009
Figure 4: Trend in the Arizona Crime Rate, 1979-2008
1 Crime rate data for 2009 will not be available until circa September 2010.
133
142
178
206
233
256
270
290
333
362
375
391
410
428
452
487
514
506
514
535
523
521
529
538
559
566
564
580
595
608
617
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
7,857
8,171
7,614
7,131
6,392
6,499
7,116
7,321
7,189
7,471
8,060
7,889
7,406
7,029
7,432
7,925
8,214
7,067
7,195
6,575
5,897
5,830
6,077
6,404
6,147
5,578
5,339
5,129
4,897
4,738
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
20089
As demonstrated by Figures 3 & 4, over the period 1995-2008, the crime rate dropped by 42.3% as the incarceration rate was increasing by 18.3%. Although the increase in the prison population (+82.3%) during the period 1995-2008 was far less dramatic than during the period 1979-1995 (+521%), the possibility of an impact on crime was far more apparent. Perhaps mandatory sentencing, Truth-in-Sentencing and other provisions of the new criminal code have served to reduce crime in some fashion. The Department of Corrections has documented that the average length of stay increased by about one-third from the mid-eighties to the late nineties and into the last decade. If an increased length of stay in the department served to keep active criminals off the streets for longer periods, this could have resulted in a net reduction in crime. Also, the deterrent effects of harsher penalties, and particularly those associated with mandatory sentencing, could have had an effect as well. However, an increasing incarceration rate and a falling crime rate did not co-occur until after Truth-in-Sentencing took effect in 1994. It was in 1995 that the crime rate began dropping precipitously. To summarize, here are the facts in favor of the crime rate impact scenario.
The Facts about Crime and Incarceration: 1995-2008
● 18.3% increase in the incarceration rate
● 54.1% increase in the state general population
● 82.3% increase in the prison population
● 42.3% decrease in the crime rate
Whether or not increased use of incarceration has impacted levels of reported crime, the question still remains as to the source of the growth in the incarceration rate. Whatever the source of the increase, it clearly cannot be increased levels of Part I or reported crime. However, increases in other types of crimes may have contributed to the trend. In looking more closely at the increase in the incarceration rate since 1995, we find that there was very little increase from 1995 to 2002, up from 514 to 538 (+4.7%). However, from 2002 to 2009, the incarceration rate rose much more dramatically--from 538 to 617 (+14.7%). Coupled with a 20% increase in general population, the net result was a 38% increase in prison population, from 29,359 at the end of 2002, to 40,544 at the end of 2009. Therefore, it is appropriate to examine possible causes of a rising incarceration rate since 2002.
Since the source of the increase cannot be an increase in Part I crime, it must draw from either an increase in Part II crime (e.g., drug offenses, DUI, and sex offenses), a change in the way law enforcement apprehends felons, or a change in the way the justice system processes them once in custody. It is partially speculative at this point, but the increase in methamphetamine use during the past decade, having the ripple effect of increased admissions of drug users and dealers, may be one of the major contributors to a rise in the incarceration rate since 2002, and especially since 2005. Data from the department’s archives indicate a dramatic increase from FY 2006 to FY 2009 in the number of first-time non-violent offenders committed for drug possession and paraphernalia offenses. Increased trafficking and use of methamphetamine has more than likely contributed to this trend. 10
Independent calculations performed by the author show that from September 30, 2006 to September 30, 2009, the number of inmates with a drug offense as the most serious committing offense increased much more (up 28.6%) than the rest of the population (up 12.0%). This discrepancy translates to an additional 1,102 inmates committed for drug offenses as of September 30, 2009. In fact, 41% of the increase in the incarceration rate from 2006 (580) to 2009 (617) may be traced directly to the observed increase in drug offenders in the population. These facts clearly support the conclusion that a disproportionate increase in drug offenders in prison has contributed to the higher rate of increase in the state’s incarceration rate since 2005.
It is certainly possible that much of the remaining increase in the incarceration rate (59%) is associated with increased methamphetamine use. For instance, it is well known that certain types of property offenders tend to be meth users. Identity theft, credit card fraud, and forgery are known to associate with meth use, and the statistics bear that out. For instance, the frequency of known meth use among inmates committed for identity theft is 2.8 times the general population frequency. For credit card fraud and forgery, respectively, the corresponding ratios are 2.4 times and 2.0 times. Couple these facts with the fact that the number of inmates committed for identity theft and credit card fraud has increased dramatically in recent years, and you have at least one additional explanation for increased population growth aside from the disproportionate increase in committed drug offenders already noted.
Increased meth use is certainly a major contributor to higher levels of growth in the state prison population. Statistical analysis shows that, overall, across offense categories that show an above average increase in inmates from 2006 to 2009, there was an 88% higher rate of meth use than across offense categories showing less than average increases. In short, increased methamphetamine trafficking and use, an accelerated flow of drug offenders through the prison system, plus an increase in identity theft, credit card fraud, and other drug-related crimes, likely driven by increased meth use as well, are among the probable causes of the recent prison population growth spurt.
Another probable cause of continuing increases in the incarceration rate is disproportionate growth in the population of undocumented aliens in custody. While exact data are not available on this inmate category, ADC records do indicate a population of 5,797 Mexican nationals (14.3% of the total population) as of September 30, 2009. This population has increased dramatically in recent years, most likely in sync with increased drug traffic across the Mexican border. It is a known fact that Mexican meth labs are pumping out a more potent form of methamphetamine that is drawing more and more users in the states. In support of the presumed link between drug trafficking and illegal border crossings, Mexican Nationals in ADC custody are twice as likely as other inmates to have a history of drug trafficking (36.7% t0 17.9%). With increased meth trafficking, and more emphasis on drug enforcement and the apprehension of undocumented aliens, a ripple effect on the prison population is inevitable.
11
Chapter 2: Goals and Objectives
One of the major objectives of the present study is to provide an in-depth statistical breakdown of the inmate population. Given the tremendous increase in the number of prisoners over time, it would be nice to know who is being kept off the street and away from potential victims in exchange for the huge fiscal investment in the Department of Corrections. In raising this issue, there is no intent to promote any kind of early release program for prisoners. Rather, the goal and strategy is simply to break out the inmate population into clearly defined categories that may be judged, individually and collectively, as to the threat they pose to society, and the consequent benefits of incarceration. Clearly, some inmate groups pose more of a threat than others. Furthermore, some measures of threat are more explicit than others. In this report we will concentrate on the more explicit categories of threat or risk, dealing with the most apparent and easily measured characteristics of inmates. In developing categories that address the general issue of threat to society, the major concern has to be the extent to which the inmate has compromised the safety of the general public by past criminal acts. Accordingly, individual groups will be judged based on the past behavior of its members and how that behavior reflects the danger they pose to society while on the street.
High degrees of threat to the public are typically exhibited by violent offenders with a repetitive pattern of criminal behavior, i.e., violent repeat offenders.1 Among these offenders, the most threat would generally be posed by those with repetitive histories of violence. However, offenders with a history of both violent and non-violent crime should not be under-estimated, especially since they usually have more opportunities for violence than those who commit violent crimes only. For instance, a burglar with a history of violence might be prone to commit an aggravated or first-degree burglary in which either a weapon or injury to a victim is involved, and may have many such opportunities. It is for this reason that a current non-violent offender with a past history of violence should not be under-estimated for threat or risk to the public. In such cases, the history of violence is less evident in the record and may be overlooked.
Aside from violent repeat offenders, two other groups also pose some significant degree of threat to the public, those being violent first offenders and non-violent repeat offenders. In the case of the violent first offender, there is always the risk that if the crime was committed once, then it might be committed again. Certainly, the consequences or threat posed by the repetition of a violent crime are worth considering. It is in part because of that perception of threat that violent offenders tend to receive longer sentences and are seldom released early. Most child molesters in Arizona prisons have no prior history of felony violence (82%), yet the consequences of a repetition of that kind of crime are most likely severe. It is for this reason that many of these inmates must serve out long flat-term sentences in Arizona. However, some types of violent crime are far less serious than the aforementioned. Wherever feasible, we reveal the specific category of crime for which the inmate was convicted. In this manner, judgments may be made “crime-by-crime.”
1 In this initial discussion, we use the term “violent” to mean any crime that poses an actual or potential threat to persons, including sex offenses. Subsequently, sex crimes will be categorized separately from violent crimes. 12
Non-violent repeat offenders also pose some significant degree of threat to the general public. In this case, the threat is often perceived as less since the consequences of re-offending are generally less. However, it is well known that the majority of crimes are committed by non-violent offenders, and often in very large numbers. Burglars and vehicle thieves, for example, often commit dozens of crimes before being caught and convicted. According to the Department of Public Safety, only about 1 in 14 burglaries and 1 in 13 motor vehicle thefts were cleared by arrest during 2008. This testifies to the likelihood that non-violent repeat offenders are convicted of far fewer crimes than they actually commit.
But just how active is the typical repeat offender sentenced to prison? A study conducted by the Bureau of Justice Statistics found that 272,111 offenders released from prison in 1994 across the U.S. were charged with a total of 4,876,654 offenses or 17.92 charges per offender.1 This included 4,132,174 charges for crimes committed prior to incarceration (15.19 per offender) and 744,480 for crimes committed within three years of release from custody (2.74 per offender). Overall, 183,675 or 67.5% of these offenders were re-arrested for an average of 4.05 new charges each within the three-year follow-up period. Furthermore, 46.9% were reconvicted and 51.8% were returned to prison within three years, including 25.4% for new felonies.
Naturally, the question arises as to how Arizona inmates compare to prisoners nationally when it comes to recidivism? In a study conducted by the author for the department last year, we found that 24.8% of 60,754 inmates released during the period July 2001-June 2007 returned to ADC custody with a new felony conviction within three years of release. In extending out the follow-up period, we found that 42.6% would return with a new felony conviction within eight years of release. In a previous recidivism study conducted in the early part of the decade, it was thoroughly documented that the best predictors of recidivism are age, criminal history, and gang affiliation. Among, 54,660 inmates released over the period 1990-1999, 43.8% returned with a new felony conviction within eight years. However, that rate was much higher for repeat offenders. For instance, 70.0% of inmates with three or more prior adult felony convictions returned to custody with a new felony conviction within eight years. The highest recidivism rates were recorded by gang members, with 86.7% of gang member suspects and 93.0% of validated gang members returning to custody with a new felony conviction within eight years.
On the positive side, an evaluation conducted in conjunction with the first of the two studies showed that recidivism rates were reduced by an average of 25.0% for inmates who participated in rehabilitation programs while in custody. Among the programs evaluated, Arizona Correctional Industries (ACI) proved to be the most effective, reducing recidivism by 31.6%. Substance abuse programs were also highly effective, reducing recidivism by 28.1%. In part due to rehabilitation, the greatest reduction in recidivism (45.3%) was recorded by inmates who served 10 years or more in prison. The only inmate categories showing increases in recidivism were those in which less than two years was served. These results suggest that correctional intervention really does work to rehabilitate offenders. However, the results also show that it takes time for inmates to reap the benefits of rehabilitation. It is certainly not in the best interests of this state for correctional program budgets to be cut to save money.
1 Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 1994, Special Report; Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice, June 2002. 13
Having dealt with the three categories of violent and repeat offenders, this leaves us with the category of “non-violent first offenders,” those inmates in prison for first felony convictions and with no history of felony violence. The major issue that arises with regard to this sub-population is the impetus or cause behind the inmate’s presence in a prison bed. Normally, non-violent first offenders are granted probation. The fact that these offenders occupy prison cells is a fact worthy of further investigation, and that is precisely one of the goals of this study. There is also the issue as to whether or not inmates in this category would constitute good candidates for some type of early release program. In any case, past research indicates that the following factors should be considered when reviewing the credentials of non-violent first offenders:
• Commitment for a Class 2 felony, a more serious than average non-violent crime
• Commitment for drug trafficking, also considered a more serious non-violent crime
• A current sentence of 4 years or more--longer than average for most non-violent crimes
• Imposition of a mandatory minimum sentence or flat term
• Current admission as a technical probation or parole violator
• Current offenses committed on multiple dates—indicating repetitive criminal behavior
• Affiliation with a prison or street gang
• A history of institutional violence or other serious discipline problem
• An active felony detainer
• Status as an undocumented alien as evidenced by an active ICE detainer
While these factors in any number may be demonstrated by the other three offender groups, they play a proportionately greater role in assessing the status of non-violent first offenders. To summarize, it is our intent in this report to separate the prison population into four individual groups along the lines discussed above so that judgments may be made about the use of scarce resources to house convicted felons. In undertaking this course of inquiry, we will need to look primarily at histories of violence and sex crime, as well as the overall criminal histories of Arizona inmates. Other factors as listed above will come into play only to the extent necessary to distinguish the four groups, and particularly non-violent first offenders. Please see the appendix to the report for the details concerning data collection and categorization.
14
Chapter 3: General Prison Population Profile
As of September 30, 2009, a total of 40,514 inmates were held in the custody of the Arizona Department of Corrections.1 This total included 83 inmates who were sentenced in other states and were resident in Arizona prisons pursuant to the Interstate Compact for Prisoners. Since these inmates were not sentenced under Arizona law, and since the information in the inmate database is incomplete for this category of inmate, we elected to delete them from our study of the inmate population. This leaves a total of 40,431 inmates for which detailed information is provided throughout the remaining body of the report. It may be recalled from the first chapter that the calendar-year-ending prison population in Arizona was 40,544. Accordingly, the target population for this report is approximately the same as the ending population for the year.
We initiate our analysis of the prison population with a general population profile. This includes a look at current committing offenses, lengths and types of sentences imposed by the court, custody level assignments, and types of commitment to the department. Table 1 below shows the most serious current committing offense, including felony class, for inmates in custody on September 30.2 There are two types of offense description, the first a general description of the category of the offense, and the second a more detailed description based on the applicable statute. Coupled together, the A.R.S. description and felony class provide a succinct indicator of both the nature of the offense and of its seriousness. The selection of the most serious offense was based first on felony class and then on the length of sentence imposed in the case of ties.
While aggravated assault is the single most frequent committing offense, with 4,017 inmates, the three drug trafficking offenses taken together account for more inmates (5,955). DUI, armed robbery, and theft of means of transportation each account for approximately 2,700-2,800 inmates. Figure 5 below identifies the fact that 18,900=46.7% of inmates are committed for a violent or sex offense as their most serious current offense, with property offenses (9,408=23.3%) and drug trafficking (6,005=14.9%) accounting for most of the rest of the population. Drug possession (2,563=6.3%) and DUI (2,834=7.0%) contribute less to the size of the prison population in Arizona than one might expect based on the numbers of inmates sentenced to prison for these crimes. This is due to the shorter sentences imposed for these offenses and the fact that this portion of the inmate population turns over quite rapidly.
Figure 6 shows that the most frequent felony class is Class 2 (12,223=30.2%), with Class 3 not far behind at 12,162=30.1%. Class 4 felonies account for an additional 10,362=25.6% of the population. The other three felony classes lag far behind, with each accounting for less than 2,300 inmates. Taken as a group, Class 1-3 felonies, representing the most serious offenses, account for 26,775=66.2% of the inmate population.
1 This number differs slightly from the number listed in the department’s population reports (40,601) due to a slight difference in the timing of the creation of the files used for this study in comparison to the time(s) the official inmate counts were taken for that day. Typically, the inmate population can vary by up to 200 inmates from day-to-day depending on when large transfers from county jails occur. Thus, the noted difference in the inmate counts for September 30 is of slight significance.
2 Old code offenses were assigned to the most appropriate felony class to facilitate the presentation. Also, the table includes only those offenses with inmate counts of seven (7) or more. 15
Table 1: Most Serious Current Committing Offense*
Description of the Most
Felony Class
Grand
Serious Current Offense
1
2
3
4
5
6
Total
Violent Offense
2,289
5,959
3,581
2,125
323
576
14,853
Sex Offense
0
2,103
1,579
291
37
37
4,047
Property Offense
0
751
4,959
2,633
402
663
9,408
Drug Trafficking
0
3,272
1,947
728
27
31
6,005
Drug Possession
0
0
0
1,770
117
676
2,563
DUI
0
0
0
2,795
7
32
2,834
Escape or Related Offense
0
138
97
13
318
104
670
Public Order/Morals Offense
0
0
0
7
27
17
51
Grand Total
2,289
12,223
12,163
10,362
1,258
2,136
40,431
Aggravated Assault
495
2,803
329
123
267
4,017
DUI
2,795
7
32
2,834
Armed Robbery
2,540
220
7
2,767
Theft of Means of Transportation
2,498
166
6
6
2,676
Trafficking in Dangerous Drugs
1,604
692
116
2,412
Trafficking in Narcotic Drugs
1,283
552
229
1
4
2,069
Trafficking in Marijuana
369
690
367
25
26
1,477
Molestation of a Child
785
665
1
1
1,452
Sexual Conduct with a Minor
768
572
3
1
18
1,362
Misconduct Involving Weapons
3
3
1,326
14
15
1,361
First Degree Murder
1,175
171
10
1,356
Burglary in the Second Degree
1,228
100
6
5
1,339
Second Degree Murder
1,036
171
2
1
1,210
Possession of Dangerous Drugs
1,135
56
8
1,199
Burglary in the Third Degree
992
48
11
1,051
Kidnapping
890
70
9
1
970
Forgery
841
33
10
884
Theft
109
366
99
42
190
806
Manslaughter
746
28
1
775
Trafficking in Stolen Property
185
482
51
4
8
730
Possession of Narcotic Drugs
635
47
26
708
Burglary in the First Degree
408
62
5
475
Possession, Manufacture, etc. of Drug Paraphernalia
458
458
Fraudulent Schemes and Artifices
369
75
4
2
2
452
Sexual Assault
361
81
442
Robbery
262
33
4
299
Sex Offender Registration Violation
1
261
17
7
286
Taking or Knowingly Accepting Identity of Another Person
8
39
183
16
5
251
Drive by Shooting
220
9
1
230
Child or Vulnerable Adult Abuse
65
64
55
17
19
220
Sexual Exploitation of a Minor
123
90
213
Promoting Prison Contraband
133
55
4
12
5
209
Unlawful Use of Means of Transportation
16
3
125
63
207
Aggravated Robbery
173
21
1
8
203
Unlawful Flight from Pursuing Law Enforcement Vehicle
1
193
7
201
Possession of Marijuana
6
184
190
Aggravated Taking of Identity of Another Person
166
8
3
1
178
Shoplifting
129
13
13
155
Sexual Abuse
3
122
16
10
2
153
Aggravated Domestic Violence
1
102
15
118
Endangerment
1
108
109 16
Table 1: Most Serious Current Committing Offense (continued)*
Description of the Most
Felony Class
Grand
Serious Current Offense
1
2
3
4
5
6
Total
Criminal Trespass in the First Degree
93
93
Discharging a Firearm at a Structure
71
17
88
Escape in the Second Degree
85
3
88
Participating in or Assisting a Criminal Syndicate
44
39
3
2
88
Disorderly Conduct (Reckless Use of Weapon)
85
85
Possession of Burglary Tools
2
77
79
Theft of a Credit Card or Obtaining Credit Card by Fraud
2
65
11
78
Resisting Arrest
73
73
Murder (Old Code)
72
72
Negligent Homicide
71
71
Arson of an Occupied Structure
58
9
2
69
Criminal Damage
18
21
29
68
Criminal Possession of a Forgery Device
67
67
Trafficking in the Identity of Another Person
44
13
5
1
3
66
Dangerous or Deadly Assault by Prisoner or Juvenile
6
32
10
48
Illegal Control of or Illegally Conducting an Enterprise
4
39
3
46
Failure to Stop: Accidents Involving Death-Personal Injury
4
24
5
7
1
41
Conducting a Chop Shop
29
5
1
35
Criminal Impersonation
35
35
Child Prostitution
17
16
33
Continuous Sexual Abuse of a Child
21
12
33
Money Laundering
2
20
2
4
28
Participating in or Assisting a Criminal Street Gang
10
17
1
28
Smuggling
10
10
8
28
Threatening or Intimidating
17
7
4
28
Involving or Using Minors in Drug Offenses
14
12
26
Prisoners who Commit Assault with Intent to Incite to Riot
16
8
24
Aggravated Harassment
7
16
23
Luring a Minor for Sexual Exploitation
20
2
1
23
Stalking
12
3
7
22
Prostitution
16
5
21
Hindering Prosecution in the First Degree
13
5
2
20
Rape (Old Code)
18
18
Use of Wire-Electronic Communication in Drug Transactions
15
1
16
Arson of a Structure or Property
12
3
15
Failure to Appear in the First Degree
13
2
15
Unlawful Discharge of Firearms
3
1
10
14
Unlawful Imprisonment
14
14
Theft by Extortion
6
1
5
1
13
Criminal Simulation
10
10
Aggravated Criminal Damage
3
2
2
2
9
Escape in the Third Degree
1
8
9
Custodial Interference
5
2
1
8
Destruction of or Injury to Public Jail
1
7
8
Hindering Prosecution
5
2
1
8
Possession-Sale of Vapor-Releasing Subst. Cont. Toxic Substance
8
8
Unlawful Copying--Sale-Sounds/Images from Recording Devices
4
2
2
8
Grand Total
2,289
12,223
12,163
10,362
1,258
2,136
40,431
*Offenses with counts of eight (8) or more
17
Figure 5: Most Serious Current Offense Category
Figure 6: Felony Class of the Most Serious Current Offense
Table 1 provides a revealing but incomplete picture of the Arizona prison population. For one, many inmates are committed for multiple offenses, often falling in different categories, e.g., burglary and assault, whereas only a single offense is listed in Table 1. Also, many inmates have serious prior offenses that are not taken into account by the table. Because of these factors and others, one needs to look at the population from a variety of perspectives to get the full picture of the kinds of inmates occupying prison cells in Arizona. For a start, Tables 2 and 3 below provide a look at the total amount of time inmates are serving on all current active sentences.
14,853
4,047
9,408
6,005
2,563
2,834
670
51
0
3,000
6,000
9,000
12,000
15,000
18,000
Violent Offense
Sex Offense
Property Offense
Drug Trafficking
Drug Possession
DUI
Escape or Related
Public Order/Morals
2,289
12,223
12,163
10,362
1,258
2,136
0
3000
6000
9000
12000
15000
Class 1
Class 2
Class 3
Class 4
Class 5
Class 618
Table 2: Total Time-to-be-Served by Most Serious Current Offense Category (#)
Total Time
Violent
Sex
Property
Drug
Drug
Escape or
Public Order/
All
to be Served
Offense
Offense
Offense
Trafficking
Possession
DUI
Related Offense
Morals Offense
Offenses
0.00-0.99 Years
346
27
543
76
559
432
77
16
2,076
1.00-1.99 Years
1,024
121
1,563
801
1,098
843
252
26
5,728
2.00-2.99 Years
1,485
166
1,747
1,107
427
570
82
3
5,587
3.00-3.99 Years
1,076
132
1,378
917
247
390
52
4
4,196
4.00-4.99 Years
1,495
270
1,107
1,289
107
230
56
1
4,555
5.00-5.99 Years
1,059
143
1,357
570
39
93
40
1
3,302
6.00-6.99 Years
1,088
200
529
328
26
106
21
0
2,298
7.00-7.99 Years
491
61
318
328
11
33
20
0
1,262
8.00-8.99 Years
1,030
512
320
158
28
82
12
0
2,142
9.00-9.99 Years
442
164
162
96
1
10
8
0
883
10.00-10.99 Years
515
117
120
83
8
23
8
0
874
11.00-11.99 Years
317
85
57
53
2
3
8
0
525
12.00-12.99 Years
404
188
38
37
1
4
6
0
678
13.00-13.99 Years
287
68
31
68
1
4
0
459
12.00-14.99 Years
183
102
18
12
0
1
4
0
320
15.00-15.99 Years
343
31
20
21
1
1
1
0
418
16.00-16.99 Years
158
235
16
7
0
1
2
0
419
17.00-17.99 Years
228
48
9
4
0
0
1
0
290
18.00-18.99 Years
154
30
4
10
0
0
2
0
200
19.00-19.99 Years
233
227
8
5
0
0
0
0
473
20+ Years
2,495
1,120
63
35
7
12
14
0
3,746
Grand Total
14,853
4,047
9,408
6,005
2,563
2,834
670
51
40,431
5+ Years
9,427
3,331
3,070
1,815
125
369
151
1
18,289
10+ Years
5,317
2,251
384
335
20
45
50
0
8,402
Life Sentence
1,261
147
2
8
1*
0
0
0
1,419
Death Sentence
128
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
128
Median (50th %-tile)
6.80
12.38
3.22
4.07
1.93
2.15
2.04
1.51
4.28
*Sentenced to life in prison for Possession of Narcotic Drugs: Offense Committed while Released from Confinement
Rather than the actual sentence(s) imposed by the court, the quantity considered here is “total time-to-be-served” or TTBS on all current sentences, which was calculated as the difference between the earliest sentence begin date of all current sentences and the projected release date based on the current time computation for the inmate. This represents the time the inmate is expected to serve assuming he or she does not lose additional good time credits. It constitutes either 100% of the sentence imposed for flat term sentences, 85.7% of the sentence imposed for a Truth-in-Sentencing release, or 85.7% minus days released early on temporary release, drug transition program release, or both. It also considers good time credits lost to-date.
The median TTBS across the inmate population is 4.28 years, meaning that 50% of inmates are serving more than 4.28 years and 50% are serving less. Overall, 45.2% of inmates are serving 5 years or more, but that percentage varies considerably, from 2.0% for public order/morals offenses, to 4.9% for drug possession, 13.0% for DUI, 22.5% for escape and related offenses, 30.2% for drug trafficking, 32.6% for property offenses, 63.5% for violent offenses, and 82.3% for sex offenses. Of particular interest (Figure 7) is the fact that the median TTBS is almost six years more for sex offenses (12.38 years) than it is for violent offenses (6.80 years). Particularly, 41.0% of sex offenders and 22.0% of violent offenders have a TTBS of sixteen years or more. 19
Table 3: Total Time-to-be-Served by Most Serious Current Offense Category (%)
Total Time
Violent
Sex
Property
Drug
Drug
Escape or
Public Order/
All
to be Served
Offense
Offense
Offense
Trafficking
Possession
DUI
Related Offense
Morals Offense
Offenses
0.00-0.99 Years
2.3%
0.7%
5.8%
1.3%
21.8%
15.2%
11.5%
31.4%
5.1%
1.00-1.99 Years
6.9%
3.0%
16.6%
13.3%
42.8%
29.7%
37.6%
51.0%
14.2%
2.00-2.99 Years
10.0%
4.1%
18.6%
18.4%
16.7%
20.1%
12.2%
5.9%
13.8%
3.00-3.99 Years
7.2%
3.3%
14.6%
15.3%
9.6%
13.8%
7.8%
7.8%
10.4%
4.00-4.99 Years
10.1%
6.7%
11.8%
21.5%
4.2%
8.1%
8.4%
2.0%
11.3%
5.00-5.99 Years
7.1%
3.5%
14.4%
9.5%
1.5%
3.3%
6.0%
2.0%
8.2%
6.00-6.99 Years
7.3%
4.9%
5.6%
5.5%
1.0%
3.7%
3.1%
0.0%
5.7%
7.00-7.99 Years
3.3%
1.5%
3.4%
5.5%
0.4%
1.2%
3.0%
0.0%
3.1%
8.00-8.99 Years
6.9%
12.7%
3.4%
2.6%
1.1%
2.9%
1.8%
0.0%
5.3%
9.00-9.99 Years
3.0%
4.1%
1.7%
1.6%
0.0%
0.4%
1.2%
0.0%
2.2%
10.00-10.99 Years
3.5%
2.9%
1.3%
1.4%
0.3%
0.8%
1.2%
0.0%
2.2%
11.00-11.99 Years
2.1%
2.1%
0.6%
0.9%
0.1%
0.1%
1.2%
0.0%
1.3%
12.00-12.99 Years
2.7%
4.6%
0.4%
0.6%
0.0%
0.1%
0.9%
0.0%
1.7%
13.00-13.99 Years
1.9%
1.7%
0.3%
1.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.6%
0.0%
1.1%
12.00-14.99 Years
1.2%
2.5%
0.2%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.6%
0.0%
0.8%
15.00-15.99 Years
2.3%
0.8%
0.2%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
1.0%
16.00-16.99 Years
1.1%
5.8%
0.2%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.0%
1.0%
17.00-17.99 Years
1.5%
1.2%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.7%
18.00-18.99 Years
1.0%
0.7%
0.0%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.0%
0.5%
19.00-19.99 Years
1.6%
5.6%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
1.2%
20+ Years
16.8%
27.7%
0.7%
0.6%
0.3%
0.4%
2.1%
0.0%
9.3%
Grand Total
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
5+ Years
63.5%
82.3%
32.6%
30.2%
4.9%
13.0%
22.5%
2.0%
45.2%
10+ Years
35.8%
55.6%
4.1%
5.6%
0.8%
1.6%
7.5%
0.0%
20.8%
Life Sentence
8.5%
3.6%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
3.5%
Death Sentence
0.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
Figure 7: Median Time-to-be-Served in Years by Most Serious Current Offense Category
12.38
6.80
4.07
3.22
2.15
2.04
1.93
1.51
0.00
3.00
6.00
9.00
12.00
15.00
Sex Offense
Violent Offense
Drug Trafficking
Property Offense
DUI
Escape or Related
Drug Possession
Public Order/Morals20
Tables 2 and 3 provide some other interesting perspectives on the prison population. Consider, for instance, the population of inmates with TTBS less than one year (2,076 =5.1%). While it is generally believed that a good share of this group consists of DUI inmates serving the mandatory minimum term of 4-8 months, in reality that number is relatively small (334). Although approximately 1,200-1,300 such inmates are admitted to the department in a year, these inmates turn over very rapidly due to the short length of stay, and tend not to accumulate. In fact, only about one-quarter of inmates committed with the mandatory flat term are present in the population at any given time. Primarily because of this, fewer DUI inmates, 432=15.2%, are serving sentences under one year than is the case for drug possession (559=21.8%).
Table 4 shows the median TTBS broken out by the most serious current offense. As expected, most of the offenses with the longest terms are violent and sex offenses. Of the 31 offenses with a median TTBS at or exceeding the overall median of 4.28 years, 23 or 74.2% are violent or sex offenses. Of the remaining 54 offenses, 16 or 29.6% are violent or sex offenses. Seven (7) of the nine (9) sex offenses listed have a median TTBS exceeding 8 years.
Table 4: Median Total Time-to-be-Served by Most Serious Current Offense*
Most Serious
Median
Current Offense
Inmates
Time-to-be-Served
First Degree Murder
1,356
Life
Second Degree Murder
1,210
18.99
Dangerous or Deadly Assault by Prisoner or Juvenile
48
15.36
Sexual Conduct with a Minor
1,362
14.75
Continuous Sexual Abuse of a Child
33
14.74
Sexual Assault
442
13.74
Molestation of a Child
1,452
13.74
Manslaughter
775
9.77
Sexual Exploitation of a Minor
213
9.75
Prisoners who Commit Assault with Intent to Incite to Riot or Participate in Riot
24
9.04
Burglary in the First Degree
475
8.80
Drive by Shooting
230
8.79
Kidnapping
970
8.79
Child Prostitution
33
8.36
Luring a Minor for Sexual Exploitation
23
8.36
Armed Robbery
2,767
8.12
Involving or Using Minors in Drug Offenses
26
7.74
Discharging a Firearm at a Structure
88
6.28
Arson of an Occupied Structure
69
6.00
Participating in or Assisting a Criminal Syndicate
88
5.86
Fraudulent Schemes and Artifices
452
5.78
Promoting Prison Contraband
209
5.05
Negligent Homicide
71
4.66
Theft of Means of Transportation
2,676
4.60
Child or Vulnerable Adult Abuse
220
4.58
Aggravated Taking of Identity of Another Person or Entity
178
4.50
Conducting a Chop Shop
35
4.37
Trafficking in Stolen Property
730
4.32
Aggravated Assault
4,017
4.29
Trafficking in Dangerous Drugs
2,412
4.29
Sexual Abuse
153
4.28
21
Table 4: Total Time-to-be-Served by Most Serious Current Offense (continued)*
Most Serious
Median
Current Offense
Inmates
Time-to-be-Served
Trafficking in the Identity of Another Person or Entity
66
4.11
Burglary in the Second Degree
1,339
4.08
Trafficking in Narcotic Drugs
2,069
4.07
Illegal Control of or Illegally Conducting an Enterprise
46
3.75
Failure to Stop: Accidents Involving Death or Personal Injuries
41
3.65
Aggravated Robbery
203
3.43
Burglary in the Third Degree
1,051
3.22
Participating in or Assisting a Criminal Street Gang
28
3.00
Taking or Knowingly Accepting Identity of Another Person or Entity
251
3.00
Stalking
22
2.90
Money Laundering
28
2.89
Misconduct Involving Weapons
1,361
2.80
Robbery
299
2.79
Theft
806
2.79
Trafficking in Marijuana
1,477
2.57
Threatening or Intimidating
28
2.39
Forgery
884
2.37
Shoplifting
155
2.36
DUI
2,834
2.15
Sex Offender Registration Violation
286
2.14
Theft by Extortion
13
2.04
Possession of Dangerous Drugs
1,199
1.93
Possession of Narcotic Drugs
708
1.93
Use of Wire Communication or Electronic Communication in Drug Related Transactions
16
1.93
Arson of a Structure or Property
15
1.93
Unlawful Discharge of Firearms
14
1.83
Escape in the Second Degree
88
1.61
Unlawful Flight from Pursuing Law Enforcement Vehicle
201
1.51
Failure to Appear in the First Degree
15
1.42
Aggravated Domestic Violence
118
1.31
Unlawful Use of Means of Transportation
207
1.30
Aggravated Harassment
23
1.29
Smuggling
28
1.18
Unlawful Imprisonment
14
1.17
Criminal Damage
68
1.11
Theft of a Credit Card or Obtaining a Credit Card by Fraudulent Means
78
1.10
Resisting Arrest
73
1.08
Prostitution
21
1.08
Disorderly Conduct (Reckless Use of Weapon)
85
1.07
Hindering Prosecution in the First Degree
20
0.95
Criminal Trespass in the First Degree
93
0.89
Endangerment
109
0.86
Criminal Impersonation
35
0.71
Possession of Burglary Tools
79
0.71
Criminal Simulation
10
0.65
Possession of Marijuana
190
0.65
Possession, Manufacture, Delivery and Advertisement of Drug Paraphernalia
458
0.65
Criminal Possession of a Forgery Device
67
0.64
*Only new code offenses with counts of ten or more are included
Two of the major determinants of TTBS are the felony class of the offense and the applicability of a sentencing enhancement statute such as A.R.S. §13-703: Repetitive Offenders, A.R.S. §13-22
704: Dangerous Offenders, and §13-705: Dangerous Crimes against Children. Tables 5 and 6, which apply only to new code inmates serving a term of years, show how these factors work together to determine the sentence imposed by the court. In this case, the sentence is the total sentence imposed by the court rather than the time the inmate will serve. Average sentence length is calculated as the mean rather than the median, which explains in part why the overall average (6.65 years) is greater than before (4.28 years). The other reason the mean sentence is greater than the median TTBS is that the latter does not include good time credits.
Table 5: Sentencing Enhancement Category by Felony Class-Most Serious Current Offense*
Sentence Enhancement Category
Felony Class-Most Serious Current Offense*
Grand
A.R.S. §13-703/704/705
1
2
3
4
5
6
Total
Dangerous/Repetitive 2
6
116
48
16
2
2
190
Dangerous/Repetitive 1
7
109
52
18
2
4
192
Dangerous/Non-Repetitive
687
3,053
1,680
120
10
57
5,607
Non-Dangerous/Repetitive 2
0
363
246
504
53
47
1,213
Non-Dangerous/Repetitive 1
7
1,141
2,696
3,089
311
259
7,503
Non-Dangerous/Non-Repetitive
258
5,061
6,624
6,919
937
1,906
21,705
Dangerous Crime against Children
35
1,593
766
11
1
1
2,407
Grand Total
1,000
11,436
12,112
10,677
1,316
2,276
38,817
*The most serious current offense is selected as the offense with the longest sentence
Table 6: Average Sentence Length by Sentencing Enhancement Category and Felony Class
Sentence Enhancement Category
Felony Class-Most Serious Current Offense
All
A.R.S. §13-703/704/705
1
2
3
4
5
6
Offenses
Dangerous/Repetitive 2
17.42
23.23
14.40
8.59
5.00
3.75
19.19
Dangerous/Repetitive 1
21.29
17.70
10.57
5.26
3.25
3.88
14.30
Dangerous/Non-Repetitive
17.95
12.14
8.22
5.66
4.28
2.77
11.43
Non-Dangerous/Repetitive 2
-
18.74
12.54
9.17
5.00
3.71
12.32
Non-Dangerous/Repetitive 1
16.07
10.19
7.06
4.85
2.62
2.16
6.28
Non-Dangerous/Non-Repetitive
18.20
6.37
4.46
2.51
1.64
1.08
4.03
Dangerous Crime against Children
21.63
18.99
9.13
7.91
2.50
2.25
15.83
Grand Total
18.15
10.72
6.09
3.55
2.03
1.31
6.65
Average sentences for Non-Dangerous/Non-Repetitive Offenders convicted of Class 4, 5 and 6 felonies are slightly above the presumptives of 2.5, 1.5 and 1.0 years. In the case of Class 1, 2 and 3 felonies, average sentences are well above the presumptives of 16.0, 5.0 and 3.5 years. The average sentence is also above the presumptive in most cases of Dangerous and Repetitive Offenders. The average sentence for Dangerous Crimes against Children (15.83 years) is slightly below the presumptive of 17.0 years for first degree offenses involving molestation of a child. Remember that sentences for inmates in custody generally exceed those handed out by the court during any given time frame, due to the rapid turnover of shorter sentence inmates.
As indicated in Table 2, 128 inmates received a sentence of death. All 128 were sentenced for first degree murder, and all but three were sentenced for crimes committed since the new 23
criminal code took effect in 1978. Inmates serving life sentences total 1,419. Most lifers (1,100=77.5%) are committed for first degree murder. Of the remaining 319, most were committed for sexual conduct with a minor (78), child molestation (42), armed robbery (40), second degree murder (37), kidnapping (29), sexual assault/rape (23), aggravated assault (21), burglary in the first degree (14), or dangerous or deadly assault by prisoner or juvenile (12). Just eleven inmates received life sentences for non-violent crimes. Most cases of a life sentence imposed for a crime other than first degree murder may be explained by the applicability of A.R.S. §13-705: Dangerous Crimes against Children, A.R.S. §13-708: Offenses Committed while Released from Confinement, or A.R.S. §13-3410: Serious Drug Offender.
Note also that life and death sentences are not reflected in Tables 5 and 6 due to the fact that no definite sentence length may be associated with the offense except for a minimum of 25 or 35 years applicable in some cases. Definite sentences are necessary in order to calculate an average or mean. It is not presumed that lifers will be released at their earliest release eligibility due to fact that release is not automatic as is the case with terms of years under Truth-in-Sentencing. However, in the case of Tables 2, 3 and 4, life and death sentences are included because they lie at the high end of the distribution and do not impact the median TTBS.
Table 7 below shows the custody levels assigned to inmates in each of the three sentence type categories. All death-sentenced inmates occupy maximum custody beds at the Eyman prison complex in Florence (126 males) or at the Perryville prison complex (2 females). While all death-sentenced inmates are assigned to maximum custody, the same cannot be said for lifers. Although no lifers may occupy minimum custody beds per department policy, more than half (809=57.0%) are currently classified to medium custody. Of those serving a term of years, just 5,921=15.2% are assigned to close or maximum custody.
Table 7: Custody Level by Sentence Type
Custody
Type of Sentence
Level*
Death Sentence
Life Sentence
Term of Years
Grand Total
Maximum
128
272
2,211
2,611
Close
0
338
3,710
4,048
Medium
0
809
15,698
16,507
Minimum
0
0
17,265
17,265
Grand Total
128
1,419
38,884
40,431
*Custody level assigned by the inmate classification system
Table 8 breaks out each of the eight (8) offense categories by custody level. Most evident is the fact that sex offenders are almost all classified to medium custody. Violent offenders, on the other hand, are pretty well spread out across the four custody levels. Almost two-thirds (63.3%) of inmates committed for non-violent crimes are assigned to minimum custody, with most of the rest assigned to medium custody.
The inmate classification system was revised in 2005 to accommodate changing custody requirements. The current system incorporates the following factors: most serious current 24
offense, most serious prior/other offense, escape history, history of institutional violence, gang affiliation status, current age, and completion of major inmate programs. One of the primary objectives of the system is to keep the most dangerous and disruptive inmates in more secure beds. This naturally includes some inmates committed for less serious crimes. Typically, inmates are re-classified to higher custody beds as the result of serious disciplinary violations.
Table 8: Custody Level by Most Serious Current Offense Category
Most Serious Current
Custody Level
Offense Category
Minimum
Medium
Close
Maximum
Grand Total
Violent Offense
3,641
6,938
2,464
1,810
14,853
Sex Offense
0
3,706
225
116
4,047
Property Offense
5,237
2,921
807
443
9,408
Drug Trafficking
4,129
1,513
257
106
6,005
Drug Possession
1,657
716
131
59
2,563
DUI
2,297
447
71
19
2,834
Escape or Related Offense
275
248
91
56
670
Public Order/Morals Offense
29
18
2
2
51
Grand Total
17,265
16,507
4,048
2,611
40,431
Most Serious Current
Custody Level
Offense Category
Minimum
Medium
Close
Maximum
Grand Total
Violent Offense
24.5%
46.7%
16.6%
12.2%
100.0%
Sex Offense
0.0%
91.6%
5.6%
2.9%
100.0%
Property Offense
55.7%
31.0%
8.6%
4.7%
100.0%
Drug Trafficking
68.8%
25.2%
4.3%
1.8%
100.0%
Drug Possession
64.7%
27.9%
5.1%
2.3%
100.0%
DUI
81.1%
15.8%
2.5%
0.7%
100.0%
Escape or Related Offense
41.0%
37.0%
13.6%
8.4%
100.0%
Public Order/Morals Offense
56.9%
35.3%
3.9%
3.9%
100.0%
Grand Total
42.7%
40.8%
10.0%
6.5%
100.0%
Table 9 below indicates the type of the inmate’s most recent commitment to the department broken out by felony class. By far the largest commitment category is direct court commitment, i.e., a direct sentence to the department without a prior period of probation (26,626=73.3%). The second largest category is probation revocation resulting from a new felony conviction (6,041=14.9%), with the third largest being revocation of probation for a technical violation (3,780=9.3%). Note that cases in which new charges are dropped or dismissed in exchange for a plea to a technical violation are included in the technical violation category. The next to last category includes inmates who have violated the terms of their release from ADC custody and have returned with a new felony conviction (650=1.6%).
25
Table 9: Type of Court Commitment by Felony Class of the Most Serious Current Offense
Type of Court
Felony Class
Grand Total
Commitment
1
2
3
4
5
6
#
%
Direct Court Commitment
2,139
9,979
8,737
6,628
888
1,255
29,626
73.3%
Probation Revocation-New Offense*
139
1,540
2,018
1,975
190
179
6,041
14.9%
Probation Revocation-Technical Violation*
556
1,200
1,211
145
668
3,780
9.3%
Parole Revocation-New Offense*
11
148
208
214
35
34
650
1.6%
Commitment as a Condition of Probation
334
334
0.8%
Grand Total
2,289
12,223
12,163
10,362
1,258
2,136
40,431
100.0%
*Limited to new offenses resulting in felony convictions; “parole” refers to post-release supervision under ADC jurisdiction
The last category is commitment as a condition of probation (334=0.8%). In this case, the offender is sentenced to probation, but is required to serve a short term of 4 to 8 months in the department as a condition of probation. This presently happens only in the case of felony DUI offenders. It should be noted that inmates with the short flat term sentence constitute just 11.8% (about 1 in 12) of the total of 2,834 DUI inmates in custody. This is the case because these inmates turn over very rapidly due to the short length of the term, and tend not to accumulate in the population.
Table 9 applies to the most recent commitment to the department, but may not provide the reason for the inmate’s most recent admission to custody. While the vast majority of inmates (96.7%) are committed by the court as their most recent admission, some are admitted without court involvement. These include technical parole violators (1,020=2.5%), inmates returned from escape (34=0.1%), inmates returned from out-of-state placement (128=0.3%), and foreign nationals returned from deportation at ½ the sentence (164=0.4%). These categories will prove useful at a later stage of the report, where we will be attempting to determine why non-violent first offenders occupy prison beds.
This concludes our preliminary profile of the inmate population. In the next chapter, we begin to probe more deeply into the past histories of Arizona inmates. One of our primary goals will be to determine how many inmates are non-violent first offenders. However, to get to that point, we will first have to determine how many have a history of felony violence. In the next chapter, we will be focus on that issue.
26
Chapter 4: A History of Violence
As previously discussed, the general approach to be used in this report is to categorize the inmate population into clearly defined groups that may be judged individually as to the threat posed to society by the members of the group. However, the analysis really serves a much broader purpose. It provides the first-of-its-kind analysis of the inmate population from top to bottom, from the most serious categories of inmates to the least serious. In attempting to judge seriousness, or public risk, one is the most concerned with the types of crimes for which inmates have been convicted, either in the past or the present. First and foremost, one must take cognizance of the inmate’s history of felony-level violence, including sex offenses. These are the crimes that are of the most concern to the general public and to criminal justice officials alike because of the degree of personal victimization generally involved. While there are exceptions, violent and sex offenses typically result in longer sentences than do other offenses.
In looking at the general issue of violence and sex crime, one naturally begins with current committing offenses. It is appropriate to ask how many inmates are currently committed for a violent or sex crime. From Chapter 3, we know that 18,900=46.7% of inmates are committed for a violent or sex offense as their most serious current offense. However, this does not take into account lesser included offenses. For instance, an inmate might be sentenced to five years for Theft, Class 3 and 2 years for Aggravated Assault, Class 4. Based on either the length of the sentence or felony class, or both, the most serious offense is theft. However, this obviously discounts the violence involved in the aggravated assault.
In addition, ADC classifies offenders as to their current or prior “sex offender status.” This includes the identification of offenders with a “sexual involvement” in the crime not reflected by an actual sex offense conviction. This happens quite often in the case of violent offenses such as murder or kidnapping, but may arise in conjunction with a typically non-violent offense as well.
Beyond lesser included offenses and sexual involvement in convicting offenses, there are a variety of indicators in the ADC database that identify elements of dangerousness or violence that again may not be explicitly reflected in the offense of conviction. Specifically, ADC records incorporate indicators for each committing offense, past or present, of the applicability to the offense of any of the following:
Indicators of Dangerousness or Violence
● A.R.S. §13-704: Dangerous Offenders
● A.R.S. §13-705: Dangerous Crimes against Children
● A.R.S. §13-901.03: Violent Crimes
● Use of a weapon
● Injury to a victim 27
For study purposes, an inmate was considered to be committed for a violent offense if any of above-listed indicators of violence was present and applicable to one or more current offenses. Likewise, any inmate with at most a “sexual involvement” in current offenses was considered to be committed for a “sex-related” offense. With these conventions in place, we were able to identify a total of 21,273 inmates or 52.6% of the population as being currently committed for one or more violent, sex or sex-related offenses. The following identifies the sequence in which the various indicators of violence or sexual involvement were incorporated, as well as the number of additional inmates classified as violent or sex offenders as a result of each indicator.
Violent and Sex Offender Identification Sequence
1) A statutory violent or sex offense is the most serious current offense (18,900=46.7%)
2) A statutory violent or sex offense is a lesser included offense (1,720=4.3%)
3) A current offense is “sex-related” (64=0.2%)
4) A current offense was prosecuted as a dangerous offense (107), a dangerous crime against children (10), or a violent offense (4) (113=0.3%)
5) ADC records indicate injury to a victim or the use of a weapon (485=1.2%)
Overall, 2,373 inmates or 5.9% of the population were classified as violent or sex offenders based on information beyond the category of the most serious current offense. The majority of these inmates (72.5%) were classified as violent or sex offenders based on lesser included offenses. In addition to determining the simple fact of a current violent or sex offense with the expanded definition, we were able to isolate composite categories such as current commitment for both violent and sex offenses. Table 10 below breaks out these composite categories by the felony class of the most serious current committing offense.
Table 10: Current Violent or Sex/Sex-Related Offense by Felony Class
Current Violent and/or
Felony Class-Most Serious Current Offense
Grand
% of
Sex/Sex-Related Offense
1
2
3
4
5
6
Total
Total
Violent Offense Only
2,151
6,188
4,324
2,751
376
585
16,375
40.5%
Sex Offense Only
0
1,539
1,395
293
43
40
3,310
8.2%
Both Violent Offense & Sex Offense
101
966
283
33
11
4
1,398
3.5%
Both Violent Offense & Sex-Related Offense
37
76
31
12
2
9
167
0.4%
Sex-Related Offense Only
0
2
8
7
0
6
23
0.1%
No Violent or Sex/Sex-Related Offense
0
3,452
6,122
7,266
826
1,492
19,158
47.4%
Grand Total
2,289
12,223
12,163
10,362
1,258
2,136
40,431
100.0%
Total Violent or Sex/Sex-Related
2,289
8,771
6,041
3,096
432
644
21,273
52.6%
% Violent or Sex/Sex-Related
100.0%
71.8%
49.7%
29.9%
34.3%
30.1%
52.6%
-
Of the 21,273 inmates currently committed for a violent or sex offense according to criteria 1-5, 17,940 or 84.3% were committed for at least one violent offense and 4,898 or 23.0% for at least one sex or sex-related offense. The vast majority (17,901 or 80.4%) of inmates committed for violent or sex/sex-related offenses are Class 1, 2 or 3 felons. Table 11 below identifies the statutory description and felony class of the most serious current violent or sex offense where an A.R.S. description is available, i.e., in the 20,620 cases where criteria 1 or 2 was applicable. The table also includes the 653 inmates classified as violent or sex offenders based on criteria 3-5. 28
Table 11: Most Serious Current Violent or Sex Offense
Most Serious Current
Felony Class-Most Serious Current Offense
Grand
% of
Violent or Sex Offense
1
2
3
4
5
6
Total
Total
Aggravated Assault
495
2,894
373
190
470
4,422
20.8%
Armed Robbery
2,538
227
7
2,772
13.0%
Misconduct Involving Weapons
3
4
1,943
32
57
2,039
9.6%
Molestation of a Child
785
665
1
1
1,452
6.8%
Sexual Conduct with a Minor
768
573
3
1
28
1,373
6.5%
First Degree Murder
1,175
171
11
1
1,358
6.4%
Second Degree Murder
1,036
171
2
1
1,210
5.7%
Kidnapping
889
74
14
1
978
4.6%
Manslaughter
746
29
1
776
3.6%
Burglary in the First Degree
408
67
7
482
2.3%
Sexual Assault
361
82
443
2.1%
Robbery
313
41
5
359
1.7%
Endangerment
2
332
334
1.6%
Sex Offender Registration Violation
1
283
17
10
311
1.5%
Child or Vulnerable Adult Abuse
65
68
76
30
34
273
1.3%
Drive By Shooting
220
9
1
230
1.1%
Sexual Exploitation of a Minor
123
92
215
1.0%
Aggravated Robbery
177
26
1
10
214
1.0%
Sexual Abuse
3
122
16
15
5
161
0.8%
Disorderly Conduct (Reckless Use of Weapon)
152
152
0.7%
Aggravated Domestic Violence
1
121
21
143
0.7%
Participating in or Assisting a Criminal Syndicate
44
45
6
2
97
0.5%
Discharging a Firearm at a Structure
71
18
3
92
0.4%
Negligent Homicide
75
75
0.4%
Murder (Old Code)
72
3
75
0.4%
Arson of an Occupied Structure
58
9
3
70
0.3%
Dangerous or Deadly Assault by Prisoner
6
32
10
48
0.2%
Aggravated Harassment
8
32
40
0.2%
Continuous Sexual Abuse of a Child
21
13
34
0.2%
Child Prostitution
17
15
32
0.2%
Threatening or Intimidating
17
7
7
31
0.1%
Unlawful Discharge of Firearms
3
1
27
31
0.1%
Participating in or Assisting a Criminal Street Gang
10
18
1
29
0.1%
Stalking
12
3
12
27
0.1%
Unlawful Imprisonment
25
25
0.1%
Prisoners who Commit Assault with Intent to Riot
16
8
24
0.1%
Luring a Minor for Sexual Exploitation
20
2
1
23
0.1%
Destruction of or Injury to Public Jail
17
1
18
0.1%
Rape (Old Code)
18
18
0.1%
Arson of a Structure or Property
14
3
17
0.1%
Theft by Extortion
6
1
5
2
14
0.1%
Custodial Interference
5
2
3
10
0.0%
Public Sexual Indecency to a Minor
8
1
9
0.0%
Domestic Violence
1
7
1
9
0.0%
Riot
2
6
8
0.0%
Prisoner Assault with Bodily Fluids
7
7
0.0%
Indecent Exposure to a Person under 15
7
7
0.0%
Other Violent or Sex Offense
18
2
23
4
6
53
0.2%
Violent or Sex Offender Indicator (Items 3-5)
97
256
238
31
31
653
3.1%
Grand Total
2,289
8,160
5,547
3,443
549
1,285
21,273
100.0% 29
As indicated, aggravated assault is the most frequent current violent or sex offense, accounting for 20.8% of the total of 21,273 current violent and sex offenders. Armed robbery (13.0%), misconduct involving weapons (9.6%), molestation of a child (6.8%), sexual conduct with a minor (6.5%), first degree murder (6.4%), second degree murder (5.7%), kidnapping (4.6%), manslaughter (3.6%), burglary in the first degree (2.3%), and sexual assault (2.1%) follow. Taken together, these eleven offenses account for 17,305 or 81.3% of current violent and sex offenders and 42.8% of the total prison population. Just 3.1% of current violent and sex offenders were identified as such by means of an application of criteria 3-5. Most of the latter are convicted of Class 2-4 felonies (90.5%).
It may be noted that the distribution of felony class is different in Tables 10 and 11. This is because the felony class in Table 10 is the highest among all current offenses, while the felony class in Table 11 is the highest among all current violent and sex offenses only. As a result, the offense listed in Table 11 is occasionally of a lower felony class than that listed for the inmate in Table 11. For instance, about half (641) of the 1,285 inmates with a Class 6 felony as the most serious current violent or sex offense are actually higher class felons when non-violent crimes are taken into account (Table 10). Of the two tables, Table 11 provides a more accurate picture of the most serious current violent or sex offense, while Table 10 provides a more complete description of the inmate and all of his or her current offenses. In any case, taken together, Tables 10 and 11 provide a relatively complete picture of the crimes for which current violent and sex offenders are committed to the department.
Summary on Current Violent and Sex Offenses
● 17,940=44.4% of inmates are currently committed for at least one violent offense
● 4,898=12.1% of inmates are currently committed for at least one sex offense
● 21,273=52.6% of inmates are currently committed for at least one violent or sex offense
● 15,996=39.6% of inmates are currently committed for a Class 1, 2 or 3 violent or sex offense
● 5,277=13.0% of inmates are currently committed for a Class 4, 5 or 6 violent or sex offense
30
Prior Felony Violence
From the screening accomplished so far, 21,273=52.6% of Arizona inmates have been identified as being currently committed for one or more violent or sex offenses according to the expanded definition developed in this chapter. However, this obviously does not take into account prior offenses of the same type. To obtain a more comprehensive measure of inmates’ histories of violence and sex crime, prior offenses for which information was available were screened in the same manner as before, using criteria 1-5. These offenses included prior offenses for which the offender had been committed to the department as well as the most serious prior felony as identified by the inmate classification system. Classification staff record a statutory designation for the most serious prior juvenile or adult felony in cases where one may be identified from the inmate’s criminal history. This information was also screened for the presence of violent or sex offenses. As a result of this screening, a total of 11,608 or 28.7% of inmates were identified as having a prior history of one or more felony violent or sex offenses.
The question then remains as to how many inmates have a current or prior history of violence or sex crime. Since there is a degree of overlap between the two groups, it is necessary to look at all four logically possible combinations of current and prior offenses, i.e., to determine how many inmates have no history of either type, how many have a history of one type but not the other, and how many have a history of both types. Table 12 below accomplishes this by showing the number and percentage of inmates who have any particular combination of current violent or sex offenses and prior violent or sex offenses.
Table 12: Current and Prior History of Violent or Sex Offenses
Current/Prior History of
Violent or Sex Offenses
Inmates
% Total
No Current Violent or Sex Offense
19,158
47.4%
No Prior Violent or Sex Offense
13,974
34.6%
Prior Violent or Sex Offense
5,184
12.8%
Current Violent or Sex Offense
21,273
52.6%
No Prior Violent or Sex Offense
14,849
36.7%
Prior Violent or Sex Offense
6,424
15.9%
Grand Total
40,431
100.0%
Total “Prior” Violent or Sex Offense
11,608
28.7%
Total “Current or Prior” Violent or Sex Offense
26,457
65.4%
As shown in the table, including priors in addition to current offenses increases the number of violent and sex offenders from 21,273 to 26,457 or 65.4% of the population. This increase is due to the 5,184 inmates (12.8% of the population) who have prior but no current violent or sex offenses. In addition, the table identifies the fact that 6,424 or 15.9% of inmates have both current and prior violent or sex offenses. This reflects the degree of overlap between the two groups as alluded to above. Figure 8 below provides a visual summary of what we know about the felony-level violent and sex offense histories of Arizona inmates. 31
Figure 8: Summary of the Violent and Sex Offense Histories of Arizona Inmates
With this additional screening for prior violence, we can now identify the fact that 13,974=34.6% of inmates have no current or prior history of felony-level violent or sex crimes. For convenience in terminology, we will henceforth refer to these inmates simply as “non-violent offenders” and their counterparts as “violent offenders.” Now that we’ve firmly established that about 35% of inmates are non-violent offenders, it is appropriate to look at the crimes for which these inmates are currently committed to the department. Table 13 initiates that process by unveiling the general category and felony class of the most serious current committing offense.
Table 13: Most Serious Current Offense by Felony Class-Non-Violent Offenders
Most Serious Current
Felony Class
Grand Total
Offense Category*
2
3
4
5
6
#
%
Property Offense
548
2,989
1,760
271
525
6,093
43.6%
Drug Trafficking
2,092
1,542
593
17
28
4,272
30.6%
DUI
1,671
5
24
1,700
12.2%
Drug Possession
1,040
75
469
1,584
11.3%
Escape or Related Offense
52
37
6
160
43
298
2.1%
Public Order/Morals Offense
2
16
9
27
0.2%
Grand Total
2,692
4,568
5,072
544
1,098
13,974
100.0%
% of Total
19.3%
32.7%
36.3%
3.9%
7.9%
100.0%
-
*Based on the current offense with the highest felony class
As might be expected, almost half (43.6%) of non-violent offenders are in prison for property crimes. However, drug trafficking accounts for a good share of the rest (30.6%). Taken together, drug possession and DUI account for just 23.5% of the non-violent population. Most non-violent offenders are imprisoned for Class 2-4 felonies (12,332=88.2%). The least serious categories of committing offenses, non-violent Class 5 and 6 felonies, account for just 1,642 or 4.1% of the prison population; about 1 in every 25 inmates.
52.6%
28.7%
15.9%
65.4%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
Current Offense
Prior Offense
Current & Prior Offenses
Current or Prior Offense32
Chapter 5: Criminal History
In the last chapter, we were able to determine that 11,608 or 28.7% of inmates have prior felony-level violent or sex offenses. That determination enabled us to classify 26,457=65.4% of inmates as having a current or prior history of felony violent or sex offenses. In this chapter, we expand our view to determine how many inmates have a prior felony record of any kind. This will eventually lead to a determination of the number of non-violent first offenders in custody, a major goal of the present research. In any case, prior criminal record provides an important dimension on which to measure the inmate population. Repeat offenders tend to be imprisoned more frequently by the courts than are first offenders, plus they often receive longer sentences, sometimes as a result of statutory sentencing enhancements. Recidivism studies conducted by the department and other agencies continue to demonstrate conclusively that repeat offenders record higher recidivism rates following release than do first offenders. For all of these reasons, it is important that we determine how many inmates have prior felony records and to understand the sources of criminal history data.
While misdemeanor records are of some importance, the primary focus of this study was on the prior “felony” records of inmates. We were concerned not only with the simple fact of a prior felony, but also with the number of prior felonies on record for the inmate. Furthermore, we decided to include both juvenile and adult felonies, as well as felonies committed in other states and jurisdictions. The goal was to obtain the most comprehensive view possible of the inmate’s felony criminal history. As was the case with violent and sex offenses, there are a number of indicators of prior felony record in the ADC database.1 They are as follows:
Felony Criminal History
1) Number of Prior Adult Felony Convictions
2) Number of Prior Adult Felony Probations
3) Number of Juvenile Felony Adjudications
4) Number of Juvenile Commitments
5) Number of Prior Felony Confinements
6) Number of Prior ADC Commitments
7) Number of Prior ADC Sentences
8) Prior Felony Conviction for a Sex or Sex-Related Offense
9) Probation or ADC Release Violation with a New Felony Conviction
10) Sentencing pursuant to A.R.S. §13-703: Repetitive Offenders
11) Sentencing pursuant to A.R.S. §13-708: Offense Committed while Released from Confinement
12) Most Serious Prior Felony from inmate classification
13) Post-Commitment Felony Conviction
Based on a review of all thirteen categories, we arrive at the conclusion that 33,896 inmates or 83.8% of the inmate population have prior felonies of one type or another.
1 See the Appendix for more detail on criminal history sources. 33
With so many criminal history categories to work with, it is important to understand the contributions of individual categories. For each of the 13 criminal history categories, Table 14 below identifies:
1. The number of inmates with that category applicable
2. The percentage of all inmates (40,431) with that category applicable
3. The percentage of all inmates with priors (33,896) with that category applicable
Table 14: Applicability of Criminal History Categories
Inmates
% of Population
% of Total
with Category
with Category
Inmates
Criminal History Category
Applicable
Applicable
with Priors
Most Serious Prior Felony-Classification
27,511
68.0%
81.2%
Prior Adult Felony Conviction
23,681
58.6%
69.9%
Prior ADC Sentence
19,528
48.3%
57.6%
Prior ADC Commitment
17,947
44.4%
52.9%
Prior Adult Felony Probation
13,865
34.3%
40.9%
Repetitive Offender
11,901
29.4%
35.1%
Juvenile Felony Adjudication
8,848
21.9%
26.1%
Probation/ADC Release Violator-New Felony Conviction
6,691
16.6%
19.7%
Prior Felony Confinement
4,837
12.0%
14.3%
Juvenile Commitment
4,248
10.5%
12.5%
Prior Felony Conviction-Sex Offense
916
2.3%
2.7%
Post-Commitment Felony Conviction
647
1.6%
1.9%
Offense Committed while Released from Confinement
624
1.5%
1.8%
Prior Felony-One or More of the Above Applicable
33,896
83.8%
100.0%
Given the critical nature of this source, recognizing both juvenile and adult priors, it is not surprising that the item “Most Serious Prior Felony” from inmate classification ranks #1 among the 13 sources, classifying 68.0% of inmates as having prior felonies. This item also leads in being applicable to 81.2% of the 33,896 inmates with priors. The intake item Prior Adult Felony Conviction ranks #2, applying to 58.6% of inmates and accounting for 69.9% of inmates with priors. Prior ADC Sentence and Prior ADC Commitment, roughly equal in contribution, differ in that some inmates are sentenced on multiple occasions for different crimes before commitment to custody—in this case 1,581 inmates. Fewer inmates have prior adult felony probations (13,865) than have prior ADC commitments (17,947).
Finally, 29.4% of inmates and 35.1% of inmates with priors have been prosecuted pursuant to A.R.S. §13-703: Repetitive Offenders. This includes inmates prosecuted as such for either a current or a prior felony. It should be noted that not all inmates with prior adult felony convictions are eligible for sentencing under this statute due to the time frames associated with historical priors. Unless circumstances dictate otherwise, inmates may plead guilty with the agreement from the prosecutor that the allegation of historical priors will be dropped. This would account in part for the fact that only about half of inmates with prior adult felony convictions (23,681) have been successfully prosecuted as repetitive offenders (11,901). 34
Table 15 below reveals the number of sources of criminal history data that were applicable to any given inmate. While five (5) was the most frequent number of sources, as many as 5,291 inmates (15.6%) had a sole source for criminal history data.
Table 15: Number of Criminal History Sources
Number of Criminal
Inmates
History Sources
#
%
1
5,291
15.6%
2
4,515
13.3%
3
4,431
13.1%
4
4,169
12.3%
5
5,583
16.5%
6
5,489
16.2%
7
3,223
9.5%
8
1,014
3.0%
9
162
0.5%
10
18
0.1%
11
1
0.0%
Grand Total
33,896
100.0%
Table 16 records which source was the sole source for the 5,291 inmates with a sole source. It reveals that Most Serious Prior Felony from inmate classification was most often the sole source, accounting for 45.8% of all sole source criminal histories. Despite the fact that this source was the sole source for so many inmates, just 8.8% of inmates with this source as a contributing source had this source as the sole source. A higher percentage of sole sources applied to the source Probation/ADC Release Violator-New Felony Conviction (10.0%). Due to its overlap with Prior ADC Sentence, Most Serious Prior Felony, and Prior Adult Felony Conviction, Prior ADC Commitment was the sole source in just 35 cases. These were cases where the inmate was recommitted to custody upon violation of a felony probation that was being served consecutive to the original prison sentence. In such a case, the felony probation was not counted as a prior.
Table 16: Sole Sources of Criminal History
Sole
% Sole
Criminal History Category
Source
Source
% Total
Most Serious Prior Felony-Classification
2,424
8.8%
45.8%
Prior Adult Felony Conviction
1,173
5.0%
22.2%
Probation/ADC Release Violator-New Felony Conviction
662
10.0%
12.5%
Juvenile Felony Adjudication
447
5.1%
8.4%
Prior ADC Sentence
222
1.1%
4.2%
Repetitive Offender
153
1.3%
2.9%
Prior Adult Felony Probation
84
0.6%
1.6%
Prior Felony Confinement
55
1.1%
1.0%
Prior ADC Commitment
35
0.2%
0.7%
Juvenile Commitment
22
0.5%
0.4%
Prior Felony Conviction-Sex Offense
12
1.3%
0.2%
Offense Committed while Released from Confinement
2
0.3%
0.0%
Post-Commitment Felony Conviction
0
0.0%
0.0%
Grand Total
5,291
15.6%
100.0% 35
Some of the sources turned out to be sole sources because of missing data from other sources. Intake items such as the number of prior adult felony convictions were occasionally coded as missing due to the lack of a presentence report or other original source document. Thus, it was important that backup sources were available, not only for this study, but also for departmental operations such as inmate classification.
For the record, information used to code items dealing with specific kinds of prior offenses, e.g., violent and sex offenses, was from ADC offense and classification data sources already counted as separate sources. Accordingly, this particular category of prior record information was not considered as a separate source in conjunction with the criminal history source analysis.
While several of the criminal history items provide actual numbers of priors, several do not. Nonetheless, it was deemed appropriate to perform a calculation of the number of prior felonies in any given inmate’s record. Given the large number of sources of criminal history data, it was necessary to combine sources in various ways in order to arrive as some reasonable comprehensive measure of priors. This was accomplished by first calculating the number of prior adult felonies from the various sources of adult record information, then performing the same operation for juvenile felonies, and then adding the results of the two operations. Whenever overlapping categories could not be reconciled, the decision was made not to add. This would apply, for instance, in cases where the inmate was sentenced as a repetitive offender and also had a prior adult felony conviction. Appropriately so, in such cases, it was not assumed that the prior felony and the offense successfully alleged as a prior were different offenses.
Here, then, is the distribution of the number of prior felonies calculated as described above:
Table 17: Number of Prior Felonies
Number of
Inmates
Prior Felonies
#
%
None
6,535
16.2%
One
11,257
27.8%
Two
5,738
14.2%
Three
4,435
11.0%
Four
3,417
8.5%
Five
2,566
6.3%
Six
1,813
4.5%
Seven
1,407
3.5%
Eight
964
2.4%
Nine
615
1.5%
Ten or More
1,684
4.2%
Grand Total
40,431
100.0%
Two or More
22,639
56.0%
Three or More
16,901
41.8%
Table 17 identifies 27.8% of inmates as having one prior felony, 56.0% as having two or more, and 41.8% as having three or more. Across the inmate population, the median number of prior felonies is two (2) and the average or mean is 2.96. Table 19 below breaks out the number of prior felonies by most serious current offense category, and is sorted by the % of inmates in the category who have two or more priors. 36
Table 18: Number of Prior Felonies by Most Serious Current Offense Category
Most Serious Current
Number of Prior Felonies
Grand
Avg.
%
%
Offense Category
0
1
2
3+
Total
#
1+
2+
Drug Possession
127
513
407
1,516
2,563
3.84
95.0%
75.0%
Escape or Related Offense
31
152
101
386
670
3.92
95.4%
72.7%
Property Offense
472
2,412
1,416
5,108
9,408
3.74
95.0%
69.3%
Public Order/Morals Offense
8
8
8
27
51
3.61
84.3%
68.6%
DUI
310
986
578
960
2,834
2.44
89.1%
54.3%
Violent Offense
2,776
4,124
1,964
5,989
14,853
2.92
81.3%
53.5%
Drug Trafficking
1,533
1,651
779
2,042
6,005
2.36
74.5%
47.0%
Sex Offense
1,278
1,411
485
873
4,047
1.80
68.4%
33.6%
Grand Total
6,535
11,257
5,738
16,901
40,431
2.96
83.8%
56.0%
% of Total
16.2%
27.8%
14.2%
41.8%
100.0%
-
-
-
From Table 18, we can see that the percentage of inmates with two or more priors (56.0%) ranges from 33.6% for sex offenses to 75.0% for drug possession. DUI inmates fall about halfway between at 54.3%. Average priors are the lowest for sex offenders (1.80), drug traffickers (2.36), and DUI inmates (2.44); and are the highest for inmates committed for escape and related offenses (3.92). The high frequency of multiple priors for inmates committed for drug possession explains, at least in part, why these inmates are occupying prison beds. It is because of their repetitive criminal behavior rather than the severity of the offense.
Table 19 provides a look at the frequency of prior felonies broken out for individual offenses. The table is sorted by the weighted average of priors assuming a maximum of three per inmate. This negates the effect that a large number of priors can have on the average. From an examination of the table, it is clear that inmates with the most priors tend to be committed either for less serious offenses, e.g., possession of narcotic drugs, prostitution, shoplifting, and resisting arrest, or for offenses normally committed while the inmate is in custody, such as promoting prison contraband and dangerous or deadly assault by prisoner or juvenile. Obviously, offenders who commit less serious crimes receive lesser penalties and thus have more opportunities to accumulate priors. However, it is also a fact that the less serious the crime, the less the likelihood of being committed to prison. Accordingly, those among less serious offenders who are committed tend to be the ones with the worst criminal histories.
Among high volume offenses, theft of means of transportation ranks the highest on criminal history, with burglary in the third degree not far behind. Notably, those who traffic in marijuana have lesser criminal histories than those who traffic in narcotics or dangerous drugs. Most sex offenses are near the bottom of the list, with continuous sexual abuse of a child showing the lowest frequency of priors. Sex offenders tend to have lesser criminal histories for several reasons. For one, they tend to specialize in that type of crime. Relatively few sex offenders are involved with drugs or property crime, and most do not show a tendency to violence such as aggravated assault. Also, sex offenders tend to be older than inmates committed for other types of crime and tend to receive longer sentences. This translates into less opportunity to accumulate priors. Finally, it is generally believed that many sex offenses go unreported, or at least are less often reported than other serious crimes. This translates into lower recidivism rates and shorter criminal histories. 37
Table 19: Frequency of Priors by Most Serious Current Committing Offense
Most Serious Current
Number of Priors
Weighted
Committing Offense
Inmates
1+
2+
3+
Average*
Possession of Narcotic Drugs
708
97.5%
85.7%
75.4%
2.59
Prisoners who Commit Assault with Intent to Incite to Riot
24
100.0%
79.2%
79.2%
2.58
Promoting Prison Contraband
209
98.6%
83.3%
72.2%
2.54
Prostitution
21
95.2%
90.5%
66.7%
2.52
Dangerous or Deadly Assault by Prisoner or Juvenile
48
100.0%
77.1%
66.7%
2.44
Aggravated Identity Theft
178
97.2%
78.7%
66.9%
2.43
Shoplifting
155
98.1%
81.3%
63.2%
2.43
Failure to Appear in the First Degree
15
100.0%
80.0%
60.0%
2.40
Sex Offender Registration Violation
286
99.7%
78.0%
58.4%
2.36
Resisting Arrest
73
95.9%
76.7%
60.3%
2.33
Theft of Means of Transportation
2,676
97.9%
74.4%
59.4%
2.32
Burglary in the Third Degree
1,051
97.8%
73.9%
59.6%
2.31
Trafficking in the Identity of Another Person or Entity
66
97.0%
74.2%
57.6%
2.29
Possession of Dangerous Drugs
1,199
96.6%
74.1%
57.5%
2.28
Robbery
299
92.0%
72.6%
59.9%
2.24
Identity Theft
251
94.4%
73.7%
56.2%
2.24
Possession of Marijuana
190
93.7%
71.6%
57.4%
2.23
Misconduct Involving Weapons
1,361
97.6%
71.1%
54.3%
2.23
Trafficking in Stolen Property
730
95.8%
69.6%
56.6%
2.23
Participating in or Assisting a Criminal Syndicate
88
94.3%
69.3%
59.1%
2.23
Fraudulent Schemes and Artifices
452
93.6%
69.5%
57.3%
2.20
Forgery
884
96.8%
69.7%
52.4%
2.19
Burglary in the Second Degree
1,339
95.1%
68.5%
55.4%
2.19
Unlawful Flight from Pursuing Law Enforcement Vehicle
201
92.5%
71.1%
53.2%
2.17
Stalking
22
95.5%
63.6%
45.5%
2.05
Conducting a Chop Shop
35
94.3%
62.9%
45.7%
2.03
Unlawful Use of Means of Transportation
207
94.2%
63.8%
45.4%
2.03
Aggravated Domestic Violence
118
93.2%
60.2%
47.5%
2.01
Hindering Prosecution in the First Degree
20
95.0%
65.0%
40.0%
2.00
Escape in the Second Degree
88
100.0%
59.1%
39.8%
1.99
Aggravated Robbery
203
87.7%
64.0%
45.3%
1.97
Theft of a Credit Card-Obtaining Credit Card by Fraud
78
91.0%
64.1%
41.0%
1.96
Arson of a Structure or Property
15
86.7%
53.3%
53.3%
1.93
Failure to Stop: Accidents Involving Death or Personal Injuries
41
87.8%
56.1%
48.8%
1.93
Participating in or Assisting a Criminal Street Gang
28
100.0%
53.6%
35.7%
1.89
Possession, Manufacture, etc. of Drug Paraphernalia
458
87.8%
60.9%
39.3%
1.88
Criminal Trespass in the First Degree
93
81.7%
60.2%
45.2%
1.87
Criminal Damage
68
82.4%
58.8%
45.6%
1.87
Theft
806
87.0%
56.8%
40.7%
1.84
Trafficking in Narcotic Drugs
2,069
83.6%
57.1%
43.0%
1.84
Armed Robbery
2,767
83.9%
56.3%
43.2%
1.83
Disorderly Conduct (Reckless Use of Weapon)
85
85.9%
55.3%
41.2%
1.82
Child Prostitution
33
87.9%
57.6%
36.4%
1.82
Burglary in the First Degree
475
83.6%
53.3%
44.4%
1.81
Aggravated Assault
4,017
83.3%
54.2%
41.3%
1.79
Murder (Old Code)
72
83.3%
52.8%
41.7%
1.78
Rape (Old Code)
18
77.8%
61.1%
38.9%
1.78
DUI
2,834
89.1%
54.3%
33.9%
1.77
Threatening or Intimidating
28
85.7%
53.6%
35.7%
1.75
Unlawful Imprisonment
14
92.9%
42.9%
35.7%
1.71
38
Table 19: Frequency of Priors by Most Serious Current Committing Offense (continued)
Most Serious Current
Number of Priors
Weighted
Committing Offense
Inmates
1+
2+
3+
Average*
Arson of an Occupied Structure
69
79.7%
56.5%
33.3%
1.70
Illegal Control of or Illegally Conducting an Enterprise
46
89.1%
45.7%
30.4%
1.65
First Degree Murder
1,356
75.8%
51.6%
37.3%
1.65
Trafficking in Dangerous Drugs
2,412
76.3%
50.0%
36.6%
1.63
Possession of Burglary Tools
79
84.8%
48.1%
30.4%
1.63
Theft by Extortion
13
76.9%
46.2%
38.5%
1.62
Money Laundering
28
85.7%
46.4%
28.6%
1.61
Sexual Assault
442
77.6%
45.9%
35.5%
1.59
Child or Vulnerable Adult Abuse
220
81.4%
45.9%
29.5%
1.57
Aggravated Harassment
23
87.0%
52.2%
17.4%
1.57
Drive by Shooting
230
70.9%
43.0%
34.8%
1.49
Second Degree Murder
1,210
72.4%
44.5%
31.8%
1.49
Criminal Possession of a Forgery Device
67
82.1%
47.8%
17.9%
1.48
Kidnapping
970
69.2%
42.9%
30.6%
1.43
Discharging a Firearm at a Structure
88
67.0%
37.5%
28.4%
1.33
Manslaughter
775
66.5%
36.3%
24.9%
1.28
Luring a Minor for Sexual Exploitation
23
78.3%
30.4%
13.0%
1.22
Criminal Simulation
10
90.0%
20.0%
10.0%
1.20
Sexual Abuse
153
80.4%
24.8%
13.7%
1.19
Criminal Impersonation
35
82.9%
28.6%
5.7%
1.17
Endangerment
109
65.1%
33.0%
18.3%
1.17
Involving or Using Minors in Drug Offenses
26
73.1%
23.1%
19.2%
1.15
Unlawful Discharge of Firearms
14
50.0%
35.7%
28.6%
1.14
Negligent Homicide
71
60.6%
32.4%
21.1%
1.14
Sexual Conduct with a Minor
1,362
61.4%
28.6%
18.1%
1.08
Molestation of a Child
1,452
65.1%
27.3%
15.0%
1.07
Use of Wire or Electronic Communication in Drug Transactions
16
68.8%
25.0%
12.5%
1.06
Trafficking in Marijuana
1,477
58.7%
28.3%
17.6%
1.05
Sexual Exploitation of a Minor
213
62.4%
22.5%
14.6%
1.00
Smuggling
28
57.1%
7.1%
3.6%
0.68
Continuous Sexual Abuse of a Child
33
45.5%
6.1%
3.0%
0.55
Other Offenses
185
86.5%
58.4%
43.2%
1.88
Grand Total
40,431
83.8%
56.0%
41.8%
1.81
In Chapter 4, based on a thorough review of the violence histories of inmates, we were able to determine how many are violent offenders (26,457=65.4%) and how many are non-violent offenders (13,974=34.6%). In Chapter 5, based on a similar review of inmate criminal histories, we have determined how many are repeat offenders (33,896=83.8%) and how many are first felony offenders (6,535=16.2%). Combining this information as shown in Table 20 below allows us to answer one of most important questions one can ask about Arizona prisoners.
39
Table 20: History of Felony Violence by Prior Felony Record
History of Felony Violence by
Prior Felony Record
Inmates
% Total
Violent Offender
26,457
65.4%
First Offender
4,192
10.4%
Repeat Offender
22,265
55.1%
Non-Violent Offender
13,974
34.6%
First Offender
2,343
5.8%
Repeat Offender
11,631
28.8%
Grand Total
40,431
100.0%
Violent or Repeat Offender
38,088
94.2%
Non-Violent First Offender
2,343
5.8%
Our calculations reveal a total of 2,343 Non-Violent First Offenders in Arizona prisons as of September 30, 2009, constituting 5.8% of the inmate population.
Most evident from the above is the fact that 55.1% of the inmate population consists of Violent Repeat Offenders. About half as many are Non-Violent Repeat Offenders (28.8%). Together, these two groups of repeat offenders account for 83.8% of the population. Of the remaining group of 6,535 first offenders, the clear majority (64.2%) are violent offenders (4,192).
Overall, 38,088=94.2% of the inmate population consists of violent and repeat offenders. Approximately 16 of every 17 Arizona inmates is a violent or repeat offender.
Figure 9: The Four Major Inmate Sub-Populations
55.1%
10.4%
28.8%
5.8%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
Violent Repeat Offenders
Violent First Offenders
Non-Violent Repeat Offenders
Non-Violent First Offenders40
Chapter 6: Major Inmate Sub-Populations
In Chapter 5, we took a close look at the criminal histories of Arizona inmates, and documented the fact that 83.8% have prior felony records. Combining this information with that obtained in the previous chapter regarding inmate histories of felony violence, we were able to determine that 94.2% of the inmate population consists of violent and repeat offenders. More specifically, inmates may be divided into four major categories or sub-populations according to their criminal and violence histories as follows:
1. Violent Repeat Offenders (55.1%)
2. Violent First Offenders (10.4%)
3. Non-Violent Repeat Offenders (28.8%)
4. Non-Violent First Offenders (5.8%)
This four-way categorization provides perhaps the most meaningful division of the inmate population when it comes to judging the use of scarce state resources for the confinement of convicted felons. Hypothetically, Violent Repeat Offenders should pose the greatest threat to society in terms of the seriousness of the offenses they’ve committed and the repetitive nature of their criminal acts. Conversely, if our method of categorizing inmates is appropriate, then Non-Violent First Offenders should pose the least threat to society, while the remaining two groups should pose intermediate levels of risk and dangerousness. However, we have yet to offer any real proof that these assumptions are correct. In particular, we know nothing about these four groups other than the conventions that were used to define them. In this chapter, we develop an in-depth profile of the four major inmate sub-populations to allow a more informed judgment about the benefits of incarceration of any given group, as well as the degree of risk or threat posed by any of the four.
To gain a better idea of the make-up of each sub-population, we consider offender and offense-related information grouped into four general categories, including 1) facts related to current offenses and the current commitment by the court, 2) facts related to the sentence imposed by the court as reflected by TTBS (total-time-to-be-served), 3) facts related to the criminal histories of inmates, and 4) other facts concerning the degree of risk inmates pose to society or to other inmates and staff.
We begin with a look at facts related to the inmate’s current offenses and his or her current commitment to the department, including:
1. The type of sentence imposed
2. The general category of the most serious current offense
3. The felony class of the most serious current offense
4. The number of offenses for which the inmates has been committed to the department
5. The number of offense dates for crimes resulting in commitment to the department
6. The category of the most recent commitment to the department
41
Current Commitment-Related Facts
The six factors listed above may be taken to address the overall nature and seriousness of the circumstances resulting in the inmate’s commitment to the department. Tables 21 and 22 below provide detailed profiles on each of these six items for the four inmate sub-populations and for the population as a whole. Table 21 provides the raw counts of inmates by category, while Table 22 provides the percentage of each sub-population falling in that category.
Table 21 shows that 1,202=77.7% of lifers and death row inmates are Violent Repeat Offenders. Most of the rest (340 or 22.0%) are Violent First Offenders. However, only about 1 in 19 Violent Repeat Offenders and about 1 in 12 Violent First Offenders carry life or death sentences. Just four (4) Non-Violent Repeat Offenders and one (1) Non-Violent First Offender are lifers.
Table 21: Current Commitment Profile of Major Inmate Sub-Populations (#)
Inmate
Violent Repeat
Violent First
Non-Violent
Non-Violent
Category
Offender
Offender
Repeat Offender
First Offender
Grand Total
Total
22,265
4,192
11,631
2,343
40,431
Death Sentence
107
21
0
0
128
Life Sentence
1,095
319
4
1
1,419
Term of Years
21,063
3,852
11,627
2,342
38,884
Class 1 Felony
1,700
589
0
0
2,289
Class 2 Felony
7,409
2,122
2,172
520
12,223
Class 3 Felony
6,401
1,194
3,711
857
12,163
Class 4 Felony
5,138
152
4,401
671
10,362
Class 5 Felony
692
22
478
66
1,258
Class 6 Felony
924
114
86
229
1,353
Violent Offense
12,077
2,776
0
0
14,853
Sex Offense
2,769
1,278
0
0
4,047
Property Offense
3,285
30
5,651
442
9,408
Drug Trafficking
1,655
78
2,817
1,455
6,005
Drug Possession
973
6
1,463
121
2,563
DUI
1,119
15
1,405
295
2,834
Escape or Related Offense
366
6
273
25
670
Public Order/Morals Offense
21
3
22
5
51
One ADC Offense Count*
4,176
2,559
2,074
1,696
10,505
Two ADC Offense Counts*
4,044
824
2,715
423
8,006
Three+ ADC Offense Counts*
14,045
809
6,842
224
21,920
One ADC Offense Date*
5,603
3,527
2,371
1,818
13,319
Two ADC Offense Dates*
4,985
417
3,030
362
8,794
Three+ ADC Offense Dates*
11,677
248
6,230
163
18,318
1 Offense Date & 1-2 Offense Counts
4,949
3,087
2,304
1,797
12,137
2+ Offense Dates or 3+ Offense Counts
17,316
1,105
9,327
546
10,128
Direct Court Commitment
16,893
3,888
7,030
1,815
29,626
Probation Revocation-New Offense
3,211
0
2,830
0
6,041
Probation Revocation-Technical Violation
1,682
303
1,455
340
3,780
ADC Supervision Revocation-New Offense
431
0
219
0
650
Commitment as a Condition of Probation
48
1
97
188
334
*Counts and offense dates applicable to current and prior ADC commitments.
42
Table 22: Current Commitment Profile of Major Inmate Sub-Populations (%)
Inmate
Violent Repeat
Violent First
Non-Violent
Non-Violent
Category
Offender
Offender
Repeat Offender
First Offender
Grand Total
Total
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
Death Sentence
0.5%
0.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
Life Sentence
4.9%
7.6%
0.0%
0.0%
3.5%
Term of Years
94.6%
91.9%
100.0%
100.0%
96.2%
Class 1 Felony
7.6%
14.1%
0.0%
0.0%
5.7%
Class 2 Felony
33.3%
50.6%
18.7%
22.2%
30.2%
Class 3 Felony
28.7%
28.5%
31.9%
36.6%
30.1%
Class 4 Felony
23.1%
3.6%
37.8%
28.6%
25.6%
Class 5 Felony
3.1%
0.5%
4.1%
2.8%
3.1%
Class 6 Felony
4.2%
2.7%
0.7%
9.8%
3.3%
Violent Offense
54.2%
66.2%
0.0%
0.0%
36.7%
Sex Offense
12.4%
30.5%
0.0%
0.0%
10.0%
Property Offense
14.8%
0.7%
48.6%
18.9%
23.3%
Drug Trafficking
7.4%
1.9%
24.2%
62.1%
14.9%
Drug Possession
4.4%
0.1%
12.6%
5.2%
6.3%
DUI
5.0%
0.4%
12.1%
12.6%
7.0%
Escape or Related Offense
1.6%
0.1%
2.3%
1.1%
1.7%
Public Order/Morals Offense
0.1%
0.1%
0.2%
0.2%
0.1%
One ADC Offense Count*
18.8%
61.0%
17.8%
72.4%
26.0%
Two ADC Offense Counts*
18.2%
19.7%
23.3%
18.1%
19.8%
Three+ ADC Offense Counts*
63.1%
19.3%
58.8%
9.6%
54.2%
One ADC Offense Date*
25.2%
84.1%
20.4%
77.6%
32.9%
Two ADC Offense Dates*
22.4%
9.9%
26.1%
15.5%
21.8%
Three+ ADC Offense Dates*
52.4%
5.9%
53.6%
7.0%
45.3%
1 Offense Date & 1-2 Offense Counts
22.2%
73.6%
19.8%
76.7%
30.0%
2+ Offense Dates or 3+ Offense Counts
77.8%
26.4%
80.2%
23.3%
25.1%
Direct Court Commitment
75.9%
92.7%
60.4%
77.5%
73.3%
Probation Revocation-New Offense
14.4%
0.0%
24.3%
0.0%
14.9%
Probation Revocation-Technical Violation
7.6%
7.2%
12.5%
14.5%
9.3%
ADC Supervision Revocation-New Offense
1.9%
0.0%
1.9%
0.0%
1.6%
Commitment as a Condition of Probation
0.2%
0.0%
0.8%
8.0%
0.8%
*Counts and offense dates applicable to current and prior ADC commitments.
As shown by Figure 10, Violent First Offenders are more likely than Violent Repeat Offenders to be committed for Class 1, 2 or 3 felonies (93.2% to 69.6%). Similarly, Non-Violent First Offenders are more likely than Non-Violent Repeat Offenders to be committed for Class 2 or 3 felonies (58.8% t0 50.6%). Non-Violent First Offenders are more than twice as likely as other inmates to be committed for Class 5 or 6 felonies (12.6% t0 6.1%). As demonstrated by Figure 11, Non-Violent First Offenders are more often committed for drug trafficking than are Non-Violent Repeat Offenders (62.1% to 24.2%). Conversely, as shown by Figure 12, Non-Violent Repeat Offenders are more often committed for Property Offenses (48.6% to 18.9%). Clearly, a current commitment for drug trafficking is one factor that distinguishes Non-Violent First Offenders from the other three groups. While violent offenses predominate among both Violent Repeat Offenders (54.2%) and Violent First Offenders (66.2%), the latter are much more likely to be committed for sex offenses (30.5% to 12.4%). Conversely, Violent Repeat Offenders are much more likely to be committed for non-violent offenses (33.4% to 2.6%). 43
Figure 10: Percent of Inmates Committed for Class 1, 2 or 3 Felonies
Figure 11: Percent of Inmates Committed for Drug Trafficking
69.6%
93.2%
50.6%
58.8%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
Violent Repeat Offenders
Violent First Offenders
Non-Violent Repeat Offenders
Non-Violent First Offenders
7.4%
1.9%
24.2%
62.1%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
Violent Repeat Offenders
Violent First Offenders
Non-Violent Repeat Offenders
Non-Violent First Offenders44
Figure 12: Percent of Inmates Committed for Property Offenses
Looking at things from the reverse perspective (compare Figures 13 and 14), drug traffickers are more likely than property offenders to be Non-Violent First Offenders (24.2% to 4.7%). Conversely, property offenders are more likely than drug traffickers to be Non-Violent Repeat Offenders (60.1% to 46.9%). As far as a history of violence is concerned, property offenders are slightly more likely than drug traffickers to be Violent Repeat Offenders (34.9% to 27.6%).
Figure 13: Major Sub-Population Distribution-Inmates Committed for Drug Trafficking
14.8%
0.7%
48.6%
18.9%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
Violent Repeat Offenders
Violent First Offenders
Non-Violent Repeat Offenders
Non-Violent First Offenders
27.6%
1.3%
46.9%
24.2%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
Violent Repeat Offenders
Violent First Offenders
Non-Violent Repeat Offenders
Non-Violent First Offenders45
Figure 14: Major Sub-Population Distribution-Inmates Committed for Property Offenses
Repeat offenders of both types are more likely than first offenders to have multiple ADC offense counts, i.e., 63.1% of Violent Repeat Offenders and 58.8% of Non-Violent Repeat Offenders have three or more counts in comparison to 19.3% of Violent First Offenders and 9.6% of Non-Violent First Offenders. More Non-Violent First Offenders than Violent First Offenders have two or more separate current offense dates (22.5% to 15.8%). As indicated by Figure 15 below, a higher percentage of Non-Violent First Offenders are committed as technical probation violators or as a condition of probation (22.5%) than any of the other three groups (9.4%). Accordingly, these factors were judged to differentiate Non-Violent First Offenders from other inmates.
Figure 15: Percent Committed as Technical Probation Violators or as a Condition of Probation
34.9%
0.3%
60.1%
4.7%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
Violent Repeat Offenders
Violent First Offenders
Non-Violent Repeat Offenders
Non-Violent First Offenders
7.8%
7.3%
13.3%
22.5%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
Violent Repeat Offenders
Violent First Offenders
Non-Violent Repeat Offenders
Non-Violent First Offenders46
Sentence-Related Facts
Tables 23 & 24 provide detail on the sentences inmates are serving, expressed as Total-Time-to-be-Served (TTBS). In comparing the sub-populations, we are interested in TTBS in relation to the overall median of 4.28 years. Since the distribution is laid out in one-year increments, we will consider the percentage of inmates with a TTBS of four years or more. This percentage varies as shown in Figure 16 below, while the median TTBS varies as shown in Figure 17.
Figure 16: Time-to-be-Served (TTBS) of 4 Years or More by Major Sub-Population
Figure 17: Median Time-to-be-Served in Years by Major Sub-Population
65.5%
83.0%
37.3%
18.8%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
Violent Repeat Offenders
Violent First Offenders
Non-Violent Repeat Offenders
Non-Violent First Offenders
5.71
8.79
3.00
2.14
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
Violent Repeat Offenders
Violent First Offenders
Non-Violent Repeat Offenders
Non-Violent First Offenders47
Just 440 or 18.8% of Non-Violent First Offenders were committed with a TTBS of 4 years or more. This is in comparison to 37.3% of Non-Violent Repeat Offenders, 65.5% of Violent Repeat Offenders, and 83.0% of Violent First Offenders. Thus, a TTBS (or sentence) of 4 years or more is considered an exceptional circumstance indicating a more serious than typical crime for a Non-Violent First Offender. While 1,904=81.2% of Non-Violent First Offenders are serving prison terms of less than four years, almost half (951=49.9%) are for Class 2 or 3 felonies. Stated more succinctly, 1,391=59.1% of Non-Violent First Offenders are in prison for Class 2 or 3 felonies or will serve 4 years or more.
Across the four sub-populations, Violent First Offenders are serving the most time. Remember, however, that Violent Repeat Offenders include inmates with prior but no current violent offenses. This tends to pull down TTBS. When Violent Repeat Offenders are split into sub-groups of inmates with or without current violent or sex offenses, the numbers change significantly. Among the 17,081 Violent Repeat Offenders with current violent or sex offenses, 12,491=73.1% have a TTBS of 4+ years. Among the 5,184 Violent Repeat Offenders without such offenses, 2,096=40.4% have a TTBS of 4+ years. Likewise, as shown by Figure 18, the median TTBS is more than twice as long for Violent Repeat Offenders with current violent or sex offenses (6.80 years) as it is for those without them (3.22 years). The median TTBS for Violent Repeat Offenders without current violent or sex offenses (3.22 years) is about the same time as the median TTBS for Non-Violent Repeat Offenders (3.00 years).
Figure 18: Median Time-to-be-Served (TTBS) for Violent Repeat Offenders
6.80
3.22
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
Current Violent or Sex Offense
Prior Violent or Sex Offense Only48
Table 23: Sentence Profile of Major Inmate Sub-Populations (#)
Inmate
Violent Repeat
Violent First
Non-Violent
Non-Violent
Category
Offender
Offender
Repeat Offender
First Offender
Grand Total
Total
22,265
4,192
11,631
2,343
40,431
0.00-0.99 Total Years-to-Serve
644
102
864
466
2,076
1.00-1.99 Years
2,454
116
2,661
497
5,728
2.00-2.99 Years
2,567
288
2,162
570
5,587
3.00-3.99 Years
2,013
206
1,607
370
4,196
4.00-4.99 Years
2,318
418
1,576
243
4,555
5.00-5.99 Years
1,793
254
1,168
87
3,302
6.00-6.99 Years
1,427
346
488
37
2,298
7.00-7.99 Years
767
116
358
21
1,262
8.00-8.99 Years
1,492
356
279
15
2,142
9.00-9.99 Years
587
145
142
9
883
10.00-10.99 Years
650
116
104
4
874
11.00-11.99 Years
389
87
42
7
525
12.00-12.99 Years
491
157
27
3
678
13.00-13.99 Years
337
77
44
1
459
12.00-14.99 Years
221
84
15
0
320
15.00-15.99 Years
304
97
15
2
418
16.00-16.99 Years
257
152
10
0
419
17.00-17.99 Years
227
54
8
1
290
18.00-18.99 Years
163
30
6
1
200
19.00-19.99 Years
317
151
4
1
473
20+ Years
2,847
840
51
8
3,746
0-3.99 Total Years-to-Serve
7,678
712
7,294
1,903
17,587
Class 2 Felony
441
143
376
174
1,134
Class 3 Felony
1,903
310
1,942
777
4,932
Class 4 Felony
3,841
127
3,672
659
8,299
Class 5 Felony
609
20
453
66
1,148
Class 6 Felony
884
112
851
227
2,074
4+ Total Years-to-Serve
14,587
3,480
4,337
440
22,844
Class 1 Felony
1,700
589
0
0
2,289
Class 2 Felony
6,968
1,979
1,796
346
11,089
Class 3 Felony
4,498
884
1,769
80
7,231
Class 4 Felony
1,297
25
729
12
2,063
Class 5 Felony
83
2
25
0
110
Class 6 Felony
41
1
18
2
62
Class 4-6 Felony & 0-3.99 Total Years-to-Serve
5,434
259
4,976
952
11,521
Class 1-3 Felony or 4+ Total Years-to-Serve
16,831
3,933
6,655
1,391
28,910
49
Table 24: Sentence Profile of Major Inmate Sub-Populations (%)
Inmate
Violent Repeat
Violent First
Non-Violent
Non-Violent
Category
Offender
Offender
Repeat Offender
First Offender
Grand Total
Total
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
0.00-0.99 Total Years-to-Serve
2.9%
2.4%
7.4%
19.9%
5.1%
1.00-1.99 Years
11.0%
2.8%
22.9%
21.2%
14.2%
2.00-2.99 Years
11.5%
6.9%
18.6%
24.3%
13.8%
3.00-3.99 Years
9.0%
4.9%
13.8%
15.8%
10.4%
4.00-4.99 Years
10.4%
10.0%
13.5%
10.4%
11.3%
5.00-5.99 Years
8.1%
6.1%
10.0%
3.7%
8.2%
6.00-6.99 Years
6.4%
8.3%
4.2%
1.6%
5.7%
7.00-7.99 Years
3.4%
2.8%
3.1%
0.9%
3.1%
8.00-8.99 Years
6.7%
8.5%
2.4%
0.6%
5.3%
9.00-9.99 Years
2.6%
3.5%
1.2%
0.4%
2.2%
10.00-10.99 Years
2.9%
2.8%
0.9%
0.2%
2.2%
11.00-11.99 Years
1.7%
2.1%
0.4%
0.3%
1.3%
12.00-12.99 Years
2.2%
3.7%
0.2%
0.1%
1.7%
13.00-13.99 Years
1.5%
1.8%
0.4%
0.0%
1.1%
12.00-14.99 Years
1.0%
2.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.8%
15.00-15.99 Years
1.4%
2.3%
0.1%
0.1%
1.0%
16.00-16.99 Years
1.2%
3.6%
0.1%
0.0%
1.0%
17.00-17.99 Years
1.0%
1.3%
0.1%
0.0%
0.7%
18.00-18.99 Years
0.7%
0.7%
0.1%
0.0%
0.5%
19.00-19.99 Years
1.4%
3.6%
0.0%
0.0%
1.2%
20+ Years
12.8%
20.0%
0.4%
0.3%
9.3%
0-3.99 Total Years-to-Serve
34.5%
17.0%
62.7%
81.2%
43.5%
Class 2 Felony
2.0%
3.4%
3.2%
7.4%
2.8%
Class 3 Felony
8.5%
7.4%
16.7%
33.2%
12.2%
Class 4 Felony
17.3%
3.0%
31.6%
28.1%
20.5%
Class 5 Felony
2.7%
0.5%
3.9%
2.8%
2.8%
Class 6 Felony
4.0%
2.7%
7.3%
9.7%
5.1%
4+ Total Years-to-Serve
65.5%
83.0%
37.3%
18.8%
56.5%
Class 1 Felony
7.6%
14.1%
0.0%
0.0%
5.7%
Class 2 Felony
31.3%
47.2%
15.4%
14.8%
27.4%
Class 3 Felony
20.2%
21.1%
15.2%
3.4%
17.9%
Class 4 Felony
5.8%
0.6%
6.3%
0.5%
5.1%
Class 5 Felony
0.4%
0.0%
0.2%
0.0%
0.3%
Class 6 Felony
0.2%
0.0%
0.2%
0.1%
0.2%
Class 4-6 Felony & 0-3.99 Total Years-to-Serve
24.0%
6.2%
42.8%
40.6%
28.5%
Class 1-3 Felony or 4+ Total Years-to-Serve
76.0%
93.8%
57.2%
59.4%
71.5%
50
Criminal History-Related Facts
Tables 25 & 26 provide an in-depth criminal history profile for the four major sub-populations. Obviously, this profile is relatively limited in the case of Violent & Non-Violent First Offenders, so we will restrict our comments to a comparison of Violent Repeat Offenders and Non-Violent Repeat Offenders. A comparison of Figures 19 and 20 shows that, in most categories, Violent Repeat Offenders have more extensive criminal histories than do Non-Violent Repeat Offenders. However, more Non-Violent Repeat Offenders have prior adult felony probations.
Figure 19: Criminal History Profile-Violent Repeat Offenders
Figure 20: Criminal History Profile-Non-Violent Repeat Offenders
39.6%
25.2%
38.4%
37.0%
15.7%
0.0%
15.0%
30.0%
45.0%
60.0%
4+ Prior Felonies
2+ Prior Prison Terms
Prior Adult Felony Probations
Juvenile Felonies
Juvenile Commitments
31.4%
19.6%
45.7%
17.0%
6.4%
0.0%
15.0%
30.0%
45.0%
60.0%
4+ Prior Felonies
2+ Prior Prison Terms
Prior Adult Felony Probations
Juvenile Felonies
Juvenile Commitments51
Non-Violent Repeat Offenders also have more extensive misdemeanor records (48.0% to 43.5%). The major difference, however, is that 11,608 or 52.1% of Violent Repeat Offenders have prior violent felonies, whereas Non-Violent Repeat Offenders have no such felonies by definition. Despite the fact that Violent Repeat Offenders generally have more serious priors and have been in prison more frequently, the percentage of the group successfully prosecuted as repetitive offenders is virtually the same for the two groups (35.5% to 34.9%). This is probably due to the fact (Table 25) that Violent Repeat Offenders are frequently prosecuted as dangerous offenders or for dangerous crimes against children (36.2%). Overall, 62.1% of Violent Repeat Offenders, 61.2% of Violent First Offenders, and 35.5% of Non-Violent Repeat Offenders have been successfully prosecuted with one or more of the three sentencing enhancements.
Across the population of 38,088 violent and repeat offenders, 11,901=31.2% were successfully prosecuted as repetitive offenders, 8,795=23.1% as dangerous offenders, 2,698=7.1% for dangerous crimes against children, and 20,528=53.9% as or for any of the three.
Table 25: Sentencing Enhancements Applicable to Violent & Repeat Offenders
Violent
Violent
Non-Violent
Violent
Sentencing Enhancement(s)
Repeat
First
Repeat
& Repeat
Applicable
Offender
Offender
Offender
Offenders
Repetitive Offender
7,768
0
4,133
11,901
Dangerous Offender
6,869
1,926
0
8,795
Dangerous Crime against Children (DCAC)
1,802
896
0
2,698
Dangerous Offender or DCAC
8,058
2,565
0
10,623
Repetitive, Dangerous or DCAC
13,830
2,565
4,133
20,528
No Sentencing Enhancement
8,435
1,627
7,498
17,560
Grand Total
22,265
4,192
11,631
38,088
Violent
Violent
Non-Violent
Violent
Sentencing Enhancement(s)
Repeat
First
Repeat
& Repeat
Applicable
Offender
Offender
Offender
Offenders
Repetitive Offender
34.9%
0.0%
35.5%
31.2%
Dangerous Offender
30.9%
45.9%
0.0%
23.1%
Dangerous Crime against Children (DCAC)
8.1%
21.4%
0.0%
7.1%
Dangerous Offender or DCAC
36.2%
61.2%
0.0%
27.9%
Repetitive Offender, Dangerous Offender or DCAC
62.1%
61.2%
35.5%
53.9%
No Sentencing Enhancement
37.9%
38.8%
64.5%
46.1%
Grand Total
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
52
Table 26: Criminal History Profile of Major Inmate Sub-Populations (#)
Inmate
Violent Repeat
Violent First
Non-Violent
Non-Violent
Category
Offender
Offender
Repeat Offender
First Offender
Grand Total
Total
22,265
4,192
11,631
2,343
40,431
No Prior