Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

In 1966 Congress created demonstration pretrial services agencies in ten federal district courts to aid judges in complying with the Bail Reform Act of 1966. This article used secondary analysis of data collected as part of the demonstration project to determine its impact on pretrial release decisions and defendant conduct. The results suggest that the agencies did create changes in the type of release conditions through changes in judicial decision making. Furthermore, these changes did not create significant increases in the rates of pretrial misconduct as feared by some. The final discussion focuses on the relationship between the agencies and the earlier Bail Reform Act of 1966.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ares, C. , A. Rankin , and H. Sturz (1963) "The Manhattan Bail Project: an interim report on the use of pretrial parole." New York Univ. Law Rev. 38: 67.

Attorney General's Committee on Poverty (1963 ) Report of the Attorney General's Committee on Poverty and the Administration of Federal Criminal Justice. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

Foote, C. (1958) "The administration of bail in New York City." Univ. of Pennsylvania Law Rev. 106: 693.

Foote, C. , J. Markle , and E. Wooley (1954) "Compelling appearance in court: administration of bail in Philadelphia." Pennsylvania Law Rev. 102: 1031.

Freed, D. and P. Wald (1964) Bail in the United States, 1964 Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice and Vern Foundation.

Goldkamp, J. (1979) Two Classes of Accused. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.

Hagan, J. , I. Nagel , and D. Alwin (1979) "Ceremonial justice: crime and punishment in a loosely coupled system." Social Forces 58: 506.

Nagel, I. (1984) "The legal/extralegal controversy revisited: a new look at judicial decisions in pretrial release." Law and Society Rev. 17: 4.

National Conference on Bail and Criminal Justice (1974) Criminal Justice in America. New York: Arno Press.

10.

Ostrom, C. (1979) Time Series Analysis: Regression Techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

11.

Rankin, A. (1964) "Pretrial detention and ultimate freedom: a statistical study." New York University Law Rev. 39: 631.

12.

Rossi, P. , H. Freeman , and S. Wright (1979) Evaluation: A Systematic Approach. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

13.

Sherwood-Fabre, L. (1984) "An experiment in bail reform: evaluating pretrial release service agencies in federal district courts." Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.

14.

Single, E. (1972) "The unconstitutional administration of bail: Belamy v. the judges of New York City" Criminal Law Bull. 8: 459.

15.

Stryker, R. , J. Hagan , and I. Nagel (1983) "Methodological issues in court research: pretrial release decisions for federal defendants." Sociological Methods and Research 11: 469.

16.

U.S. House Hearings (1966) Federal Bail Reform. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

17.

U.S. Senate Hearings (1971) Speedy Trial Act of 1971. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

18.

U.S. Senate Hearings (1973) Speedy Trial Act. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

19.

U.S. Senate Report (1965) Bail Reform Act of 1965. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

An Evaluation of Federal Pretrial Services Agencies' Impact On Pretrial Decisions and Outcomes

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References