ILNews

Partnership targets Indiana's corrections system

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

To address Indiana’s growing prison population and increasing related costs, the state is partnering with The Pew Center on the States and the Council of State Governments Justice Center for the first comprehensive review of the state’s criminal code and sentencing policies since 1976.


Indiana is participating in the Justice Reinvestment Initiative, officials announced this morning in Gov. Mitch Daniels’ office. The project aims to improve public safety by reducing the number of offenders in Indiana’s prisons, reduce recidivism, and to better manage corrections costs.


The state’s prison population has grown 47 percent in the past 10 years from 19,309 in fiscal year 2000 to 28,389 in fiscal year 2010. In that same period, the Indiana Department of Correction’s appropriations from the general fund increased 76 percent. Despite those increases, Daniels noted the state addressed the population increase without new construction by being more efficient and better management of prison capacities.


Daniels, with the support of Indiana Supreme Court Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard, bipartisan legislative leadership, and Attorney General Greg Zoeller, sought assistance from the Public Safety Performance Project of The Pew Center regarding sentencing and other corrections issues.


The project will analyze Indiana’s crime, arrest, conviction, jail, prison, probation, and parole supervision data. It will also include a system-wide examination of the state’s prison population, drivers of prison growth, and strategies currently used to increase public safety. The CSG Justice Center will interview people from prosecutors, public defenders, and law enforcement officials to victims, their advocates, and service providers, among others. The new 13-member Justice Reinvestment Steering Committee, comprised of various Indiana stakeholders, will review the analysis and make recommendations while working with the CSG Justice Center on policy options.


Adam Gelb, director of the Public Safety Performance Project of The Pew Center, said the project will help Indiana going forward rein in prison spending. He also noted Indiana is not starting from “ground zero” because there are “a lot of essential building blocks here in Indiana.”


Such essentials include drug and other problem-solving courts that look at options other than prison for offenders.


More than 2,000 times a day, Indiana’s trial court judges are deciding sentences for offenders, looking at what would be the “smart” sentence for the offender and the situation, Chief Justice Shepard said. “There are alternatives to prison. Many programs are led by trial judges. … It’s a great opportunity to cooperate with the other two branches.”


However, Chief Justice Shepard told Indiana Lawyer that five times as many felons in Indiana are serving sentences in various ways as part of a “whole constellation” of programs that are not prison.


Indiana’s monetary commitment is $100,000, which is paid for with federal grant monies through the Indiana Criminal Justice Institute. The Pew Center and the CSG Justice Center have also received funding from the U.S. Department of Justice and the Bureau of Justice Assistance to advance the initiative. As a participant, Indiana will be eligible for future funding from the BJA.


Daniels said Pew has shown it ability to work fast in other states and officials here hope to see analysis in the third and fourth quarters because they want to be able to make recommendations in January for the legislature to address in tandem with the budget. The Indiana General Assembly’s 2011 session will set the state’s next biennial budget.


Daniels also said a surprising percentage of prisoners are there for a “very short period of time, suggesting we’re a little out of whack.”


The average sentence for an Indiana prisoner is 18 years and 10 months, according to information provided by the governor’s office. However, this is an increasing number of low-risk offenders being sentenced to prison for short period of time. In 2009, 4,583 offenders were sent to the Department of Correction for a fixed term of less than 90 days; of those, 1,361 were in prison for 30 or fewer days.


As states nationwide have addressed ways to reduce incarceration rates, Indiana’s rate of incarceration continues to climb at a rate much higher than the national average. Using 2000 to 2007 figures, Indiana ranked seventh in the nation for rate of incarceration. In 2009, Indiana was in fourth and likely will be in second behind Alabama once Florida and Pennsylvania’s sentencing reform measures take effect, according to U.S. Department of Justice statistics.


Once the legislature adopts new policies, the CSG Justice Center will help the state translate the policies into practice, keep track of any effects, and keep state officials up to date.



 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. My husband left me and the kids for 2 years, i did everything humanly possible to get him back i prayed i even fasted nothing worked out. i was so diver-stated, i was left with nothing no money to pay for kids up keep. my life was tearing apart. i head that he was trying to get married to another lady in Italy, i look for urgent help then i found Dr.Mack in the internet by accident, i was skeptical because i don’t really believe he can bring husband back because its too long we have contacted each other, we only comment on each other status on Facebook and when ever he come online he has never talks anything about coming back to me, i really had to give Dr.Mack a chance to help me out, luckily for me he was God sent and has made everything like a dream to me, Dr.Mack told me that everything will be fine, i called him and he assured me that my Husband will return, i was having so many doubt but now i am happy,i can’t believe it my husband broke up with his Italian lady and he is now back to me and he can’t even stay a minute without me, all he said to me was that he want me back, i am really happy and i cried so much because it was unbelievable, i am really happy and my entire family are happy for me but they never know whats the secret behind this…i want you all divorce lady or single mother, unhappy relationship to please contact this man for help and everything will be fine i really guarantee you….if you want to contact him you can reach him through dr.mac@yahoo. com..,

  2. As one of the many consumers affected by this breach, I found my bank data had been lifted and used to buy over $200 of various merchandise in New York. I did a pretty good job of tracing the purchases to stores around a college campus just from the info on my bank statement. Hm. Mr. Hill, I would like my $200 back! It doesn't belong to the state, in my opinion. Give it back to the consumers affected. I had to freeze my credit and take out data protection, order a new debit card and wait until it arrived. I deserve something for my trouble!

  3. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  4. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  5. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

ADVERTISEMENT