Today's Paper Obits Crime Today's Photos Movie Style ON FILM: And the Oscar goes to ... GARY SMITH: Winter is no cupcake Puzzles

After two decades of "tough on crime" policies, many states are taking a hard look at how people are charged, how much time they serve, and what happens when they are released from prison.

Many states are looking at growing prison populations, obstacles to drug treatment, and high recidivism rates as reasons to re-evaluate their criminal-justice systems.

The U.S. has the highest incarceration rate in the world, and many states are considering whether to build new prisons, change how they sentence people, and change how they guide prisoners through parole and probation.

Several states, including Alaska, Maryland and Rhode Island, are considering changes that would ease some of the punitive policies of the 1980s and '90s, especially when it comes to drug offenders. In some places, lawmakers will consider recommendations made by criminal-justice task forces, often with the guidance of outside groups such as the Council of State Governments and The Pew Charitable Trusts.

"If there's a theme or common denominator, it is policymakers asking what the science says will work," said Michael Thompson, director of the Council of State Governments' Justice Center. "The question they're asking is, 'Can we get a better return on our investment?'"

States that want to decrease the number of people going to prison often turn to reducing sentences, by either scrapping mandatory minimums or reclassifying some felonies as misdemeanors. They may also divert people into treatment for drug addiction or mental illness.

Nicole Porter with the Sentencing Project, which advocates shorter sentences, said that when states reclassify crimes, it tends to be lower-level felonies, such as drug possession and property crimes like theft of property under a certain dollar value.

Porter said some states may be inspired by California voters who, in 2014, approved Proposition 47. That reduced some felonies, such as nonviolent property theft and drug crimes, to misdemeanors.

Not only did the state decrease the number of people going into prison, but thousands of inmates were also eligible to be released early under the new law. As of September, nearly 4,500 people were released under Proposition 47. And the state's Department of Corrections estimates that 3,300 fewer people will be imprisoned each year.

Holly Harris with U.S. Justice Action Network, a coalition of liberal and conservative groups pushing for criminal-justice changes, said reducing felonies to misdemeanors could have a big effect on women. Though they are the fastest-growing segment of prison population, many women are nonviolent offenders or are serving time for drug crimes that might be reclassified.

In Alaska, the state's Criminal Justice Commission in December called for limiting prison to serious and violent offenders, reclassifying many of the lowest-level misdemeanors as violations punishable by fines, and shortening prison time for more serious misdemeanors to no more than 30 days. The panel also called for changing simple possession of heroin, methamphetamine and cocaine to a misdemeanor.

States that are adjusting sentences aren't just shortening them. Last year, Maine legislators reduced sentences for some drug-possession crimes, but increased them for cocaine and the opioid fentanyl.

Reducing sentences could have unintended consequences. In Utah, state Rep. Eric Hutchings, a Republican, said the reclassification of some crimes as misdemeanors blocked some people from drug courts and treatment programs meant only for felons -- something he said the state will fix this year.

Many states may also consider ending some mandatory minimum sentences, which have helped to swell prison populations in several states. Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller, a Democrat, said he wants the Legislature to eliminate mandatory minimums for less serious crimes, which under current law can put someone in prison for decades.

Bills in several states, including Florida, Massachusetts and Virginia, would either scrap mandatory minimums or give judges more power to depart from them when issuing sentences. Last year, Maryland, North Dakota and Oklahoma gave judges more discretion to exempt some people from mandatory minimums, according to Alison Lawrence of the National Conference of State Legislatures.

States are also looking to get people who are already in the criminal-justice system out faster and to help them transition back into society while on parole.

And some states are trying to make their parole process more responsive to parolees' behavior.

Several states, including Alabama and Utah, have adopted "swift, certain, fair" approaches, which aim to provide an immediate response to parolees' behavior, whether it's prison time after failed drug tests or a reduced parole term if parolees follow the rules and make a lot of progress in post-prison life.

Michigan state Sen. John Proos, a Republican, said he wants to expand his state's "swift and certain" program, which now operates only in some counties. He'd also like the state to open it to probationers.

But he also wants to understand why prison doesn't better prepare inmates for parole. "Do we need more education? Do we need more resources?" he said.

A Section on 02/01/2016

Print Headline: States evaluate criminal-justice systems

Sponsor Content