Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Michael O’Hear (2005)
The Original Intent of Uniformity in Federal SentencingUniversity of Cincinnati Law Review
Steven Chanenson (2007)
Statement of Steven L. Chanenson Before the United States Sentencing Commission Regarding Retroactivity of Crack Guidelines Amendments (November 2007)Federal Sentencing Reporter, 20
Mindy Tarlow, Marta Nelson (2007)
The Time Is Now: Immediate Work for People Coming Home from Prison as a Strategy to Reduce Their Reincarceration and Restore Their Place in the CommunityFederal Sentencing Reporter, 20
J. Travis (2007)
Reflections on the Reentry Movement.Federal Sentencing Reporter, 20
Michael O’Hear (2006)
Victims and Criminal Justice: What's Next?Criminal Law eJournal
Michael Pinard (2007)
A Reentry-Centered Vision of Criminal JusticeFederal Sentencing Reporter, 20
Elizabeth Lightfoot, M. Umbreit, B. Vos, R. Coates (2005)
Restorative justice in the twenty-first century : A social movement full of opportunities and pitfallsMarquette Law Review, 89
E. Miller (2007)
The Therapeutic Effects of Managerial Reentry CourtsFederal Sentencing Reporter, 20
M. Farkas, G. Miller (2007)
Reentry and Reintegration: Challenges Faced by the Families of Convicted Sex OffendersFederal Sentencing Reporter, 20
O ’ Hear , Victims and Criminal Justice : What ’ s Next ? , 19 FED
(2007)
King , Recent Developments in State Parole Reform , 2004 – 2006 , 20 FED
R. King (2007)
Recent Developments in State Parole Reform, 2004––2006Federal Sentencing Reporter, 20
Beth Colgan (2007)
The Presidential Politics of Prisoner Reentry ReformFederal Sentencing Reporter, 20
Christy Visher (2007)
Returning Home: Emerging Findings and Policy Lessons about Prisoner ReentryFederal Sentencing Reporter, 20
EDITORâS OBSERVATIONS The Second Chance Act and the Future of Reentry Reform MICHAEL M. OâHEAR Professor, Marquette University Law School Editor, Federal Sentencing Reporter Mass incarceration in the 1980s and 1990s has spawned a prisoner reentry crisis in this decade. Although reentry has only recently gained currency as a national political issue, the problems associated with reentry were an utterly predictable consequence of a long-term trend toward increased reliance on imprisonment as a response to crime. Even at the height of the incarceration boom, only a tiny fraction of offenders were sentenced to death or life imprisonment, and the average prison term has remained below three years.1 Thus, nearly everyone we send away to prison eventually comes back. They return, for the most part, to a small number of low-income, urban communities that are already struggling with a host of profound social problems.2 They return, after the defunding of prison-based educational and therapeutic programs,3 with the same underlying deficits that contributed to their criminal behavior in the first place. Indeed, they are apt to return with those deficits widened as a result of their time in prison and the stigma of a criminal record.4 And they return in
Federal Sentencing Reporter – University of California Press
Published: Dec 1, 2007
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.