7-3 final project submission: state corrections analysis

CJ320ModuleThreeMilestoneOne.docx

2

Sentencing Policies and Offender Demographics in Texas

Melony Hadden

Southern New Hampshire University

CJ 320 Corrections in the US

Instructor Phillip Dawalt

Sentencing Policies and Offender Demographics in Texas

Texas is among the most researched states within the American corrections system due to the high number of prisoners and the changing sentencing policy. The present paper discusses the nature of sentencing in Texas, the philosophy underlying it, when that philosophy was introduced, its effect on the inmate population, and the current demographics of the incarcerated population in the state.

Type of Sentencing in Texas

Texas uses determinate sentencing, a model in which the maximum and minimum terms of punishment are set in advance by law and imposed according to the type of crime. The felony criminal acts in the Texas Penal Code are categorized into five tiers: capital, first-degree, second-degree, third-degree, and state-jail felonies, based on the prescribed sentencing range (Criminal Appeals Advocates, 2023). Sentences in these sequences are determined by the judges based on the nature of the crime, the offender's criminal history, and aggravating or mitigating factors. Texas also has mandatory minimum sentences for particular offences like aggravated sexual assault, and sentencing enhancements for recidivist/habitual offenders.

Sentencing Philosophy and Adoption Timeline

The prevailing sentencing philosophy in Texas is based on the Truth in Sentencing (TIS) framework, which places greater emphasis on retribution and incapacitation than on rehabilitation. TIS believes that the percentage of time offenders spend in the term they get in court should not be subject to early discretionary parole, thereby enhancing transparency and consistency in punishment (Number Analytics, 2023). This philosophy became highly popular after the federal Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, which encouraged states to implement TIS policies through prison-expansion grants. It was not until the mid-1990s that Texas started to formally match its corrections structure to its TIS principles, that violent offenders were required to serve more of their sentences before they could be released (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1998).

Impact on Prison Population

In Texas, the significant effect of the adoption of determinate and Truth in Sentencing policies has been experienced in the prison population. These policies made incarceration time more challenging to serve parole, thus raising the average length of stay and pushing the prison populations upwards. Prison running costs in Texas increased from 91 million in 1980 to 1.84 billion in 1994, as the incarcerated population also increased (Heritage Foundation, 1994). By September 2024, the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) was home to 134,668 prisoners, and the prison population in Texas had nearly grown by 12 percent between 2021 and 2023 alone (Texas 2036, 2024). In 2020, the overall population of prisons was more than 52 percent of people with sentences ranging between one and 25 years, who could have been released on parole but were not (Justice Reinvestment Initiative, 2023).

Demographics of Offenders in Texas

The Texas incarcerated population demographics demonstrate the strong tendencies in terms of age, race, gender, incarceration rate, and education levels. The report Texas 2036 (2024) has made it clear that the average age of inmates in August 2023 was 41, indicating an aging prison population. Gender wise, more than 90 percent of all inmates are men (around 119,448), and women make up less than one-tenth (around 10,205). In racial terms, about one-third of the prisoners are blacks, one-third are Hispanic, and one-third are White (Prison Policy Initiative, 2024). It is worth noting that the incarceration rate of Black people is 3.3 times higher than that of White people, which is a huge racial gap (Prison Policy Initiative, 2024). The general incarceration rate in Texas is 751 per 100,000 people, which is one of the highest rates in democratic countries. In terms of education, low literacy and the absence of a high school diploma are widespread among the incarcerated population, which explains why the TDCJ is running secondary and post-secondary education programs to minimize recidivism (Texas 2036, 2024). The role of substance abuse is also not an insignificant factor: the TDCJ offers a special Substance Abuse Felony Punishment (SAFP) program, which highlights the importance of drug and alcohol issues among the people incarcerated when the individual is admitted (TDCJ, 2023).

References

Bureau of Justice Statistics. (1998). Truth in sentencing in state prisons. U.S. Department of Justice. https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/tssp.pdf

Criminal Appeals Advocates. (2023). Felony sentencing guidelines in Texas. https://spolinlaw.com/texas/felony-sentencing-guidelines/

Heritage Foundation. (1994). Criminals and getting truth-in-sentencing laws. https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/report/criminals-and-getting-truth-sentencing-laws

Justice Reinvestment Initiative. (2023). Texas criminal justice data snapshot. https://justicereinvestmentinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Texas-Criminal-Justice-Data-Snapshot_accessible.pdf

Number Analytics. (2023). Understanding the truth in sentencing philosophy. https://www.numberanalytics.com/blog/ultimate-guide-truth-in-sentencing-philosophy

Prison Policy Initiative. (2024). Texas profile. https://www.prisonpolicy.org/profiles/TX.html

Texas 2036. (2024). A look inside Texas’ prison system. https://texas2036.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/A-Look-Inside-Texas-Prison-System.pdf

Texas Department of Criminal Justice. (2023). Statistical report, fiscal year 2023. https://www.tdcj.texas.gov/documents/Statistical_Report_FY2023.pdf

CJ320ModuleFiveMilestoneTwo.docx

California's Alternatives to Incarceration and Offender Reentry Initiatives

Melony Hadden

CJ 320 Corrections in the US

Instructor Phillip Dawalt

Southern New Hampshire University

Date

California's Alternatives to Incarceration and Offender Reentry Initiatives

California has been facing a prison overcrowding issue, excessive prison costs, and high recidivism rates. The state has responded by implementing broad legislative and programmatic changes to decrease incarceration, rehabilitate offenders, and support successful reentry into the community. This paper will discuss the main alternatives to incarceration in California, their categorization, their effectiveness with various types of offenders, and state reentry programs.

Alternatives to Incarceration in California

California has a wide range of non-custodial sentencing. In September 2022, Assembly Bill 2167 became law, establishing Penal Code Section 17.2, which directs every sentencing court, on the record, to exhaust all available least restrictive methods, including collaborative justice courts, statutory diversion, restorative justice, and probation—before a custodial sentence is imposed (California Legislature, 2022). This legislative requirement shifted California from an ad hoc to a systematic method of non-custodial disposition.

Formal and summary probation, electronic monitoring and GPS house arrest, work-release programs, drug courts, mental health courts, and the Enhanced Alternative Custody Program (EACP) are some of the specific alternatives in operation, which is a voluntary residential alternative offered by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) to eligible incarcerated individuals (CDCR, 2025). Diversion programs, both pre-plea true diversion and deferred-entry-of-judgment schemes, have also increased greatly since the enactment of AB 2167, so that diversion is now the most common form of custody imposed on misdemeanor defendants (Vista Criminal Law, 2025). Some of these programs are actually substitutes to incarceration in the sense that they replace a custodial term altogether (e.g., true diversion, drug courts, mental health courts, and restorative justice); others, including electronic monitoring, split sentences and work release, are more properly considered as an extension to probation or parole since they are only imposed in combination with or instead of a fraction of a custodial term (PPIC, 2022).

Matching Alternatives to Offender Types

Empirical studies based on the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) model show that the most successful interventions focus on higher-risk groups and address their criminogenic needs in ways that align with their learning style and motivation (PPIC, 2022). Most effective drug courts and mental health courts are used with non-violent offenders whose crime is caused by substance use or psychiatric disorder; they combine close judicial supervision with evidence-based treatment and achieve measurable reductions in rearrest (Stanford Addiction Medicine Policy Lab, 2023). EM is more appropriate for lower-risk offenders who pose little risk to the general population but require some form of organized supervision as they continue working and have families. Restorative justice models are best suited to first-time or juvenile offenders whose crimes led to discrete, identifiable harm because the victim-offender conversation promotes accountability and is not subjected to the criminalizing impact of incarceration (California Legislature, 2022). Residential reentry programs incorporating cognitive-behavioral therapy, vocational training, and peer mentorship are most beneficial to long-time offenders who have been released after decades in prison.

Elements Necessary for Successful Reentry

Numerous studies of corrections research have found that successful reentry depends on several interlocking factors, including (1) housing stability on release, (2) employment and vocational skills, (3) healthcare access and substance use/mental health treatment, (4) education and life skills, (5) pro-social family and community ties, and (6) supervision and case management continuity during the period of release (CDCR, 2 In the absence of stable housing, other reentry services become hard to obtain and maintain, and homelessness makes it highly likely that a person will re-offend.

California's State Initiatives Addressing Reentry Elements

California has introduced several specific programs to deal with every aspect. Regarding housing, in October 2024, Governor Newsom authorized the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and CDCR to collaborate on the Reentry Housing Pilot Project (RHPP), a federally funded HOME-ARP program with $16 million provided by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The RHPP is the permanent supportive housing connected to wraparound services to individuals leaving incarceration, and the ultimate aim of the program is to decrease homelessness and recidivism in formerly incarcerated Californians (California HCD, 2024; California Governor's Office, 2024).

CDCR manages the Male Community Reentry Program (MCRP) and the Female Community Reentry Program (FCRP) for employment, education, and treatment, and each has almost $ 140 million in state funding in fiscal year 202324. In a 2021 study commissioned by CDCR and conducted by Stanford Public Policy, researchers found that male participants who were followed for 9 months or longer reduced their likelihood of rearrest by 13 percent and of reconviction by 11 percent (CalMatters, 2024). Since 2014, the Specialized Treatment for Optimized Programming (STOP) network has been available, providing evidence-based substance use treatment, cognitive-behavioral intervention, life-skills training, and employment assistance at residential and drop-in centers across the state (CDCR via CBS Sacramento, 2023). Reentry is also supported by the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) Adult Reentry Grant (ARG) Program, which, in November 2024, published a Cohort 4 Request for Proposals with $108.3 million to fund warm-handoff reentry services and rental assistance between 2025 and 2028 (BSCC, 2024).

Combined, they form a coherent state strategy: legislation like AB 2167 will reduce unnecessary custody admissions on the front end, and MCRP, FCRP, STOP, and RHPP will support the empirically validated components of successful reentry on the back end: housing, employment, treatment, and community connection. The reduction in the reconviction rate in California, 44.6 percent in fiscal year 201718, becomes 41.9 percent in 201819 (CalMatters, 2024), indicating that these reforms are starting to take hold. However, long-term investment and program assessment are needed.

References

Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC). (2024). Adult Reentry Grant Program. State of California. https://www.bscc.ca.gov/s_argrant/

California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). (2024, October 31). California launches new program to improve public safety by reducing homelessness and recidivism. https://www.cdcr.ca.gov/news/2024/10/31/california-launches-new-program-to-improve-program-to-improve-public-safety-by-reducing-homelessness-and-recidivism/

California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). (2025, December). Three-judge court monthly update. https://www.cdcr.ca.gov/3-judge-court-update/

California Governor's Office. (2024, October 31). California launches new program to improve public safety by reducing homelessness and recidivism. https://www.gov.ca.gov/2024/10/31/california-launches-new-program-to-improve-public-safety-by-reducing-homelessness-and-recidivism/

California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). (2024). Reentry Housing Pilot Project – Notice of Funding Availability. https://www.hcd.ca.gov/about-hcd/newsroom/reentry-housing-pilot-project-nofa

California Legislature. (2022). AB 2167: Crimes: Alternatives to incarceration [Bill text, Chapter 800, Statutes of 2022]. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2167

CalMatters. (2024, April). California expands re-entry programs for formerly incarcerated individuals. https://calmatters.org/economy/2024/04/re-entry/

CBS Sacramento. (2023, July 13). California pays for parolee rehabilitation — but is not tracking outcomes. https://www.cbsnews.com/sacramento/news/california-parolee-rehabilitation-investigation/

Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC). (2022). Alternatives to incarceration in California. https://www.ppic.org/publication/alternatives-to-incarceration-in-california/

Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC). (2024). California prison programs and reentry pathways. https://www.ppic.org/publication/california-prison-programs-and-reentry-pathways/

Stanford Addiction Medicine Policy Lab. (2023). Drug courts as an alternative to incarceration. Stanford University. https://addictionpolicy.stanford.edu/drug-courts-alternative-incarceration

Vista Criminal Law. (2025, February 20). Alternative sentencing programs in San Diego, California. https://vistacriminallaw.com/alternative-sentencing-california/