One of those programs is called a Diversion Program. Diversion is being used by numerous courts as a teeth of deterrence for 1st time and/or nonviolent offenders. This review will evaluate the program and its effect on recidivism rates in the criminal justice system. Literature Review The Diversion Program is an attempt to divert charges of offenders to alternate programs in the community such as counseling, community service, treatment, and drug rehabilitation. They complete these programs the criminal charges will be dismissed.
However, if the offender violates any terms of the Diversion Program, the court will prosecute them and sentence them accordingly (Brown, 2013). There was a previous program in the Criminal Justice Department from 1946-1974 called the Brooklyn Plan for Juveniles. If the juvenile committed a minor offense and the juvenile had a good record, they were referred for a rehabilitative measure. In 1 974, another program for adults was introduced (www. Inept. Us. Courts. Gob, 2013). In 1 978 the Pretrial Services Agency formed an agreement with the IS .
S. Attorney’s Office and formally established the framework. Diversion is a Very influential aspect of the Criminal Justice System. The program IS designed to alleviate some of the burden on the correctional system (move. Inept. S. Courts. Gob, The diversion program is designed to divert criminal activity and 2013). Reduce the recidivism rate of offenders. The criminal justice system is overcrowded, overwhelmed and very costly to the economy. So if the defendant is looked at as being TABLE to be rehabilitated or “saved”.
The prosecution and the court and not considered a career criminal, which in turn helps the burdened criminal justice system. The Diversion Program has major objectives. They are designed to accelerate the disposition of cases to reduce recidivism, deter expenses by giving services to offenders at the sweets cost and reduces prosecutions, give offenders alternate methods to reduce their entry into the correctional system and relieve the cases and give judicial officers more time for caseloads that have to go to court . Inept. Courts. Ova, 2013). Two (2) additional issues are the constitutionality and charges of differential treatment based on race and ethnicity. There have been issues of “disposition without adjudication” and differential treatment of African Americans where they were incarcerated for offenses and Caucasians were offered diversion. Also, studies found that minorities had inadequate family support, school failure and negative peer influence and were not given enough community-based support while in the program or after release (www. Incurs. Gob, 1999).
Regulating behavior to deter criminal activity and refunding is the main goal of the criminal justice system The Lafayette La Diversion Program showed in 2008 that inmates who enroll in diversion program, recidivism rates dropped 20% of inmates who were incarcerated. The study showed 354 in diversion programs were rearrested compared to 55. 7% inmates who were incarcerated (Brown, 2008) According to EUNICE on the impact of incarceration over deferment shows evidence that imprisonment makes it hard for offenders to adjust to life after prison, especially long term sentences which causes them to roofed.
Studies indicate that administering the correct kind of intervention to offenders in a way they understand will reduce offending anywhere from 5 to (EUNICE, 2013). The data for the review will be collected from criminal justice courts and agencies throughout the United States. Online resources from the Department of Juvenile justice, the pretrial services division, and the United States department of justice. Various studies of drug courts, diversion courts, and community resources will be evaluated for their efficiency and effects on offenders who attend the program versus offenders who are incarcerated.
Journal articles with studies on ethical treatment and problems that offenders experience while attending the program and support after leaving the program will be evaluated there is limited information provided by offenders which will pose some problems with the data that will be collected. Most of the statistical information located is provided by agencies that implemented the program. The most effective measurement that can be conducted is on the recidivism rates of the offenders who attended the Diversion Program against those offenders who were incarcerated on similar offenses without a diversion option.
These statistics will be obtained from the Department of justice, journal articles, and studies by individual diversion programs and repeat offenders in their programs. Expected Outcome The expected outcome of an analysis on the Diversion alternative system is to improve the recidivism rates among offenders of nonviolent non habitual felony offenders. Another overall goal is to reduce the amount of offenders in the justice system to alleviate the financial burden on the justice department.
A grant to evaluate the system for inconsistencies and flaws could improve the recidivism rate and red Lice the cost of supporting first time or nonviolent offenders by our tax payers. These funds could be used to rehabilitate which has been shown to be less Of a financial burden on taxpayers than supporting a lifetime criminal. The results could show the decrease in the cost and show criminal justice courts and individual community the benefit of adopting diversion programs and implementing ore rehabilitative programs to deter these criminals from refunding.