A STUDY OF THE ATTITUDES OF
DISTRICT JUDGES
IN T E X A S T O W A R D
NANCY SAMPLE
GARMS
STATE
RESTITUTION
A S T U D Y OP T H E A T T I T U D E S OP S T A T E
D I S T R I C T J U D G E S IN T E X A S T O W A R D R E S T I T U T I O N
Prepared for P r o f e s s o r D a n i e l B e n s o n
by
N a n c y Sample G a r m s
In f u l f i l l m e n t of
Independent
Spring
Research
1979
Texas T e c h U n i v e r s i t y
S c h o o l of Law
119
W h e n the q u e s t i o n "Why i m p r i s o n c r i m i n a l s ? " a r i s e s , p u b l i c
s a f e t y , p u n i s h m e n t , the e l i m i n a t i o n of c r i m e , r e h a b i l i t a t i o n and
r e s t i t u t i o n to s o c i e t y h a v e b e e n among the r e a s o n s a d v a n c e d .
w h a t of r e s t i t u t i o n to the i n d i v i d u a l
But
victim?
M a r g e r y P r y suggested as early as 1951 t h a t the h i s t o r i c a l
a i m of r e s t i t u t i o n "was to c o m p e n s a t e the party a g g r i e v e d ; the
1
idea of p u n i s h m e n t for a p u b l i c crime came l a t e r . "
In a l a n d m a r k
196ti p u b l i c a t i o n , M e n n i n g e r a d v o c a t e d supervised r e s t i t u t i o n as 2
the c o m m o n sense r e s p o n s e to the vicious r e p e a t - o f f e n d e r c y c l e .
H o w e v e r , the topic of r e s t i t u t i o n h a s r e c e i v e d m i x e d
r e v i e w s in the l i t e r a t u r e .
The r e a s o n s for this are n u m e r o u s and
i n c l u d e h i s t o r i c a l r e l i a n c e on i n c a r c e r a t i o n and u n i v e r s a l emphasis on p u n i s h m e n t of the o f f e n d e r r a t h e r than r e s t o r a t i o n of loss
to the v i c t i m .
A l t h o u g h " r e m a r k a b l e u n a n i m i t y exists as to the
i n h e r e n t defects of i n c a r c e r a t i o n , " m o s t a t t e m p t s at s h i f t i n g the
e m p h a s i s a w a y from i m p r i s o n m e n t h a v e failed."^ R e f o r m efforts h a v e
f r e q u e n t l y b e e n p i e c e m e a l and are i n v a r i a b l e forced to o c c u r w i t h i n
tne i n c a r c e r a t i o n
system.
Tne system n a s n o t g i v e n w a y to a l t e r n a t i v e s .
For example,
the "rational w a y s o c i e t y now h a n d l e s b a n k r u p t c y " h a s n o t found
w a y into tne c r i m i n a l justice s y s t e m . ^
its
C n a n e l e s p o i n t s out t h a t
the c o r r e c t i o n system lobby zealously p r o t e c t s its 6 billion d o l l a r
i n d u s t r y and
investment.
H a r l a n d c o n t e n d s tnat "until tne last few y e a r s , r e s t i t u t i o n
had b e e n employed l a r g e l y in an u n s y s t e m a t i c m a n n e r at the d i s c r e t i o n
and
(often i m a g i n a t i v e ) i n i t i a t i v e of i n d i v i d u a l
6
t h r o u g h o u t the c r i m i n a l justice p r o c e s s , "
decision-makers
B e c a u s e r e s t i t u t i o n has g e n e r a l l y b e e n employed in c o n j u n c tion w i t h i n c a r c e r a t i o n , s u s p e n s i o n or some f o r m of p r o b a t i o n , it
is s u s c e p t i b l e of m a n y d a m n i n g forces -- f o r c e s w h i c h o b s e r v e r s
suggest h a v e g i v e n r i s e to the f r e q u e n t l y quoted R o t h m a n
"failure
7
model."
D e s p i t e this g l o o m y h i s t o r y , i n t e r e s t in a l t e r n a t i v e s
a t t e m p t s at i n n o v a t i o n c o n t i n u e .
a t t e s t to this i n t e r e s t .
P r o g r a m s in at l e a s t 20
and
states
It Is this i n d e f a t i g u a b l e i n t e r e s t w h i c h
prompted the p r e s e n t r e s e a r c h .
The need for e m p i r i c a l data on the
subject is u n d e r s c o r e d b y G a l a w a y .
He s u g g e s t s that d e s p i t e its
l e n g t h y h i s t o r y "the e x t e n t (of u s e ) of this p r a c t i c e ( r e s ht i9t u t i o n )
is n o t k n o w n and its r a t i o n a l e is n o t c l e a r l y a r t i c u l a t e d .
To study the c u r r e n t i n t e r e s t in and u s e of r e s t i t u t i o n
a m o n g S t a t e D i s t r i c t J u d g e s in T e x a s , a r a n d o m sample of S k w a s
mailed the 2 5 - i t e m q u e s t i o n n a i r e shown in A p p e n d i x A .
Results ob-
tained f r o m the t h i r t y - o n e r e s p o n d i n g judges follow and r e p r e s e n t
a 57% return.
D i s c u s s i o n of the
Questionnaire:
T o t a l u n a n i m i t y w a s achieved on o n l y o n e item (#1) w h e r e
the judges reported t h a t r e s t i t u t i o n in some u n s p e c i f i e d
form
"should b e u s e d m o r e as one form of s a n c t i o n . "
R e s p o n s e s to s e v e r a l items ( i . e . , n o s . 1 , .31 k
r e v e a l a g e n e r a l i z e d s u p p o r t i v e stance toward
a n d
restitution.
"'4)
S p e c i f i c a l l y , 77% of the r e p o r t i n g judges b e l i e v e d that r e s t i t u t i o n
should be studies on a s t e p p e d - u p b a s i s
(item j#3),
Note, however,
that o n l y 16% reported r e s t i t u t i o n as i m p o s i n g a s u f f i c i e n t p u n i s h ment in the m i n d of the o f f e n d e r w h e n compared w i t h
imprisonment.
Nor did these j u d g e s , b y a m a r g i n o f I4 to 1 , f e e l that
is o v e r - u s e d as a b e h a v i o r r e g u l a t i n g s a n c t i o n .
imprisonment
One-third o f those
r e s p o n d i n g a c t u a l l y e m p l o y r e s t i t u t i o n 33% of the time or less
(item #1i+.)
O t h e r t h a n the u n a n i m i t y n o t e d on i t e m o n e , n o o t h e r i s s u e
u n c o v e r e d m o r e a g r e e m e n t among o u r sample t h a n that reached o n item
#21.
A s i g n i f i c a n t b7% i n d i c a t e d t h a t they do n o t impose r e s t i t u -
tion s e n t e n c e s i n excess of the a m o u n t p r o v e d as v i c t i m
The four judges who h a v e ruled contra to this p o s i t i o n
damages.
explained
the v a r i a n c e s in terms of the p e c u l i a r facts raised in s p e c i f i c
cases.
Two q u e s t i o n n a i r e items resulted in e s p e c i a l l y
response patterns.
diverse
W h e n asked to s p e c i f y w h i c h of six f a c t o r s
should b e u s e d to d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r or n o t to impose
this sample w a s u n a b l e to agree (item #17)«
restitution,
Apparently, either
the p e c u l i a r c i r c u m s t a n c e s of a g i v e n case w i l l b e found
determi-
n a t i v e or the courts u s e a v a r y i n g c o m b i n a t i o n or the listed
factors.
Item # 2 3 a l s o p r o v e d i n c o n c l u s i v e in d e t e r m i n i n g w h i c h
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of r e s t i t u t i o n is m o r e p o s i t i v e .
find all five choices equally d e s i r a b l e .
This sample m a y
Seventy-seven
percent
agreed t h a t r e s t i t u t i o n can p r o v i d e an i n c r e a s e d sense of justice
for the v i c t i m .
1
J u d g i n g by the r e s p o n s e s to Items 1 2 , 13 and 2 0 , this
sample p r e f e r r e d to leave the a m o u n t of r e s t i t u t i o n
determination
u p to t h e b e n c h and to r e f u s e v i c t i m veto of its u s e .
This
q u e s t i o n n a i r e does n o t a n s w e r the q u e s t i o n of w h a t should be
done w i t h r e s t i t u t i o n d o l l a r s a s s e s s e d if victims r e f u s e a c c e p t ance.
A p p a r e n t l y , c u r r e n t p r a c t i c e in the g i v e n
would p r e v a i l ,
jurisdiction
A strong m i n o r i t y (i.e., 4 4 % ) see a p l a c e for
a l t e r n a t i v e forms of r e s t i t u t i o n as revealed b y r e s p o n s e s to
item
6,
R e s t i t u t i o n as a part of the c r i m i n a l s a n c t i o n is n o t
nex^ in T e x a s c o u r t s .
It has b e e n employed by 5 5 % of our s a m p l e
for t h r e e y e a r s or m o r e .
T h e s e T e x a s judges e m p l o y r e s t i t u t i o n
in a p p r o x i m a t e l y blf.% of the cases w h i c h come b e f o r e t h e i r c o u r t s .
U n s o l i c i t e d c o m m e n t s m a d e b y a n u m b e r of the r e s p o n d e n t s
demon-
strate t h a t p r o b a t i o n is u n i f o r m l y and p r e d i c t a b l y a c o n c o m m i t a n t
to the i m p o s i t i o n of r e s t i t u t i o n .
A c c o r d i n g to t h e s e 31 j u d g e s , a t t o r n e y s are
significantly
less l i k e l y to r e q u e s t or o f f e r the I m p o s i t i o n of r e s t i t u t i o n t h a n
are o t h e r involved p e r s o n s
w o r k e r s , or p o l i c e ) .
(i.e., probation officers, welfare
T w o - t h i r d s of the a t t o r n e y s e i t h e r n e v e r o r
r a r e l y ( i . e . , in 25% or f e w e r of t h e i r c a s e s ) o f f e r or r e q u e s t
restitution.
On the o t h e r h a n d , "(b% of the i n v o l v e d p e r s o n s listed
in i t e m # 1 9 s u g g e s t r e s t i t u t i o n in h a l f or m o r e of t h e i r
A strong m a j o r i t y
cases.
(51%) of the r e s p o n d i n g judges felt
that T e x a s should i n i t i a t e some type of s t a t e - w i d e
restitution
p r o g r a m and 2 / 3 of that 51% favored a r e s i d e n t i a l f o r m a t
• r>
O
(items
I4. and 5 ) .
In the sole i t e m w h i c h related to the f i n a n c i n g of
such a p r o g r a m , this sample rejected the s u g g e s t i o n of a statea d m i n i s t e r e d p r o g r a m o f v i c t i m i n s u r a n c e by a v o t e of 7 to 3 (item
In q u e s t i o n s w h i c h r e f l e c t on the b l a m e i s s u e , our sample
of b a r r i s t e r s s o l i d l y spurned the n o t i o n that the state o r f e d e r a l
g o v e r n m e n t s should a s s u m e any p a r t of the f i n a n c i a l load of s u c h a
restitution program.
E v i d e n t l y the i n d i c a t i o n t h a t Texas
should
i n i t i a t e a r e s i d e n t i a l r e s t i t u t i o n p r o g r a m is m a d e w i t h the u n d e r s t a n d i n g that It w o u l d b e s e l f - s u p p o r t i n g o r , at l e a s t , n o n - p u b l i cally funded.
This finding t h a t n e i t h e r the b l a m e n o r the b u r d e n should
r e s t w i t h the g o v e r n m e n t is d i r e c t l y c o n t r a r y to t h e trend w h i c h
Sommer reports.
He a s s e r t s t h a t
" ... eleven U . S . States h a v e p r o g r a m s for r e i m b u r s i n g
v i c t i m s of v i o l e n t crimes based on the p r o p o s i t i o n
that w h e n the g o v e r n m e n t fails in its o b l i g a t i o n s to
p r o t e c t its c i t i z e n s , it should at least h e l p comp e n s a t e them for t h e i r l o s s e s . " 10
H a r l a n d r e f e r s to a v o c a l m i n o r i t y , i n c l u d i n g
Chief
Justice Goldberg, who favor state-funded victim
compensation
on the t h e o r y that "the State h a s failed in its
'duty' to p r o t e c t
h i m (the v i c t i m ) . "
11
Of the 22% (W = OJ w h o felt t h a t e i t h e r the state or the
f e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t should b e a r p a r t or the f i n a n c i a l
responsibi-
l i t y of r e s t i t u t i o n a r y e f f o r t s , six judges p l a c e d the p u b l i c
snare at less t h a n o n e - t h i r d .
Few s u r p r i s e s surfaced as a r e s u l t of the r e s p o n s e s
item fZi\...
to
When r e s t r i c t e d to "ONLY ONE" s a n c t i o n , judges in this
sample selected
jail or p r i s o n terms in o v e r w h e l m i n g a c c o r d .
w e i g h t i n g the s e l e c t i o n s m a d e in this item
(i.e., 5 points
By-
for
each n u m b e r 1 r a n k i n g , 1| points for each n u m b e r 2 r a n k i n g , e t c . )
the j a i l / p r i s o n o p t i o n achieved a 1J-.73 r a t i n g .
Supervised
tion, with a 3 . s c o r e , was a distant second.
R e s t i t u t i o n , as
can be seen by r e v i e w i n g the c h a r t at A p p e n d i x B , was the
proba-
judges'
third c h o i c e and f i n i s h e d a scant .ij.5 ahead of f i n e s .
I n d i v i d u a l r e s p o n s e s to the three q u e s t i o n s raised
item # 2 5 w e r e s u r p r i s i n g l y in c o n c e r t .
under
T w e n t y - f o u r of our sample
framed r e s p o n s e s to these v o l u n t a r y i t e m s .
Over h a l f the judges
reported an enhanced sense of justice for the v i c t i m as the m o s t
p o s i t i v e o u t c o m e of r e s t i t u t i o n .
As one judge expressed
it,
" R e s t i t u t i o n is one of the best w a y s to show victims that the
courts care about t h e m . "
A n o t h e r reported t h a t r e s t i t u t i o n
forced
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and aided the d e f e n d a n t in h i s o w n r e h a b i l i t a t i v e
attempt.
V i c t i m g r e e d , f i n a n c i a l i n a b i l i t y of d e f e n d a n t s , and the
n u m e r o u s b u r d e n s of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n w e r e listed as the m o r e serious
d r a w b a c k s to i n c r e a s e d u t i l i z a t i o n of r e s t i t u t i o n .
One judge urged
t h a t the " e l i m i n a t i o n of time in jail or the p e n " was such a drawback.
S e v e n t e e n of the sample m a i n t a i n e d they could I m a g i n e no
c i r c u m s t a n c e s u n d e r w h i c h r e s t i t u t i o n would be justified as the
sole s a n c t i o n .
O t h e r r e s p o n s e s suggested u s i n g r e s t i t u t i o n
m
"where
7
no v i o l e n c e is i n v o l v e d " or where- an u n i n t e n t i o n a l tort is at i s s u e .
S u m m a r y and
Conclusions:
R e c e n t u t i l i z a t i o n of r e s t i t u t i o n is labelled
by Harland.
"regressive"
He a s s e r t s :
" . . . the r e n e w e d u s e of r e s t i t u t i o n in the c r i m i n a l
p r o c e s s is u s u a l l y asserted as a r e t u r n to an a n c i e n t
h i s t o r i c a l a p p r o a c h ... the j u s t i f i c a t i o n for this
r e g r e s s i o n is u s u a l l y based upon the f a i l u r e of
c i v i l t r i b u n a l s to p r o v i d e a c c e s s i b l e and enforceable r e m e d i e s for crime v i c t i m s . " 12
S t a t e D i s t r i c t Judges in T e x a s are m a k i n g u s e of r e s t i t u t i o n
if on a s o m e w h a t i r r e g u l a r and i n d i v i d u a l i z e d b a s i s .
While
this
g r o u p w a s n o t a m e n a b l e to d i s c a r d i n g the m o r e t r a d i t i o n a l
sanctions
of p r i s o n or j a i l , the p r e s e n t study r e v e a l s an increased
awareness
of the p o s i t i v e q u a l i t i e s and p o t e n t i a l i t i e s of r e s t i t u t i o n .
One
C a l i f o r n i a judge h a s suggested that a l t e r n a t i v e s e n t e n c i n g , i n c o r p o r a t i n g r e s t i t u t i o n , "makes p u n i s h m e n t a m o r e w o r t h w h i l e
for the o f f e n d e r and a less costly one for
society."
experience
13
T h e t h i r t y - o n e judges involved in thi3 r e s e a r c h f a v o r
increased
e m p h a s i s and study of r e s t i t u t i o n b u t feel any s t a t e - w i d e p r o g r a m should
n o t be
state-supported.
This t i p - o f ~ t h e - i c e b e r g study r e v e a l s the need for c o n t i n u e d
and m o r e detailed r e s e a r c h in the a r e a .
It is urged that f u r t h e r
study b e g i n w i t h the d e f i n i t i o n of r e s t i t u t i o n set forward by C o l s o n
and
Benson:
" ... in using the term r e s t i t u t i o n , we r e f e r n o t to
s y s t e m s of state financed or i n s u r a n c e financed comp e n s a t i o n to v i c t i m s , but instead to p a y m e n t m a d e b y
the c r i m i n a l to the v i c t i m of his or h e r crime u n d e r
the s u p e r v i s i o n of the c r i m i n a l justice s y s t e m .
m
FOOTNOTES
1.
M . F r y , A R M S OF T H E L A W 125
(1951).
2.
K . M e n n i n g e r , T H E G R I M E OF P U N I S H M E N T 68
3.
T H E N A T I O N 657 (December 2 1 , 1 9 7 4 ) .
4.
R . S o m m e r , T H E E N D OF I M P R I S O N M E N T 2 7 , 29
5.
S . C h a n e l e s , A Job Program for E x c o n v i c t s That W o r k s ,
PSYCHO. TODAY 4 3 - 6 , (Mar. 1975).
6.
A . H a r l a n d , C o m p e n s a t i n g the Victims of C r i m e , 1I4 C R I M . L .
B U L L . 2 0 3 , 205 ( 1 9 7 8 ) .
7.
T H E N A T I O N , I d . at 6 5 9 .
8.
J . H u d s o n , B . G a l a w a y , & S . C h e s n e y , W h e n Criminals R e p a y
T h e i r V i c t i m s : A S u r v e y of R e s t i t u t i o n P r o g r a m s , 60 J U D I C A T U R E ,
J . A M . J U D . S O C ' Y . 314 ( 1 9 7 7 ) .
~
9.
B . G a l a w a y , The Uses of R e s t i t u t i o n , 2 3 C R I M E & D E L I N Q U I N C Y 57
(1977).
(1968).
(1976).
10.
R . S o m m e r , I d . at 2 9 .
11.
A . H a r l a n d , I d . at 2 0 6 - 0 7 .
12.
Id.
13.
F . M c C a r t y , How One Judge U s e s A l t e r n a t i v e S e n t e n c i n g , 60
J U D I C A T U R E , J . A M . J U D . S O C ' Y . 316 ( 1 9 7 7 ) .
11|.
C . C o l s o n & D . B e n s o n , R e s t i t u t i o n as an A l t e r n a t i v e to
I m p r i s o n m e n t , f o o t n o t e 96 of u n p u b l i s h e d m a n u s c r i p t , 1 9 7 9 .
APPENDIX A
IPS
QUESTIONNAIRE
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Requiring offenders to assume responsibility for the harm they have done
(by restitution or reparation) should be used more as one form of
sanction.
T
F
100%
The sanction of imprisonment is generally over-used as a method of regulating b e h a v i o r .
T
F
25%
75%
Do you feel that restitution is a sufficiently serious alternative sanction to warrant stepped-up study and emphasis in Texas?
Yes
No
77%
22%
Texas should initiate some type of program in the area of restitution.
T
F
81%
18%
If you responded "T" to the above item, would you favor a residential
program?
Yes
No
68%
31%
A State-administered form of victim insurance with w e l l defined classes
of losses would be preferable to any other form of victim compensation.
T
F
26%
73%
The State should accept part of the blame where innocent victims lose
property or are injured for failing to protect citizens adequately or
for inability to apprehend and prosecute offenders.
T
F
19%
80%
The State or Federal Government should assume part of the expense of any
restitution effort.
T
F
(N=8)
22%
77%
If you responded "T" to the above item, what % do you feel would be fair
and realistic for the State or Federal Government to assume (not on an
individual case b a s i s , but of the overall cost of such a program;?
(circle one)
10%
2
20%
1
30%
40%
3
50%
2
%
other
10.
Restitution imposes sufficient "punishment" in the mind of the o f f e n d e r ,
as compared to prison terms.
T
F
16%
83%
11.
Victims should be allowed to work out restitution agreements through faceto-face meetings with the offender.
T
F
30%
70%
Do you believe that victims should be allowed to veto the use of
restitution?
Yes
No
25%
75%
If n o t , should restitution be imposed anyway and the $$ channeled
elsewhere?
Yes
No
32%
68%
12.
13.
14.
To w h a t approximate extent does your court employ restitution as one
sanction (% of individual cases; circle one)
0%
10%
25%
33%
50%
66%
75%
100%
(12%)
(6%)
(15%)
(21%) (9%)
(9%)
(25%)
i nn
15.
Approximately how long have you been making use of restitution as one
method or part of a sanction?
(check one)
3%
8%
16.
Never
Only within the past year
One to two years
Three to five years
More than five y e a r s
The following forms of restitution should be employed to one degree or
another.
(check as many as desired)
55%
13%
Money paid directly to victim
Public community service by offender (i.e., work with sanitation
dept.)
Private community service by offender (i.e., Lighthouse for Blind
volunteer work)
Direct service restitution to victim (i.e., repair damaged property)
Other
12%
17%
2%
17.
37%
51%
Whether or not to use restitution should be determined by (check as many
as desired).
a.
b.
9%
16%
c.
20%
d.
e.
16%
22%
f.
15%
The seriousness of the crime
The ability of the offender to pay regardless of his present
work status
The ability of the offender to pay dependent upon his ability
to work
Court's belief that the offender would benefit thereby
Court's belief that the victim's interests would best be
served thereby
Whether a prison or j a i l sentence was concurrently being
assessed
18.
19.
Estimate how frequently attorneys request or offer the imposition of
restitution in your court. (circle one)
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
(34%)
(31%)
(17%)
(17%)
(1%)
Estimate how frequently probation officers, welfare w o r k e r s , police or
other third party persons suggest the use of restitution in your court,
(circle one)
0%
20.
25%
50%
75%
100%
(34%)
(26%)
(12%)
(28%)
How should the amount of restitution be determined:
a.
b.
57%
c. _ _ _ _ _ _
d.
e.
21%
f.
g.
h.
i.
18%
Jury trials alone
Court alone
Jury/court combination
Negotiation between victim and offender
Some 3rd party (i.e., probation officer)
Should be set by statute
Should be set by Sup. C t . guidelines
Other
All or some of the above depending on the case.
A
J.u'O
21.
22.
23.
Have you ever imposed a restitution sentence in excess of the amount
actually shown as victim damages?
Yes
No
12%
87%
If you responded "Yes" to the above item, briefly state the
circumstances:
In my experience, restitution has the following positive qualities:
(check as many as desired)
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
24.
45%
58%
51%
77%
54%
1%
A cleansing or cathartic result for offender
A s punishment to the offender
For offender rehabilitation
An increased sense of justice having been done for the victim
Provides $$ satisfaction to victim
Other
If you were limited to ONLY ONE of the following sanctions for imposition in all offender caused injury cases (but NOT involving victim death),
which would you select?
(Rank these by placing 1 beside your first choice,
etc. )
a.
b.
c
d.
e.
4. 73
2.42
3,94
2.87
l. 80
J a i l or prison terms
Fines
Supervised probation
Restitution
Other
If time permits, please respond to the. following:
a.
In light of your own experience, what is the most positive statement
you can make about the use of restitution in criminal (non-death) cases?
b.
What are the most serious drawbacks or limitations to increased
utilization of restitution?
c.
Under what circumstances would you feel justified in assessing
restitution as the sole sanction?
1l i
APPENDIX
i
APPENDIX B
Item
Sanction
Option
a.
Jail or p r i s o n terms
b.
Pines
c.
Supervised
Restitution
e.
N = 23
Other
probation
Weighted
Score
Weighted
Mean
109
1+.73
31+
2.i|2
67
3-924-
life
2.07
9
1 .BO