About half the jurisdictions in this country have some form of community prosecution program. The basic principle of community prosecution is involving the prosecutor’s office in crime prevention, not merely crime punishment.
One of the key means of doing this is to get criminals out of neighborhoods. For example, prosecutors have started bringing public nuisance suits to make owners of abandoned buildings being used as drug marts to either fix it up or give up the property. Other examples are excluding convicted drug offenders from drug areas, or convicted johns from prostitution areas, as part of their probation.
One of the methods used in some places is called the scene of the crime stay-away order. This is most commonly used for drug and prostitution offenses in order to stop the “revolving door” phenomenon where someone is arrested and back offending at the same spot the next day. It is well documented that drug and prostitution vendors are fairly consistently located for a few months and have serious effects on the neighborhoods.
These orders are given to defendants who are released before trial, usually without bond. They tell the defendant they can’t go within 4 blocks of the place where they bought drugs. The orders are tailored so that no one is excluded from their home or place of work.
Assume the orders are constitutional and otherwise legal. Does anyone have any ideas on policy considerations for this, positive or negative?
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Long term I'm almost certain it'll just result in behavior shifts, but for the short term its likely good, and even in the long term it may help prevent individual neighborhoods from bearing the brunt of the issues, giving them a better chance of prevention and impact amelioration.
Posted by Miro (Member # 1178) on :
At first glance, stay-away orders seem to be a good tool.
What happens if the defendant is caught defying an order? What I mean is, are the punishments light or severe?
Edit: Another question, how long do the orders last?
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Ah, should have explained that. The orders last until trial.
The penalties can be severe - revocation of bail which leads to detention until trial or even a felony. The felony result is very rare, but is possible. Jail would probably result: 10-45 days or so most likely.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
I wonder how the people just outside the four block range feel about this? I wouldn't think they'd be happy about influx of drug users/dealers awaiting prosecution (even though it would just be a few of them).
Posted by Toretha (Member # 2233) on :
why that specific distance? How is it enforced?
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:why that specific distance? How is it enforced?
Specific distance is a compromise to limit the restricted area (a 16-block square can make a lot of trips in many cities very difficult) and still get the person out of the neighborhood where he bought. There's nothing magical about it, but much bigger would exclude huge areas, and much smaller would do nothing.
It's enforced by communication with the local officers. Pictures are kept in the squad car, but really the officers are very likely to recognize them.
quote:I wonder how the people just outside the four block range feel about this? I wouldn't think they'd be happy about influx of drug users/dealers awaiting prosecution (even though it would just be a few of them).
I don't think that's what happens, although displacement must be examined.
Drug dealers don't just set up shop. There's turf issues, plus they like to know the neighborhood. Usually the changeover takes a few months.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
That's why I assume they'll stay close to what they know. It's not the known, per se, but it's less unknown than just relocating to the other side of town. They're territorial, as you mentioned, and I bet they stay close.
Posted by Miro (Member # 1178) on :
(Oops. I just accidently deleted my last post in this thread because I got it confused with another thread I had open.)
What I originally said... Are the reasons for exceptions to stay-away orders limited to home and work? What about things like family or church?
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
That would be more difficult. Maybe with a regular schedule or something it could be worked out.
But possible separation from community is something that needs to be considered.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
One thing I'm trying to find a way to describe is the effect on judicial credibility of giving orders that, in all likelihood, can be violated fairly often with little chance of being caught. Does this erode the judges credibility? If so, is the erosion small or great?