Abstract
This study explores the role of the probation officer in the sentencing process. There is no consensus in the literature regarding the importance of this role. Viewing the high rate of agreement often noted between probation officers' recommendations and sentences imposed has led some authors to view the probation officer as a highly competent “agent of individualization.” Others view this high rate of agreement as merely reflecting the ability of “judicial hacks” to “second guess” judges. Our data support the first of these interpretations. Probation officers' recommendations have a substantial direct effect on actual sentences. We noted that officers' recommendations varied significantly between liberal and conservative officers, and between male and female officers. More important, actual sentences also varied consistently with these criterion variables, thus arguing strongly for the independent role of probation officers in the sentencing process.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
