Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sentencing Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Researchers and prosecutors urge transparent sentencing data; national JRI evidence is mixed
Summary
A prosecutor and university researchers told the Judiciary Interim Committee North Dakota lacks transparency about how long people actually serve sentences and that national justice-reinvestment results are modest; they urged clearer sentencing definitions and data reporting to inform policy.
A senior assistant state's attorney and two university researchers told the Judiciary Interim Committee that North Dakota’s sentencing system lacks the transparency lawmakers need to make informed policy.
Dennis (identified in the record as "Dennis single"), a local prosecutor, said open-records requests and DOCR spreadsheets reveal a gap between court-ordered sentences and time actually served. He cited an example from DOCR records in which an offender given an 1,826-day sentence served 45 days before parole consideration — roughly 2.5% of the term. "I did an open records request for DOCR records, and that offender served before his parole 45 days of his 1826 day sentence," he said, asking whether the system is transparent when court sentences are routinely shortened behind the scenes.
Professors William Sable and Thaddeus Johnson, invited from Georgia State University, summarized national research on the Justice Reinvestment Initiative (JRI). They said JRI-style reforms produced modest, short-lived reductions in drug-related prison admissions but did not yield durable nationwide declines in violent- or property-crime admissions. Johnson told the committee that local context, substitution effects and pre-existing trends often drive outcomes and that policy design should be intentional about goals and assumptions.
Both presenters urged better public reporting: define "incarceration," publish consistent sentence-to-service spreadsheets, and adopt shared definitions for recidivism and 'time served.' Dennis cited the American Law Institute's recent model penal code revision recommending a higher 'floor' for time served (70% in the ALI report) and greater transparency. The researchers recommended that the committee be explicit about targeted outcomes before adopting reforms so forecasts about savings and prison populations are credible.
Committee members asked for the spreadsheets and the DOCR-derived sentence detail file; the presenters agreed to forward those records to legislative staff for follow-up analysis. The committee signaled interest in building more standardized reporting and clearer cross-agency data flows before drafting statutory changes.
