Presentence Investigations
The origins of the modern Presentence investigation began in the 1840’s, led by a Boston shoemaker by the name of John Augustus. Augustus felt ” [The] object of the law is to reform criminals and to prevent crime, and not to punish maliciously or from a spirit of revenge” (www.cjcj.org). He felt it was his social responsibility to help selected offenders by gathering background information about an offender and if he deemed they worthy, he would provide bail out of his own pocket. He would then help the offender out by helping them find housing and employment. Mr. Augustus would then provide the judge with his detailed report at the sentence in hopes of persuading the judge to suspend the sentence and release the person into his custody.
John Augustus is considered the father of modern probation and through this procedure, he helped establish what became the first probation system in the nation. Massachusetts became the first state to adopt a probation law and in this statute it stated that probation could be granted to “such persons as may be reasonably be expected to be reformed without punishment.” This type of law was eventually expanded and led to the creation of numerous state statutes as well as the National Probation Act passed in 1925. The PSI took on renewed importance during the reformatory movement of the 1870’s in which an individualized approach was advocated and the PSI provided such information. This time period also led to the creation of indeterminate sentencing, which became the standard form of sentencing until the 1980’s. As systems and processes in criminal law evolved so did the need for more information about the defendant. By the 1930’s one of the most important tasks that a probation officer performed was the preparing of Presentence investigation reports.
This original PSI provided the judge a comprehensive background on the perpetrator as well as established the offenders potential for rehabilitation and reintegration. This information allowed the judge to tailor each sentence he handed down to the individual person. The PSI remains integral to sentencing systems based on rehabilitation.
The Presentence investigation is defined as “The examination of a convicted offender’s background before sentencing. Presentence investigations are generally conducted by probation or parole officers and are submitted to sentencing authorities” (Schmalleger, Pg.315). Such investigations can be reported in one of three ways, the long form, a very in depth report, the short form, an abbreviated summarization, or verbally. A PSI is very similar to a resume that includes both positive and negative aspects of a subjects life experiences.
The typical long form is divided into ten sections including personal information, information about the current and past offenses, family information, community information, sentencing recommendations, as well as various other types of info. The defendant is the major source of information included in the report and the information must then with be corroborated or marked as defendant provided or unconfirmed.
The final section of the report is one of the most important. It includes the sentencing recommendations of the probation officer and the probability of rehabilitation. Most judges accept the recommendation, which is made because it is recognized as being completed by a professional.
Every jurisdiction varies in the use of the PSI. Federal law requires Presentence investigations and outlines 15 topics every report must cover. States vary greatly in their individual uses of the report. Some states require them on all felonies; others only require one if the possible incarceration is over 6 months, and yet others do not require one at all unless the judge requests it. The task of writing PSIs can be very daunting. In New York City, probation officers each had to complete more that 40 PSIs each month. Despite a recent shift in the criminal justice system to more offense based and mandatory sentencing, the Presentence investigation still plays a very important role in ensuring justice. Through careful creation and implementation of the PSI greater justice can be assured and the court system will be able to act more efficiently and more effectively.
