SAGE Journal Articles

Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

Journal Article #1: Euvard, E., & Lecterc, C. (2016). Pre-trial detention and guilty pleas: Inducement or coercion. Punishment & Society. doi:10.1177/1462474516670153.

Abstract: This article examines why accused persons in pre-trial detention decide to plead guilty. Relying on the understanding of coercion proposed by Brunk, the article go beyond his analysis to show how pre-trial detention can exert pressure on an accused individual, who then feels coerced into pleading guilty. Interviews with 12 accused and 12 lawyers showed that in certain situations pre-trial detention can be a source of coercion, particularly if there are lengthy procedural delays and eventual sentences can be expected to be fairly short. However, there are other situations in which custodial remand acts as an inducement rather than as coercion or does not exert any pressure on the accused.


Journal Article #2: Koelzle, D., Listwan, S. J., Guastaferro, W. P., & Kobus, K. (2015). Treating high-risk offenders in the community: The potential of drug courts. International Journal of Offender Theory and Comparative Criminology, 59(5), 449-465. doi:10.1177/0306624X13515635

Abstract: The drug court model, which integrates drug treatment with community supervision and uses the authority of the court to facilitate compliance and behavioral change, provides an innovative alternative to processing as usual. While drug courts have enjoyed considerable empirical support, research suggests that they could increase their effectiveness through further refining their target population. In particular, it is hypothesized that drug courts are particularly well suited to treat drug offenders who have a high risk for recidivism. The purpose of the current study is to compare recidivism rates of high-risk drug court participants and high-risk probationers. Using new charges as a measure of recidivism, the results indicate drug court participants had significantly better outcomes than probationers. Implications for policy and practice are discussed.