Browsing Reports by Subject "parole"
Now showing items 1-2 of 2
Alaska Criminal Code Revision — Tentative Draft, Part 6: Sentencing: Classification of Offenses Chart; Index to Tentative Draft, Parts 1-6The Alaska Criminal Code Revision Commission was established in 1975, and reestablished in June 1976 as a Subcommission of the newly formed Code Commission, with the responsibility to present a comprehensive revision of Alaska’s criminal code for consideration by the Alaska State Legislature. Tentative Draft, Part 6, contains an overview of sentencing in existing Alaska law as of 1978 and the provisions on sentencing and related procedures of the draft Revised Criminal Code, including classification of offenses, probation, fines, restitution, community service, imprisonment, and appeals. Commentary following each article is designed to aid the reader in analyzing the effect of the draft Revised Code on existing law and also provides a section-by-section analysis of each provision of the draft Revised Code. Appendices include definitions, proposed revisions to Title 33 of the Alaska Statutes (parole), a chart of classification of offenses, and an index to the six volumes of the Tentative Draft.
Alaska's Participation in the Interstate Compact for Probation and ParoleThe Interstate Compact for the Supervision of Parolees and Probationers is an agreement whereby one state agrees to provide supervision for offenders on community release from other states. Participants in the interstate compact agree that any state will accept supervision of a parolee or probationer providing the offender has proper residence either as a resident of that state or with family, and that he/she is able to find employment. Major increases in Alaska's prison population over the past decade have been accompanied by corresponding increases in the number of persons under probation/parole supervision and in the caseloads of individual probation officers. Using a master listing of all persons under the jurisdiction of the Alaska Department of Corrections from 1976 to 1983, the Justice Center at University of Alaska Anchorage made a preliminary assessment of the impact on Alaska of participation in the Interstate Compact. From 1976 to 1983, Alaska processed 1,551 offenders through the Interstate Compact, of whom 999 were received for supervision from other states (64.4% of the total) and 552 (35.6%) were sent to other states. Based on this data, the interstate compact has not yet been an equitable arrangement for any city in Alaska: each city has seen a greater number of incoming than of outgoing transfers.