In the United States law enforcement system, paroles are one of the common ways used when releasing offered from the prison. Both the federal and states governments have different rules which address the issue paroles. It thus occurs that some states tend to have better parole system than others based on legal system put in place. It follows then that some states find it hard to operate an efficient paroles system and thus they need some change so that they can achieve the best out of this process (Kleiman & Hawken, 2008). This paper aims at focusing on the structure and size of Louisiana State’s parole system, address changes that may be required in the system, and lastly, outline how those changes affect a probation officer.
The Structure and Size of Louisiana States Parole System
The Louisiana state parole systems are outlined in Chapter 5, Title 15 of the state’s statutes. The system is headed by a seven member board of parole who are appointed by the governor. These are the members who are responsible for paroles given in this state. For eligibility of parole, these members consider the factors outline in the state’s law (USLegal, 2016). One major rule followed by this state is that all inmates that serve for the first felony offense are eligible for parole after serving thirty-three and one-third of the sentence imposed. Those one second time offenses qualify after serving 50% of their sentence, while as those convicted of a third or subsequent felony are not allowed for parole.
Louisiana State’s parole system structure also helps in the external supervision of the individual under conditional release. As per the 2016 state report on probation, 27,481 offenders were under the jurisdiction of the board, of this number, 2,842 were already under the parole supervision while as 24,639 were under the good time monitoring (Louisiana Board of Pardons and Parole, 2016). Based on the above data, it can be observed that the States has a fairly small under of individual under parole as opposed to others states like Mississippi and Alaska. The state’s parole system also lack a proper supervision team of people under good time monitoring as it does not look to their employability or family responsibility.
Changes Recommended by the System to Increase Effectiveness
Several changes can be introduced by this states on its system to make it more efficient like that of other states. First, the issue of two or more felony occurs due to poor integration of inmates and society once they are realized (Kleiman & Hawken, 2008). The states thus need to address this issue first, before they decide on giving parole order. There should be a supervision team that should look at aspect like employability of a person, and family responsibility to determine if they will fit in if given the parole.
This state also needs to lower the average time required for an individual to be eligible for parole. They can consider one-fourth of the sentence time for the first time offenders, and maybe 40% of the penalty time for the second time felony (Kleiman & Hawken, 2008). Such lowering of time needed will be good as it will reduce the public cost in term of tax for maintaining correction facilities and also increase chances of rehabilitating more offenders into the society.
How the Changes A Parole Officer
The above mention shifts in the Louisiana state parole systems will have several direct impacts on the probation officer. First, it will require them to have data about an offender beyond his/her prison records. The officer will be needed to contacts family members and cross friends so that they can report on the eligibility of a person for parole. Such effort will thus require these officers to have more skills on their duties. Secondly, the workload of the officers is also likely to raise (Kleiman & Hawken, 2008). They will have more individuals under parole if the average time of eligibility is reduced, and thus they will have more supervision to conduct.
In conclusion, this paper has given the structure and size of Louisiana State’s parole system, addressed changes that may be required in the system, and lastly, it has how those changes affect a probation officer. It has been revealed that average time for eligibility needs to be lowered and that more information about offender’s employability and family need to be identified.
Kleiman, M. A., & Hawken, A. (2008). Fixing the parole system. Issues in Science and Technology, 24(4), 45-52.
Louisiana Board of Pardons and Parole. (2016). Annual report; LA Board of Pardons & Parole. Retrieved from http://www.doc.la.gov/media/1/126.96.36.1996.annual.report_final.pdf
USLegal. (2016). Louisiana pardon and parole laws. Retrieved from https://pardonandparole.uslegal.com/state-pardon-and-parole-laws/louisiana/