REPORT
ON
TRENDS IN NORTH CAROLINA PROBATION AND PRISON
POPULATIONS AFTER
THE
STRUCTURED SENTENCING ACT
Prepared by:
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND PLANNING
April, 2001
2
Page
Introduction 3
Probation
Entries 4
Exits 4
Population 5
Population age distribution 5
Population racial distribution 6
Population distribution by sex 6
Population crime distribution 7
Population and sentencing law 7
Population average length of stay 8
Prison Inmates
Admissions 9
Exits 9
Population 10
Population age distribution 10
Population racial distribution 11
Population distribution by sex 11
Population crime distribution 12
Population and sentencing law 12
Population average length of stay 13
Parole and Post-Release 14
Conclusion
15
CONTENTS
3
Introduction
In 1993, in response to overcrowded prisons and discrepancies between the sentences
required by statute and the length of sentences actually being served, the North Carolina
General Assembly adopted a new sentencing policy. This policy, the Structured
Sentencing Act (SSA) changes sentencing laws by setting new priorities for the use of
prison and community correction resources and links sentencing policies to correctional
resources through a formal legislative review process. The objectives of Structured
Sentencing include the following:
 To balance sentencing policies with corrections resources by making sentencing more
predictable and therefore population projections more accurate.
 To increase consistency in sentencing by limiting judicial discretion.
 To establish truth in sentencing by eliminating discretionary parole and the amount of
term reducing credits inmates can earn.
 To set priorities for the use of correctional resources by prioritizing prison
confinement to violent and repeat offenders.
The policies in the Sentencing Act change the profile of offenders who go to prison and
who remain in the community on probation. Prison is reserved for the most serious and
chronic offender and actual time served is longer. Intermediate punishments provide
restrictive supervision to offenders who need a high level of control in the community.
Community punishments provide structure for the least serious, chronic offender.
The Structured Sentencing Act became effective for offenses committed on or after
October 1, 1994. Other legislation has also had an impact on sentencing, including a
1993 statute requiring the legislature to obtain a fiscal impact statement before making
any change to sentencing laws, and a 1995 amendment changing the habitual-offender
statute.
This is the second report in an annual series to periodically monitor changes in
correctional populations as a result of sentencing law changes. This information is
important to correctional managers, to policy-makers and to the public to ascertain the
intended and unintended impact of sentencing law changes on correctional agencies.
The charts in this report show trends occurring between calendar years 1995 and 2000
among prison and probation populations. The data in the report are available through the
Office of Research and Planning’s Automated System Query (ASQ), a web-based
information source. Accompanying each chart is a narrative providing some
interpretation of the data.
4
Between 1995 and 1997 annual
probation entries increased from
50,000 to 60,000. This increase
was an expected result of
Structured Sentencing. Since
1997 probation entries have
remained fairly constant. Felons
consistently represent about 27%
of the annual probation entries.
Probation Entries
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Total
Misd
Felon
Probation Exits
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Total
All Other
Revoc.
ETS
During the period, probation revocations
increased faster than other types of exits from
supervision. The number of probationers
electing to serve (ETS) their suspended prison
terms declined, due to a change in the State
constitution. Revocations and ETS combined
rose from 30% of all exits in 1995 to 35% in
1998 before dropping back to 34% in 2000.
The rise in probation revocations may be the
result of higher-risk probationers who
previously were sentenced to prison and now
are on probation in the community. The exit
category “All Other” includes all successful
completions plus some terminations of re-convicted
offenders facing imprisonment.
PROBATION
5
Age Distribution
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Under 20
20 to 24
25 to 29
30 to 34
35 to 39
40 to 44
45 to 49
50 and over
2000
1995
The age distribution of
probationers under
supervision has not changed
substantially since 1995. The
largest age category continues
to be 20-24 year olds,
representing 20% of all
probationers. Increases in the
proportion of older offenders
are partly due to a general
aging of the state population.
Between 1995 and 1997, the
total number of probationers
under supervision rose by
8%, reflecting the increase in
entries due to Structured
Sentencing.. Since 1997, the
probation population has
remained fairly stable.
Probation Population
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Total
Misd
Felon
PROBATION POPULATION
6
Since 1995, there has been
little change in the relative
proportion of male and
female offenders under
probation supervision. In
1995 and 2000, 79% of the
probation population were
male and 21% were female.
Distribution by Sex
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Female
Male
2000
1995
Racial Composition
0% 20% 40% 60%
WHITE
BLACK
INDIA N
OTHER
2000
1995
The relative proportion of
white and black offenders
under probation supervision
has changed little during the
period. Since 1995 the
percentage of the probation
population that are white
dropped from 47 to 45 and
the percentage that are black
dropped from 49 to 48. The
category “Other” more than
doubled from 2 to 5 percent,
reflecting the recent
increase in the state’s
Hispanic population.
PROBATION POPULATION
7
PROBATION POPULATION
Crime Types
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
Other Public
Order
Other Traffic
Viol.
DWI
Drug Offenses
Property
Assaultive
2000
1995
The greatest change in the
distribution of crime types
of probationers since 1995
is a 24% increase in
assaultive crimes,
followed by a 17%
increase in non-DWI
traffic violations. This
trend may be the result of
an effort to make room for
the most serious and
chronic offenders in
prison by shifting some
offenders to probation that
in the past would have
received an active prison
sentence.
Sentence Law
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Structured
Sentence
Pre-Structured
Sentence
DWI
Other
2000
1995
Offenders sentenced under
Structured Sentencing now
make up 75% of the
probationer population.
Some offenders are still
sentenced under other laws,
including DWI offenders.
The category “Other”
includes out-of-state
convictions.
8
Average Length of Stay under
Supervision (Months)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Structured Sentencing reduced the
maximum probation supervision
period from five years to three for
felons and to two years for
misdemeanant probationers. Since
1995, the average length of stay for
felons declined from 30 months to
27 months, and from 22 to 20
months for misdemeanants. The
policy change seems to have had its
full effect and the average length of
stay has stabilized.
PROBATION POPULATION
Felon
Total
Misd
9
Prison Admissions
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Prison admissions dipped
in 1996 to 23,500 after the
first full year under
Structured Sentencing and
remained stable until 2000.
The decline in admissions
in 2000 was probably due
to lower arrests,
convictions and court
hearings as a result of
Hurricane Floyd. As
intended by policy, the
proportion of felony
admissions increased
during the period from
68% to 70% and the
proportion of
misdemeanants decreased.
Type of Prison Exit
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Structured Sentencing
resulted in an increase from
12% to 65% in the number
of inmates who remain in
prison until the expiration of
their sentence (“Expir”).
The number paroled has
declined substantially as the
pool of offenders admitted
under the old Fair
Sentencing law dwindles.
The “Other” category of
exits includes deaths and
release by the courts for
appeal, or release of
safekeepers. The 12%
decrease in total exits from
prison 1999 to 2000 is driven
by a continuing decline in
paroles and release of
safekeepers.
Total
Felon
Misd.
Total
Expir
Parole
Other
PRISON
10
Age Distribution
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Under 20
20 to 24
25 to 29
30 to 34
35 to 39
40 to 44
45 to 49
50 and over
2000
1995
The largest proportion of
prison inmates is aged 25 to
29. Since 1995 the
proportion of older inmates
has increased, particularly
inmates 35 and older. This
increase is probably due to
the effects of Structured
Sentencing, which requires
offenders to have prior
criminal convictions before
being sentenced to prison.
The year-end prison population
peaked in December 1998 and
has stabilized since then.. This
stabilization of the prison
population is due to the principle
of Structured Sentencing to match
resources and policies. This trend
is projected to be temporary as
more inmates serve longer
sentences over the coming
decade.
Prison Population
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Total
Felon
Misd
PRISON POPULATION
11
PRISON POPULATION
Racial Composition
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
OTHER
WHITE
BLACK
INDIAN
2000
1995
Since 1995, there has been a
slightly larger increase in
the proportion of white
inmates compared to black
inmates, reversing a long-term
trend. Whites
represent 33% of the prison
population in 2000 versus
63% black.
Distribution by Sex
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Female
Male
2000
1995
The inmate population
continues to be overwhelmingly
male. In 2000, males represent
94% of the prison population
and females represent 6%.
12
Crime Types
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Other Public
Order
Other Traffic
Viol.
DWI
Drug Offenses
Property
Assaultive
2000
1995
The prison population increases since
1995 were concentrated among
Assaultive and “Other public order”
crimes. This latter category consists
primarily of habitual offenders. Both
categories tend to have older-than-average
inmates and this trend explains
the increase in the over-35 population in
prison. The largest increase was among
the Other Public Order crimes, which
increased by 178%, followed by
assaultive crimes, up 18%. The large
decrease in property crimes is due
mainly to a 55% decrease in breaking
and entering. In addition, drug offenses
decreased 1.5% in 2000.
Sentencing Law
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Structured
Sentence
Pre-structured
DWI
Other
2000
1995
In 2000, 70% of inmates in
prison were sentenced under
Structured Sentencing. About
one-third were sentenced under
previous sentencing laws.
PRISON POPULATION
13
Average Length of Stay in Prison (Months)
0
4
8
12
16
20
24
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
The increase in time served in
prison after 1995 resulted from
the reduction in admission of
misdemeanants. Average length
of stay in prison will increase as
assaultive inmates (felons)
admitted under Structured
Sentencing remain in prison past
the time they would have been
paroled under the old Fair
Sentencing law. The sharp
increase in the average length of
stay in 2000 is indicative of this
trend.
Felon
Total
Misdem.
PRISON POPULATION
14
Parole and Post-release Entries
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
The number of inmates paroled
diminishes each year, as the
number of pre-Structured
Sentence inmates in prison
declines. Under Structured
Sentencing, the only inmates
supervised after release are
those whose crimes fall in the
B-E offense classes. Only in
the last two years have
substantial numbers of these
offenders been released under
post-release supervision (890 in
1999 and 1,017 in 2000).
Parole Only
Post Release
PAROLE AND POST-RELEASE
15
Conclusions
The trends revealed in this report show that the Structured Sentencing Act is achieving
the goals that were established:
 Among the prison and probation populations, a larger proportion of offenders are
those convicted of assaultive crimes, a result in line with the goal to reserve more
correctional resources for more serious offenders.
 Fewer misdemeanants are being admitted to prison, reserving prison space for felony
offenders.
 The average length of time that inmates spend in prison has increased. This is partly
a result of reserving more of the space for felons.
 Since the Sentencing Commission provided accurate population projections to the
General Assembly, legislators were able to fund adequate correctional resources for
such policy changes as the elimination of the population cap. This, in turn, enabled
the Parole Commission to reduce early paroles. Structured Sentencing was also
designed to provide increases in entries to probation to reserve prison space for
serious, chronic offenders.
 The most notable demographic trend depicted in this report is an increase in the
proportion of older probationers and prisoners. This trend is due in part to the aging
of the state population and to the policies of Structured Sentencing. While there was
no noticeable change in the female offender population, there was a slight reduction
in the proportion of black offenders in prison.
 The average length of stay in prison is beginning to increase as inmates with
assaultive crimes remain in prison past the time they would have been paroled under
old laws.