Procedure as Punishment: Analyzing Group Differences in Bench Warrant Issuance

• In Event: Theoretical Debates and Dimensions of Punishment

Abstract

Bench warrants, while often perceived as a strictly procedural tool intended to maintain an individual’s engagement with their ongoing court proceedings, can lead to various unintended consequences for defendants. In addition to increasing their likelihood of engagement with law enforcement, defendants may be burdened with additional court costs, fines and fees, and even incarceration. This research investigates the impacts of bench warrant issuance on the program participants of alternative to incarceration (ATI) programming in two major cities in the Northeastern United States. Researchers examined group differences across various demographics and assessed psychosocial needs of over 1,000 ATI participants as they related to the issuance of bench warrants and satisfactory program completion. Preliminary results demonstrated that, among other factors, substance use, housing instability, age, and program mandate length were all associated with a participant’s likelihood of being warranted, and that participants who had been warranted had higher levels of program non-completion compared to their non-warranted peers. This research demonstrates the need for judges and relevant court stakeholders to consider extenuating psychosocial factors impacting a defendant’s failure to appear in court, and to carefully consider the ways this procedural tool may in fact extend, rather than help resolve, their justice involvement.

Authors

• Conor Michael Mulvaney, Center for Justice Innovation

• Erin Morgan Koyle, Center for Justice Innovation