Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Access Criminology and Criminal Justice journals now

SAGETRACK

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Interpersonal Violence
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
0886260508322185v1
24/7/1209    most recent
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Diviney, C. L.
Right arrow Articles by Olson, L. M.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Diviney, C. L.
Right arrow Articles by Olson, L. M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Outcomes of Civil Protective Orders

Results From One State

Charles L. Diviney

Salt Lake Area Domestic Violence Coalition, cdivineyiii{at}yahoo.com

Asha Parekh

Salt Lake Family Justice Center

Lenora M. Olson

Intermountain Injury Control Research Center, University of Utah

This study compares final sentencing decisions ordered by judges to federal and state sentencing guidelines for protective order violations. The authors reviewed violations that were pled before the largest district court in Utah and found that in the majority of cases, defendants were not sentenced in accordance with federal and state guidelines. Although state guidelines mandate defendants who violate a protective order to attend a batterer intervention program, less than one fourth of defendants were sentenced to attend such programs. Fewer than half of the defendants were arrested and incarcerated, as opposed to the 100% mandated by state sentencing guidelines. Federal guidelines mandate that all defendants be ordered to surrender firearms, but only six defendants were given that order. This study shows that the judicial system could be more aggressive in improving the safety of victims of intimate partner violence by using the full extent of the sentencing guidelines.

Key Words: civil protective orders • intimate partner violence • court • sentencing • prosecution • firearms • batterer intervention programs • arrest • incarceration

This version was published on July 1, 2009

Journal of Interpersonal Violence, Vol. 24, No. 7, 1209-1221 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0886260508322185
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?