|
NOTES
<br />1. Taylors Falls and Wyoming are currently the only local governments in Minnesota that have passed residency restric-
<br />tions for sex offenders. None of the 224 offenders examined in this study were released to either of these two locations.
<br />2. In Minnesota, there are currently 11 correctional facilities that house adult prisoners committed to the Commissioner
<br />of Corrections. The 3,166 sex offenders were released from 8 of these facilities. The only 3 facilities from which these offend-
<br />ers were not released were MCF–Red Wing, which contains mostly juvenile offenders, and MCF–Willow River and
<br />MCF–Togo, which hold the male and female boot camp (i.e., Challenge Incarceration Program) populations, respectively.
<br />The 224 recidivists examined here were released from 7 facilities. The eighth facility, MCF–Shakopee (the main correctional
<br />facility for female offenders), did not account for any releases due to the absence of females among the 224 recidivists.
<br />3. Information regarding the specific data source(s) used for each item can be obtained from the corresponding author.
<br />4. The standards for intensive supervised release (ISR) are more rigorous in comparison to those for supervised release.
<br />In particular, offenders placed on ISR experience a greater frequency of contacts with supervision agents, are required to
<br />maintain steady employment, are expected to comply with random alcohol and/or drug testing, and are subjected to unan-
<br />nounced face-to-face contacts with their supervision agents at both their residence and place of work. Because of the
<br />increased supervision requirements, ISR agents handle a smaller caseload, which has been capped at 15 offenders per agent
<br />according to Minnesota law.
<br />REFERENCES
<br />American Correctional Association. (2007). Resolution on Neighborhood Exclusion of Predatory Sex Offenders. Retrieved
<br />from http://www.aca.org/government/policies.asp
<br />Brantingham, P. J., & Brantingham, P. L. (1984). Patterns in crime. New York: Macmillan.
<br />Canter, D.V., & Gregory, A. (1994). Identifying the residential location of rapists. Journal of the Forensic Science Society,
<br />34, 169-175.
<br />Colorado Department of Public Safety. (2004). Report on safety issues raised by living arrangements for and location of sex
<br />offenders in the community. Denver, CO: Sex Offender Management Board.
<br />Greenfield, L. (1997). Sex offenses and offenders: An analysis of data on rape and sexual assault. Washington, DC: U.S.
<br />Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
<br />Groff, E., & McEwen, T. (2006). Exploring the spatial configuration of places related to homicide events, final report.
<br />Alexandria, VA: Institute for Law and Justice.
<br />Hanson, R. K., & Morton-Bourgon, K. (2004). Predictors of sexual recidivism: An updated meta-analysis (User Report No.
<br />2004-02). Ottawa: Department of the Solicitor General of Canada.
<br />Harris, A. J. R., & Hanson, R. K. (2004). Sex offender recidivism: A simple question. Ottawa: Public Safety and Emergency
<br />Preparedness Canada.
<br />Iowa County Attorneys Association. (2006). Statement on sex offender residency restrictions in Iowa. Des Moines: Author.
<br />Langan, P. A., & Levin, D. J. (2002). Recidivism of prisoners released in 1994. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice,
<br />Bureau of Justice Statistics.
<br />Langan, P. A., Schmitt, E., & DuRose, M. (2003). Recidivism of sex offenders released from prison in 1994. Washington, DC:
<br />U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
<br />Levenson, J. S., & Cotter, L. P. (2005). The impact of sex offender residence restrictions: 1,000 feet from danger or one step
<br />from absurd? International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology,49, 168-178.
<br />Levenson, J. S., & D’Amora, D. A. (2007). Social policies designed to prevent sexual violence: The emperor’s new clothes?
<br />Criminal Justice Policy Review, 18,168-199.
<br />Lundrigan, S., & Czarnomski, S. (2006). Spatial characteristics of serial sexual assault in New Zealand. The Australian and
<br />New Zealand Journal of Criminology,39, 218-231.
<br />Minnesota Department of Corrections. (2003). Level three sex offenders’residential placement issues. St. Paul: Author.
<br />Minnesota Department of Corrections. (2007). Sex offender recidivism in Minnesota. St. Paul: Author.
<br />Mustaine, E. E., & Tewksbury, R. (in press). Registered sex offenders, residence, and the influence of race. Journal of
<br />Ethnicity in Criminal Justice.
<br />Mustaine, E. E., Tewksbury, R., & Stengel, K. M. (2006a). Social disorganization and residential locations of registered sex
<br />offenders: Is this a collateral consequence? Deviant Behavior,27, 329-350.
<br />Mustaine, E. E., Tewksbury, R., & Stengel, K. M. (2006b). Residential location and mobility of registered sex offenders.
<br />American Journal of Criminal Justice,30(2), 177-192.
<br />Nieto, M., & Jung, D. (2006). The impact of residency restrictions on sex offenders and correctional management practices:
<br />A literature review. Sacramento: California Research Bureau.
<br />Rengert, G. F. (2004). Journey to crime. In G. Bruinsma, H. Elffers, & J. de Keijser (Eds.),Punishment, places and perpe-
<br />trators: Developments in criminology and criminal justice research. Portland, OR: Willan Publishing.
<br />Duwe et al. / RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY & SEX OFFENSE RECIDIVISM 503
<br /> at University of British Columbia Library on April 27, 2010 http://cjb.sagepub.comDownloaded from
|