Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
The decision to grant conditional release from prison (aka the parole decision) has been largely neglected in the contemporary criminological literature, despite its critical implications. The current study, conducted in Pennsylvania, United States, tests for punitive themes in parole decision making by examining the impact of several measures reflective of punishment satisfaction on the decision to grant release to eligible parole candidates. The results indicate that the amount of time served in relation to the original punishment does not predict parole decisions but the nature of the original offense does. Moreover, inmates eligible for parole have to experience at least one parole denial to increase their chances of release, suggesting that parole decision makers use the parole process as a punitive means. The implications of the findings are discussed.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0306624X16668512 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!