Judicial Perspectives on Sentencing Mentally Ill Violent Offenders in New York

Mass incarceration is a public health crisis in the United States. Scholarly research has shown that incarceration may lead to exacerbated psychiatric conditions and increased recidivism risk. Lawmakers and policymakers have turned toward therapeutic jurisprudence (TJ) to develop and implement trauma-informed crime prevention and intervention strategies that focus on diverting individuals from prisons and into community-based treatment. New York legislators have expanded problem-solving courts (e.g., mental health courts), psychiatric treatment facilities, public housing supports, and law enforcement training. In this generic qualitative study, five criminal court judges in New York shared their perspectives on TJ and trauma-informed approaches to sentencing mentally ill violent offenders. Four themes emerged from thematic analysis: criminal responsibility, sentencing approaches, professional development for judges, and benefits of study. The five subthemes related to the research questions were cognitive factors, social factors, applications of TJ, judicial education, and criminal justice reforms. The findings of this study may provide greater insights for law- and policymakers in New York and other U.S. urban areas on ways to strengthen criminal justice policy reforms incorporating trauma-informed research applicable to legal applications. Applying TJ to judicial sentencing may facilitate positive outcomes for defendants and victims, which can enhance public safety leading to positive social change.