Edge Rewrite
Jump to content

// Workers AI · dad joke modeWhat did the jail cell say to the visitor? You're always behind.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Prison visitation, in which someone held in prison is allowed to meet non-prisoners, is allowed in many jurisdictions, although rules differ by jurisdiction[1] and it may be considered either a privilege or a right.[2] Studies have evaluated its effect on recidivism.[3][4][5][6] In person visitation is often used by attorneys to protect legal professional privilege.[7]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. Boudin, Chesa; Stutz, Trevor; Littman, Aaron (2013–2014). "Prison Visitation Policies: A Fifty-State Survey". Yale Law & Policy Review. 32: 149.
  2. McCarthy, Daniel; Adams, Maria (2 October 2017). "Prison visitation as human 'right' or earned 'privilege'? The differing tales of England/Wales, and Scotland". Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law. 39 (4): 403–416. doi:10.1080/09649069.2017.1390292. S2CID 149314066.
  3. Duwe, Grant; Clark, Valerie (May 2013). "Blessed Be the Social Tie That Binds: The Effects of Prison Visitation on Offender Recidivism". Criminal Justice Policy Review. 24 (3): 271–296. doi:10.1177/0887403411429724. S2CID 145803358.
  4. Mitchell, Meghan M.; Spooner, Kallee; Jia, Di; Zhang, Yan (December 2016). "The effect of prison visitation on reentry success: A meta-analysis". Journal of Criminal Justice. 47: 74–83. doi:10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2016.07.006.
  5. Mears, Daniel P.; Cochran, Joshua C.; Siennick, Sonja E.; Bales, William D. (1 December 2012). "Prison Visitation and Recidivism". Justice Quarterly. 29 (6): 888–918. doi:10.1080/07418825.2011.583932. S2CID 53138357.
  6. Turanovic, Jillian J.; Tasca, Melinda (29 July 2022). "Conditions of Contact: Reexamining the Relationship between Prison Visitation and Recidivism". Justice Quarterly. 39 (5): 923–952. doi:10.1080/07418825.2021.1944284. S2CID 237715151.
  7. Geczy, Isabelle M. (2023). "Captive without Counsel: The Erosion of Attorney-Client Privilege for Incarcerated Individuals". UCLA Law Review. 70: 1084.