Youth Probation Officer Pre-Sentence
Report Recommendations
Karla Gronsdahl, MA, Ph.D. (ABD)

Introduction
The pre-sentence report (PSR) has traditionally been a distinct
and essential document to assist judges in determining
appropriate sentencing outcomes in Canada. Utilizing the focal
concerns theory (e.g. blameworthiness, protection of the
community and practical constraints and consequences) this study
tests the hypothesis that there is a strong agreement between
youth probation officers (YPOs) sentencing recommendations and
judicial sentencing decisions despite the challenges of interpreting
a highly complex law such as the Youth Criminal Justice Act
(YCJA).
Methods
147 YPOs from British Columbia read five case studies and were
asked to select the appropriate sentencing options they would
have hypothetically recommended to the court in their PSRs. The
YPOs also checked off factors they considered when making their
recommendations. The 26 factors were grouped according to the
three focal concerns (see Table 2).
Results
To simplify the YPO data, values lower than 50% are not shown in
Table 1. In the first case (Kara), the YPOs and judge agreed with
a community sentence, but the type of sentence was very different.
Yet, as shown in Table 2 the focal concern factors that affected
YPO and judicial decisions in this case are almost identical.
In more serious cases (Carlos & Amir) there was considerable
agreement between the YPOs suggestions and final sentencing
decisions (e.g. a custodial sentence followed by some form of
community supervision).
While in the other two cases (Edward & Andy), the YPOs and
judges agreed on custody being part of the sentencing process,
however, it was the type of custody imposed that was different.
The judges preferred a type of custody that is served in the
community called a deferred custody and supervision order
(DCSO), whereas the YPOs suggested a custodial sentence in a
youth facility.

Discussion
Across the five cases there was a modest level of agreement
between the YPO recommendations and final judicial sentences.
When judges deviated from YPOs it was most often in favor of a
lighter sentence. However, in cases involving serious and violent
offences, legal variables (e.g. offence type, severity and prior
record) had a very strong influence on YPO recommendations and
the judges’ final sentencing outcomes. This is consistent with the
focal concerns perspective that suggests legal variables do
influence perception of blameworthiness and dangerousness.
Extralegal variables such as gender, family background and socioeconomic status were not influential in the five cases. Yet, mental
health concerns were important in Kara’s case as she had a
history of assaulting staff after repeated attempts to physically
restrain her. The judge sentenced her to a reprimand, the most
lenient sentencing option under the YCJA . This was a deliberate
and purposeful message by the judge that under this Act, a more
punitive consequence in order to curb assaultive behaviour will no
longer be available for youth with mental health issues who are in
the care of social service professionals.
In another case, race was important for three-quarters of the
YPOs, however, it was not as salient as the nature of the offence
(aggravated assault) and subsequent victim impact. Similarly, the
judge noted the offence superseded family and cultural ancestry.
This result was very surprising given the YCJA includes mandatory
provisions for sentencing Aboriginal young offenders.
Conclusion
The hypothesis that YPOs and final judicial sentences would align
found moderate agreement. Given the YCJA is highly prescriptive
and unambiguous when sentencing serious and violent offenders,
there is an expectedly high correspondence between YPO
recommendations and related judicial sentencing decisions in
these types of cases. For other less serious offences, the YPOs
and judges more frequently differed in terms of their focal concerns
because of the complex interaction between the various extralegal
factors (e.g. family, mental health, substance use) making it
difficult for YPOs to align their recommendations with the actual
sentences given by the judges.

JUSTICE INSTITUTE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA