Procedural justice alone was insufficient to increase perceived legitimacy when financial motives were suspected.
In Georgia, courts are permitted to contract with private probation companies to supervise individuals’ sentences for minor offenses or simply because they cannot pay their fines and fees at the time of sentencing. This dissertation examines how legal debt—specifically, probation supervision fees assessed through private probation—shapes perceptions of procedural justice, legal cynicism, and legitimacy among individuals sentenced to misdemeanor probation in Atlanta’s Municipal Court. Drawing on over 50 hours of court observations and 33 in-depth interviews with individuals on misdemeanor private probation, the author identifies three domains through which participants evaluate their court experiences: relational fairness (e.g., dignity and voice), procedural fairness (e.g., transparency and bureaucratic hassle), and substantive fairness (e.g., proportionality of punishment). While many participants reported neutral or even positive interactions with individual system actors, such as judges and probation officers, the imposition of ongoing fees—especially by for-profit probation companies—was perceived as exploitative. This perception contributed to widespread legal cynicism — a belief that the justice system is more concerned with extracting money than delivering fair outcomes. This study shows that when financial exploitation is perceived, procedural fairness alone does not increase legitimacy. Participants often viewed fines as legitimate punishments, but saw private probation fees as arbitrary and unjustified. This distinction, combined with previous exposure to the system, reinforced legal cynicism and skepticism toward the broader legal system. The author recommends rethinking the role of monetary sanctions in misdemeanor courts and offers policy suggestions aimed at reducing overreliance on revenue-generating probation models.
You can read the full text here.
Key Findings:
- Legal debt was often cited as the primary burden of probation, especially for unemployed or low-income individuals.
- Participants lacked clear breakdowns of what they owed, contributing to confusion, distrust, and perceptions of procedural unfairness.
- Monthly private probation fees ($49/month plus fees) created long-term debt burdens, particularly for unemployed or underemployed participants.
- Judges rarely waived probation fees, even for indigent defendants, despite having the discretion to do so under court policy.
Recommendations:
- Implement an electronic court notification system to reduce failure-to-appear (FTA) rates and the resulting financial and legal consequences.
- Improve court transparency by providing clear, layperson-accessible fact sheets that explain sentencing options, such as community service or participation in diversion programs.
- Waive probation fees for defendants who choose community service.
- Reconsider the use of private probation companies for supervising misdemeanor cases.
- Adopt a retributive procedural justice framework that centers legitimacy on the fairness and proportionality of punishment and emphasizes mutual accountability between the state and its citizens.