Roadblocks to crime: travel restrictions for convicted prostitutes.

During 1986 and 1987, the City of Champaign, Illinois, suffered a serious problem with prostitution in its downtown area. Prostitutes solicited customers from the street, stopping cars and blocking traffic. Collateral crimes--including theft, robbery, assault, and "John rolling"--resulted in a significant drain on police resources. Local merchants, citizens, and members of the city council lodged complaints, making this problem the number-one priority for the Champaign Police Department.

After several nominally successful overt attempts at enforcement, the department tried two different covert approaches, which also met with some success and resulted in numerous arrests and successful prosecutions for a number of months. Unfortunately, the problem did not disappear; it merely moved to a residential area west of the downtown area and actually worsened. The prostitutes became more brazen, even using a local church parking lot to perform sexual acts openly. In fact, the area developed such a bad reputation that women who lived there were approached by men who thought that any woman in the area was a prostitute.

The worsening of the problem despite successful arrest and conviction rates convinced department administrators that nearly 2 years of routine prosecution had not served as a deterrent to street prostitutes. Over the course of time, recidivism rates exceeding 90 percent illustrated the need for a new strategy. Careful planning and a joint effort between police and prosecutors ultimately led to the creation of a unique and comprehensive system of travel restrictions for convicted prostitutes.

Historical Background

The failure of the criminal justice system to provide a remedy had many causes. In Illinois, prostitution is a class A misdemeanor, punishable by up to 364 days in jail and a maximum fine of $1,000. While maximum penalties might, in theory, serve preventive purposes, State laws mandating progressive discipline precluded the courts from imposing long jail sentences on both first offenders and recidivists. Thus, even in those cases that did not result in a plea-bargain agreement, a typical sentence for a first offender would be 12 months' probation, a fine, and perhaps some public service.

Likewise, repeat offenders rarely faced incarceration, due in part to the misperception that prostitution, a so-called "victimless" crime, did not warrant such a harsh sanction. A jail sentence was the exception, not the rule, for recidivists. Thus, sentences imposed were either short or, in one case, potentially scandalous, as when a defendant with no true means of support other than street prostitution sought placement in a work-release program.

In 1989, the Illinois Legislature passed a statute that made third and subsequent prostitution convictions felonies, punishable by up to 3 years in prison. The initial promise of this new provision soon evaporated in light of the fact that many months, sometimes years, would pass before offenders would amass a criminal history sufficient to make them eligible for enhanced felony sentencing. Moreover, when these offenders first appeared in felony court, the process of progressive discipline customarily began anew, frequently resulting in the imposition of longer terms of probation.

Due to the heavy caseloads of court services personnel, convicted prostitutes were put back on the street with minimum judicial oversight. As this type of crime is rooted frequently in drug abuse, offenders placed on probation one afternoon would invariably be back on the "stroll" that very night.

Clearly, Champaign needed a new approach, leading the assistant State's attorney to theorize on the feasibility of travel restrictions. Such "no contact" provisions had previously received judicial sanction on a small, site-specific scale, such as offenders' being ordered to stay away from a fixed place of business where they had trespassed. However, broader restrictions had neither statutory authority nor appellate court precedent. As a result, the department faced the formidable task of convincing the courts to allow imposition of travel restrictions on convicted prostitutes.

Case Preparation

The first step in this process entailed establishing legal precedent, which extensive research provided. Courts in several States had addressed the propriety of travel restrictions for convicted prostitutes, presenting the prevailing view that such restrictions would be upheld if not overly broad or onerous in their scope and effect. While none of the reported cases upheld restrictions on the scale contemplated in Champaign, they did provide persuasive authority on which to base a request for imposing travel restrictions.

Next, the department needed to amass a factual basis for the implementation of travel restrictions. Toward that end, officers in the Crime Analysis Unit analyzed prostitution arrests in the city from 1983 to 1987. They paid specific attention to the geographic location of each offense, as defined by the location of the arrest or the initial covert contact made by police with the offender.

The results of this extensive analysis were indeed revealing, especially when plotted on an enlarged city map. Colored pins marking the location of each offense graphically illustrated that 92 percent of 321 documented arrests occurred within a 12-square-block area of downtown Champaign. In addition, because the different colors represented the years in which the offenses occurred, the map also demonstrated the migration of the center of illicit commerce from the downtown business area into an adjacent, well-established area of single family residences.

The Prosecution's Day in Court

The Champaign County State's Attorney's Office now had the evidentiary arsenal it needed to make its unprecedented request for judicial approval of travel restrictions on a broad geographic scale. At the sentencing hearing for a convicted prostitute, prosecutors requested a punishment that included travel restrictions. When presenting their case, they used the plot map as Exhibit 1. This evidence provided an irrefutable argument that the government had a compelling interest in providing safe streets in the affected area. The map also graphically illustrated that while in itself large, the area comprised only a small percentage of the entire community.

The defense's arguments were nonetheless formidable, relying in part on the time-honored constitutional right of travel and the absence of any express legal authority for the imposition of restrictions. Indeed, at the time of the hearings, the only valid legal authority was a provision in the State Code of Corrections that permitted a court to impose conditions of probation considered "reasonable" and "relat[ed] to the nature of the offense or the rehabilitation of the defendant"(1) on an individual basis. The prosecutors used this seemingly vague statutory provision to make a convincing claim that restricting access to Champaign's "open-air brothel" would indeed serve a rehabilitative purpose, by depriving the defendants access to their principal place of business.

The prosecutors' claim did not, however, go unanswered. Champaign County public defenders countered that complete "banishment" from the defined area would unduly hamper legitimate activity. In support, they presented evidence that drug rehabilitation facilities, job placement agencies, and arterial bus routes were either in or coursed through the area in which travel would be forbidden.

The prosecutor successfully rebutted this argument by proposing that probation supervision personnel monitor the travel ban. In other words, offenders could obtain written permission from a probation officer to enter the restricted area for legitimate purposes, with appropriate limitations as to time and place.

The prosecution ultimately prevailed. Balancing the competing concerns, the Circuit Court of Champaign County placed the offender on probation, subject to statutory conditions, with the added condition that she neither enter nor remain within the designated area without prior written permission from a probation officer.(2)

Following this case, the State's attorney successfully argued for travel restrictions for a second convicted prostitute.(3) Thirteen other cases were plea-bargained and also included travel restrictions as punishment.

Enforcement

The mere imposition of sentences of this nature, while unprecedented, could only be viewed as a starting point, for without successful enforcement, it would mean nothing. But, both the police and prosecutors had envisioned enforcement as well.

Mindful that Illinois law permits police officers to arrest probationers found violating the conditions of their sentences, the State's attorney immediately provided the Champaign Police Department with written notices of the imposition of the sentences in these cases. The notices contained photographs of the offenders, their biographical data, and a description of the area in which their travel had been restricted.

The State's attorney also provided specific direction that these offenders be arrested and brought before the court should they be encountered in the restricted area without the required written travel permit. In addition, the prosecutor handling the case volunteered to be available on an on-call basis to provide guidance.

Results

The implementation and enforcement of travel restrictions became a model of interagency cooperation. Nine weeks following trial court litigation, 12 recidivist and first-offender prostitutes were restricted from illegitimate presence in the area in which they had worked previously. While some rehabilitated themselves, the majority, unfortunately, tested government resolve and violated the travel restrictions. Police officers arrested these offenders, and the State's attorney initiated proceedings to revoke probation the same or following day.

Eventually, diligent enforcement and prosecution of the restrictions brought about successes never envisioned by those who devised and implemented the program. Over the ensuing 4-year period, street prostitution in Champaign decreased in excess of 90 percent. The quality of life in the impacted residential area improved markedly; the government prevailed; and the residents in the area reclaimed their neighborhood.

There were also legal inroads made far beyond the circuit court level. The Appellate Court of Illinois subsequently upheld the legality of Champaign's program, and the Illinois Legislature, in the wake of that decision, amended the Code of Corrections to authorize travel restrictions expressly as a condition of probation.

Conclusion

Champaign's experience provides valuable lessons for the future. The resulting legal remedies, now written into Illinois law, provide a resource for other communities throughout the State. Moreover, use of travel restrictions as a condition of community-based sentences has great potential for application to drug- and gang-related crimes.

When police officers and prosecutors work together, they can approach problems with solutions they may not have considered individually. Through continued cooperation, they can successfully implement these strategies and, with unrelenting enforcement and prosecution, warn potential lawbreakers that the city will not provide a haven for their illegal activities. Through such efforts, "the world's oldest profession" might be one step closer to extinction.

Endnotes

1 ILL. REV. STAT., Ch. 38, Sec. 1005-63(b) (1987).

2 Although the appellate court later reversed this case on trial errors, the propriety of the travel restrictions was not addressed, and the defendant began serving her sentence prior to the retrial. On appeal, the court upheld the defendant's sentence, which included travel restrictions.

3 In this case, the propriety of the travel restrictions was challenged and subsequently upheld in appellate court. See People v. Pickens 186 Ill.App.3d 456, 542 N.E.2d 1253 (1989).