Social Science Research on Wrongful Convictions and Near Misses, 1980-2012 (ICPSR 34522)
Version Date: May 31, 2016 View help for published
Principal Investigator(s): View help for Principal Investigator(s)
Jon Gould, American University;
Julia Carrano, American University;
Richard Leo, University of San Francisco;
Joseph Young, American University
https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR34522.v1
Version V1
Summary View help for Summary
These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.
This study examined how the criminal justice system avoids wrongful convictions by comparing violent felony cases that ended in an official exoneration after conviction ("wrongful convictions") with those in which defendants had charges dismissed before trial or were acquitted on the basis of their factual innocence ("near misses"). Data were collected on a total of 460 cases (260 wrongful convictions and 200 near misses), and these cases were compared quantitatively and qualitatively on variables that might explain the different outcomes. These variables included the usual causes of wrongful convictions, such as eyewitness misidentification, false confession, and forensic error, as well as demographic, social, and procedural variables.
Citation View help for Citation
Export Citation:
Funding View help for Funding
Subject Terms View help for Subject Terms
Geographic Coverage View help for Geographic Coverage
Smallest Geographic Unit View help for Smallest Geographic Unit
County
Restrictions View help for Restrictions
Access to these data is restricted. Users interested in obtaining these data must complete a Restricted Data Use Agreement, specify the reasons for the request, and obtain IRB approval or notice of exemption for their research.
Distributor(s) View help for Distributor(s)
Time Period(s) View help for Time Period(s)
Date of Collection View help for Date of Collection
Data Collection Notes View help for Data Collection Notes
-
These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.
-
The qualitative Expert Panel dataset is not available. Please see the final report for a summary of the data.
Study Purpose View help for Study Purpose
The purpose of this study was to ascertain which factors explain how the criminal justice system identifies and addresses cases of factual innocence to prevent wrongful convictions. To accomplish this, the study compared felony cases that ended in an official exoneration with those in which defendants had charges dismissed or were acquitted on the basis of their factual innocence. The specific questions asked were as follows:
- What factors explained why innocent suspects were erroneously convicted in certain cases but acquitted or have their charges dismissed in other cases ("near misses")?
- What policy interventions would help the criminal justice system "get it right" and acquit the innocent, thereby preventing future erroneous convictions?
Study Design View help for Study Design
The study selected cases between January 1, 1980 to January 1, 2012 where a factually innocent defendant who was indicted by a state for a violent felony against a person and was subsequently relieved of all legal responsibility for the crime. Two categories were created: "erroneous convictions" for those who were exonerated after conviction, and "near misses" for those who were acquitted or had charges dismissed before conviction on the basis of factual innocence.
To identify potential cases, prior publications in the field, internet websites and blogs were searched; media coverage of these incidents were investigated using online newspaper databases, such as Google Archives; and potential cases were solicited through national outreach to lawyers, criminal justice officials, local innocence projects, and scholars. From these sources 61 umbrella questions were collected on demographics, procedural information, and evidential information. The questions were designed to elicit factors that might distinguish erroneous convictions from dismissals and acquittals based on innocence. A modified Police Foundation Rating Scale was applied to both sets of cases to derive an evidentiary strength rating scale.
To supplement the quantitative results with a qualitative context, an expert panel comprised of twelve criminal justice professionals, was convened to review 39 sample cases, drawn from the database of erroneous convictions (20) and near misses (19). The expert panel was asked to identify and discuss the significant errors in the sample cases.
Sample View help for Sample
Social Science Research on Wrongful Convictions and Near Misses Dataset
The defendant must have been factually innocent, and convicted or indicted on a violent felony against a person no earlier than January 1, 1980 and exonerated, acquitted, or dismissed no later than January 1, 2012 in the United States. Here factually innocent is defined as someone else having committed the crime.
The potential cases were identified, under a common methodology, using multiple approaches. These included: examining prior publications in the field; searching internet websites and blogs; investigating media coverage of these incidents using online newspaper databases, such as Google Archives; and soliciting potential cases through national outreach to lawyers, criminal justice officials, local innocence projects, and scholars.
Expert Panel Dataset
An expert panel met over two days in early February 2012 at the American University campus in Washington, DC. The panelists were selected with the goal of providing a diversity of opinions and experiences in the field of criminal justice. The potential panelists were selected though nominations from experts or by their reputations as experts. The expert panel consisted of twelve criminal justice professionals: two prosecutors, two retired judges, a defense attorney, a police sergeant, a forensic scientist, and researchers on both police and prosecutor practices.
Time Method View help for Time Method
Universe View help for Universe
Factually innocent defendants convicted or indicted on a violent felony against a person no earlier than January 1, 1980 and exonerated, acquitted, or dismissed no later than January 1, 2012 in the United States. (Wrongful Convictions and Near Misses Dataset)
Criminal justice professionals. (Expert Panel Dataset)
Unit(s) of Observation View help for Unit(s) of Observation
Data Source View help for Data Source
Court Documents
Internet Websites and Blogs
LexisNexis Academia
Google Archives
Association of Prosecuting Attorneys
The Innocence Project's database
Data Type(s) View help for Data Type(s)
Mode of Data Collection View help for Mode of Data Collection
Description of Variables View help for Description of Variables
Social Science Research on Wrongful Convictions and Near Misses dataset (n=460) contains variables on crime statistics of the jurisdiction, criminal history and demographics of the defendant such as race, age, and types of previous charges and convictions, evidential information such as relationship between the victim and offender, time interval between crime, arrest and indictment, forensic evidence, and witness information, procedural information such as reason for exoneration, method and responsible authority of exoneration, and time between conviction and exoneration, and measures of the evidentiary strengths of the prosecution and defense case.
Presence of Common Scales View help for Presence of Common Scales
Police Foundation Strength of Evidence Scale
HideOriginal Release Date View help for Original Release Date
2016-05-31
Version History View help for Version History
- Gould, Jon, Julia Carrano, Richard Leo, and Joseph Young. Social Science Research on Wrongful Convictions and Near Misses, 1980-2012. ICPSR34522-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2016-05-31. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR34522.v1
Notes
These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.
The public-use data files in this collection are available for access by the general public. Access does not require affiliation with an ICPSR member institution.
One or more files in this data collection have special restrictions. Restricted data files are not available for direct download from the website; click on the Restricted Data button to learn more.
This dataset is maintained and distributed by the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data (NACJD), the criminal justice archive within ICPSR. NACJD is primarily sponsored by three agencies within the U.S. Department of Justice: the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.