Search results

Showing 1 – 9 of 9 results.
Curated

American Bar Foundation: State Criminal Court Cases, 1962 (ICPSR 7272)

Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
This study presents data about criminal court cases in the 50 states and District of Columbia in 1962. Variables include state and county of trial, case processing, offense charged, sentence, type of counsel, amount of bail, length of time in jail, and other aspects related to the disposition of the cases. Demographic information on the defendant is provided, such as age group, sex, race, and years of school completed.
Curated

Assessment of Defense and Prosecutorial Strategies in Terrorism Trials in the United States, 1980-2004 (ICPSR 26241)

Released/updated on: 2014-11-11
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1980-01-01--2004-01-01
This study created a flat-file database of information regarding defendants who were referred to United States Attorneys by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) following official terrorism investigations between 1980 and 2004. Its ultimate goal was to provide state and federal prosecutors with empirical information that could assist federal and state prosecutors with more effective strategies for prosecution of terrorism cases. The results of this study enhanced the existing 78 variables in the AMERICAN TERRORISM STUDY, 1980-2002 (ICPSR 4639) database by adding the 162 variables from the Prosecution and Defense Strategies (PADS) database. The variables in the PADS database track information regarding important pleadings, motions, and other key events that occur in federal terrorism trials; the PADS variables measure the strategies used by legal counsel as well as other legal nuances.
Curated

Comparing Court Case Processing in Nine Courts, 1979-1980 (ICPSR 8621)

Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
Geographic coverage: United States, Illinois, Michigan, Pennsylvania
Time period: 1979-01-01--1980-01-01
This study looks at the characteristics of officials who are involved in court case processing. Data were collected on the cases and defendants, the officials involved in the cases, personality characteristics of the officials and the perceptions that these officials have of each other.
Curated

Early Intervention by Counsel: A Multi-Site Evaluation of the Presence of Counsel at Defendants' First Appearance (CAFA) in Court, 6 New York State counties, 2012-2016 (ICPSR 37370)

Released/updated on: 2020-11-30
Geographic coverage: United States, New York (state)
Time period: 2012-01-01--2016-01-01

This study sought to assess the impact of local programs that ensure that legal counsel is provided at first appearance (usually arraignment) in court on court decisions (such as bail or pretrial release, and consequences such as pretrial detention and booking at a local detention facility), as well as on subsequent consequences for charge reduction, disposition, and sentencing. The project collected original data from six upstate New York counties (under pseudonyms). The data were collected from indigent defense programs' case files, supplemented by data from county detention facilities on booking and release.

Demographic variables in this collection include defendant age, race, gender, and residency.

Curated

Effects of Defense Counsel on Homicide Case Outcomes in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1995-2004 [United States] (ICPSR 32541)

Released/updated on: 2012-09-21
Geographic coverage: United States, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Time period: 1994-01-01--2005-01-01
This study measured the difference that defense counsel made to the outcome of homicide and death penalty cases. One in five indigent murder defendants in Philadelphia were randomly assigned representation by the Defender Association of Philadelphia while the remainder received court-appointed private attorneys. This study's research design utilized this random assignment to measure how defense counsel affected murder case outcomes. The research team collected data on 3,157 defendants charged with murder in Philadelphia Municipal Court between 1995-2004, using records provided by the Philadelphia Courts (First Judicial District of Pennsylvania). Data were also obtained from the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, the Pennsylvania Unified Judicial System web portal, the National Corrections Reporting Program, and the 2000 Census. This study contains a total of 47 variables including public defender representation, defendant demographics, ZIP code characteristics, prior criminal history, case characteristics, case outcomes, and case handling procedures.
Curated

National Manpower Survey, 1973-1976 (ICPSR 7675)

Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1973-01-01--1976-01-01
This data collection contains information from a series of national surveys, conducted simultaneously across the criminal justice system, to ascertain national manpower strengths and goals, agency information and characteristics, and attitudes of the agency heads during the period 1973-1976. The National Manpower Survey was undertaken to assess the adequacy of existing federal, state, and local training and education programs meeting current personnel needs in various law enforcement and criminal justice functions and operations. The study intended to project future personnel and training needs, by occupation, in relation to anticipated availability of qualified personnel in order to assess the future adequacy of training and educational resources. It also sought to establish "needs priorities" as a basis for future training and academic assistance programs to be funded by the Bureau of Justice Statistics. The study design systematically covered the personnel needs in all state and local governmental agencies that were part of the law enforcement and criminal justice system. Sectors within the system included: (1) law enforcement, consisting of police departments and sheriff's agencies, ranging in size from one-person constabularies to large city departments employing 20,000 or more individuals, (2) corrections, including both adult and juvenile correctional institutions and agencies, and (3) the judicial process, including a wide range of courts with varying jurisdictions and scope, district attorneys or prosecutors' offices, and public defenders' offices. For this study, the Bureau of Social Science Research was responsible for the acquisition and assessment of existing statistical data as well as the design and execution of systematic mail surveys of agencies, officials, and employees within the law enforcement/criminal justice system. Nine nationwide surveys were directed to executives in criminal justice agencies, including chiefs of police (in both large and small departments), sheriffs (in both large and small departments), chief prosecutors, chief defenders, court administrators, wardens of adult correctional facilities, directors of juvenile correctional facilities, and chief probation and parole officers. Two additional surveys were sent to general and appellate jurisdiction courts. In the nine surveys directed to criminal justice executives, the instruments asked respondents for (1) an overall assessment of manpower problems, including personnel categories in which critical shortages might exist, and total personnel required to fulfill all agency duties and responsibilities, (2) desired and actual entry level standards, as well as entry level and in-service training content and requirements, (3) demographic, educational, training, and occupational background information about the executive respondent, (4) opinions about major obstacles to effectiveness and attitudes toward various issues such as team policing, plea bargaining, and computer-assisted case management, and (5) a fact sheet section dealing with agency employment by occupational category, salaries, and workloads. Each of the remaining two surveys was a census of general and appellate jurisdiction courts designed to yield basic statistical information regarding the courts and court systems' current staffing, training activities, and caseloads, and did not seek any attitudinal or subjective responses. Thus the agency itself was the reporting unit, with the respondent required only to be in a position to provide accurate, reliable information.
Curated

National Survey of Indigent Defense Systems (NSIDS), 1999 (ICPSR 3081)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-18
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1999-01-01--2000-01-01
This survey collected nationwide data in order to: (1) identify the number and characteristics of publicly financed indigent defense systems and agencies in the United States, (2) measure how legal services were provided to indigent criminal defendants in terms of caseloads, workloads, policies, and practices, and (3) describe the types of offenses handled by indigent defense system organizations. The study was initially designed to permit measurable statistical estimates at the national level for each region of the United States, for individual states, and for the 100 most populous counties, including the District of Columbia. However, due to resource and financial constraints, the study was scaled back to collect indigent criminal defense data at the trial level for (1) the 100 most populous counties, (2) 197 counties outside the 100 most populous counties, and (3) states that entirely funded indigent criminal defense services.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs

National Survey of Indigent Defense Systems (NSIDS) State-Administered Data, 2013 (ICPSR 36831)

Released/updated on: 2017-10-02
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2012-01-01--2013-01-01

The National Survey of Indigent Defense Systems (NSIDS) collected nationwide data in order to: (1) identify the number and characteristics of publicly financed indigent defense systems and agencies in the United States, (2) measure how legal services were provided to indigent criminal defendants in terms of caseloads, workloads, policies, and practices, and (3) describe the types of offenses handled by indigent defense system organizations. The study was initially designed to permit measurable statistical estimates at the national level for each region of the United States, for individual states, and for the 100 most populous counties, including the District of Columbia. However, due to resource and financial constraints, the 1999 Survey of Indigent Defense Systems (ICPSR 3081) was scaled back to collect indigent criminal defense data at the trial level for (1) the 100 most populous counties, (2) 197 counties outside the 100 most populous counties, and (3) states that entirely funded indigent criminal defense services.

The 2013 NSIDS was the first census of all state- and county-administered indigent defense systems. It was also the first collection of data focusing on criminal defense and civil, juvenile, and appellate representation. The NSIDS furthers the work of the 2007 Census of Public Defender Offices (CPDO) and the 1999 Survey of Indigent Defense Systems.

Curated

Systems and Training Requirements for Criminal Justice Participants (PROJECT STAR), 1971-1974: California, Michigan, New Jersey, Texas (ICPSR 8392)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-18
Geographic coverage: United States, Texas, California, New Jersey, Michigan
Time period: 1971-01-01--1974-01-01
Project STAR was designed to collect information about the various roles of operational criminal justice personnel in order to assist in the design of educational and training programs for these personnel. Data were collected from a two-part questionnaire administered to criminal justice personnel in four states: California, Michigan, New Jersey, and Texas. The first part of the questionnaire contained personal, attitudinal, and opinion items as well as questions concerning the goals of the criminal justice system. The second part presented 97 situations that the respondent was asked to rank using a five-part scale. The situations dealt with the roles of police officers, prosecuting attorneys, defense attorneys, judges, probation officers, correctional officers, and parole officers. Demographic information about the respondents includes age, sex, race, educational attainment, occupation and employing agency, and income.