Assessing the Impact of Plea Bargaining on Subsequent Violence for Firearm Offenders, Maryland, 2015-2019 (ICPSR 39244)
The purpose of this study was to assess how patterns of prosecution and plea bargaining in firearms cases shape subsequent case and defendant outcomes. Drawing on recent work (Johnson and Larroulet, 2019), the researchers developed measures of plea bargaining discounts and examined their effects on sentencing and recidivism for firearms-involved offenders. To do so, the investigators [1] analyzed unique data collected by the Client Legal Utility Engine (CLUE), a web-scraped database of court records for all criminal cases in the State of Maryland for a cohort of defendants charged with firearms-involved crimes in district and circuit courts between 2015 and 2019; [2] generated estimates of the average distance traveled in charge bargaining, or the magnitude of average sentencing discounts in gun cases in Maryland by comparing expected sentences based on the original filed charges to the final charges at conviction; and [3] explored the association between plea discounts and recidivism, measured by the defendant coming back into the criminal court system on new criminal charges. The resulting dataset includes information on criminal case processing outcomes for firearms-related cases processed in Maryland district and circuit courts for the time period 2015-2019.
A Comprehensive Assessment of Deadly Mass Shootings, 1980-2018, United States (ICPSR 38482)
Detecting Fentanyl and Major Players in Darknet Drug Markets by Analyzing Drug Networks and Developing a Threat Assessment Tool, Global, 2020-2022 (ICPSR 39131)
Preventing and Controlling Corporate Crime: The Dual Role of Corporate Boards and Legal Sanctions, United States, 1996-2013 (ICPSR 37463)
This project consists of secondary analysis material (syntax only, no data). The original study that the material pertains to examines two distinct but related types of corporate crime prevention and control mechanisms--one that rests on firm governance (specifically, the Board of Directors) and the other on formal legal interventions. Specifically, the study examines whether (ceteris paribus) firms with more gender diversity on their boards are less involved in offending than firms whose boards are less diverse and whether changes in board diversity over time affect firm offending patterns. Of additional interest is how firms respond to legal discovery and punishment.
Do they change their governance structures (i.e., become more diverse) due to formal legal discovery?
Are firms generally deterred from reoffending (recidivism) when discovered or does deterrence depend on the government's response to offenders?
In particular, are certain regimes (criminal, civil, or regulatory) more successful at crime control than others?
Relevant data are collected from a variety of secondary sources, including corporate financial, statistical, and governance information. These data are then linked to cases of corporate offending (accounting fraud, bribery, environmental and anti-competitive) for 3,327 US based companies between 1996 and 2013.
Analyses-NIJ-5.21.2019--2-.do: Syntax (Stata) used to create type of offense count; domain of processing (civil, criminal, regulatory); offense distribution (by corporate year), female board membership (count and percent); Reoffending (by enforcement type and governance characteristics).