Showing 1 – 7 of 7 results.
Curated
Access to Justice in Ontario, 1985-1988 (ICPSR 9729)
Released/updated on: 1999-11-19
Geographic coverage: Canada, Ontario, Global
Time period: 1985-01-01--1988-01-01
This data collection, which was designed to assess experiences with the Ontario, Canada, civil justice system, is a replication and extension of a survey conducted by the Civil Litigation Research Project at the University of Wisconsin. Interviews were conducted with the heads of households. Questions were asked about the nature of the problem, e.g., auto accident, work injury, discrimination, problems with landlord, violations of privacy, or victimization. Questions were also asked about actions taken in response to the problem, such as whether a lawyer was contacted, reasons for not contacting a lawyer, whether non-lawyer assistance was sought, whether a claim was made, and reasons for not making a claim. Finally, questions were asked about the household's experience with the Ontario justice system if a claim was made, including whether there was a trial or a hearing, how much the lawyer charged, evaluation of the result, satisfaction with the result, evaluation of the cost, perceived delay, agreement reached, and compensation awarded. Major demographic variables include age, occupation, number of persons in household, language, ethnic background, religion, education, and family income.
Curated
Center for Research on Social Reality [Spain] Survey, April 1992: Justice and Civic Rights (ICPSR 9992)
Released/updated on: 1993-04-09
Geographic coverage: Europe, Global, Spain
This data collection is part of a continuing series of semi-monthly surveys of individuals in Spain. Each survey consists of three sections. The first section collects information on respondents' attitudes regarding personal and national issues. This section includes questions on level of life satisfaction and frequency of relationships, as well as a rating of the importance of national issues. The second section varies according to the monthly topic, with this survey's topic focusing on justice and civic rights. Among the issues investigated are the respondent's personal experience with lawyers and police, evaluation of Spanish prisons and treatment accorded to those in prison, attitudes toward the death penalty, evaluation of the Spanish penal code and the "Corcuera Law," evaluation of government policy with respect to the administration of justice, and perceived image of judicial institutions and justice professionals. The third section collects demographic data such as sex, age, religion, income, and place of residence.
Curated
Executions in the United States, 1608-1991: The Espy File [Instructional Materials] (ICPSR 3465)
Released/updated on: 2003-01-02
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1608-01-01--1991-01-01
These instructional materials were prepared for use with EXECUTIONS IN THE UNITED STATES, 1608-1991: THE ESPY FILE (ICPSR 8451), compiled by M. Watt Espy and John Ortiz Smykla. The data file (an SPSS portable file) and accompanying documentation are provided to assist educators in instructing students about the history of capital punishment in the United States. An instructor's handout is also included. This handout contains the following sections, among others: (1) general goals for student analysis of quantitative datasets, (2) specific goals in studying this dataset, (3) suggested appropriate courses for use of the dataset, (4) tips for using the dataset, and (5) related secondary source readings. This dataset furnishes data on executions performed under civil authority in the United States between 1608 and April 24, 1991, and describes each individual executed and the circumstances surrounding the crime for which the person was convicted. Variables include age, race, name, sex, and occupation of the offender, place, jurisdiction, date, and method of execution, and the crime for which the offender was executed. Also recorded are data on whether the only evidence for the execution was official records indicating that an individual (executioner or slave owner) was compensated for an execution.
Curated
Impact of Prisoner Litigation Reform, 1992-2000 [United States] (ICPSR 20354)
Released/updated on: 2008-04-10
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1992-04-01--2000-12-01
In 1996, the United States Congress enacted two policies to regulate the use of the legal system by state prisoners. They were the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) and the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA). The purpose of this research project was to examine whether the PLRA and the AEDPA had their intended effects of reducing the number of Section 1983 lawsuits and habeas corpus petitions, respectively, at both the national and circuit court levels. The researchers obtained data, from the Research and Statistics Division of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, on the number of civil rights suits and the number of habeas corpus petitions filed by state prisoners in district courts from April 1992 to December 2000. These data were organized into monthly increments. Dataset 1, Civil Rights Suits Filed, contains 105 cases, and Dataset 2, Habeas Corpus Petitions Filed, also contains 105 cases. The trends in civil rights suits filed (Dataset 1) and habeas corpus petitions filed (Dataset 2) were measured by the number of petitions filed per 10,000 state prisoners. Filing rates were measured at the level of district courts, grouped together by the circuit court that has jurisdiction over them.
Variables in Dataset 1, Civil Rights Suits Filed, include filing date and the number of civil rights suits filed per 10,000 state prisoners at the national level as well as for district courts within each of the 11 circuits and the District of Columbia. An intervention flag variable is also included. Variables in Dataset 2, Habeas Corpus Petitions Filed, include filing date and the number of habeas corpus petitions filed per 10,000 state prisoners at the national level, as well as for district courts within each of the 11 circuits and the District of Columbia. A pulse flag variable and two intervention flag variables are also included.
Curated
Line Police Officer Knowledge of Search and Seizure Law: An Exploratory Multi-city Test in the United States, 1986-1987 (ICPSR 9981)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1986-01-01--1987-01-01
This data collection was undertaken to gather information on the extent of police officers' knowledge of search and seizure law, an issue with important consequences for law enforcement. A specially-produced videotape depicting line duty situations that uniformed police officers frequently encounter was viewed by 478 line uniformed police officers from 52 randomly-selected cities in which search and seizure laws were determined to be no more restrictive than applicable United States Supreme Court decisions. Testing of the police officers occurred in all regions as established by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, except for the Pacific region (California, Oregon, and Washington), since search and seizure laws in these states are, in some instances, more restrictive than United States Supreme Court decisions. No testing occurred in cities with populations under 10,000 because of budget limitations. Fourteen questions to which the officers responded were presented in the videotape. Each police officer also completed a questionnaire that included questions on demographics, training, and work experience, covering their age, sex, race, shift worked, years of police experience, education, training on search and seizure law, effectiveness of various types of training instructors and methods, how easily they could obtain advice about search and seizure questions they encountered, and court outcomes of search and seizure cases in which they were involved. Police department representatives completed a separate questionnaire providing department characteristics and information on search and seizure training and procedures, such as the number of sworn officers, existence of general training and the number of hours required, existence of in-service search and seizure training and the number of hours and testing required, existence of policies and procedures on search and seizure, and means of advice available to officers about search and seizure questions. These data comprise Part 1. For purposes of comparison and interpretation of the police officer test scores, question responses were also obtained from other sources. Part 2 contains responses from 36 judges from states with search and seizure laws no more restrictive than the United States Supreme Court decisions, as well as responses from a demographic and work-experience questionnaire inquiring about their age, law school attendance, general judicial experience, and judicial experience and education specific to search and seizure laws. All geographic regions except New England and the Pacific were represented by the judges. Part 3, Comparison Data, contains answers to the 14 test questions only, from 15 elected district attorneys, 6 assistant district attorneys, the district attorney in another city and 11 of his assistant district attorneys, a police attorney with expertise in search and seizure law, 24 police academy trainees with no previous police work experience who were tested before search and seizure law training, a second group of 17 police academy trainees -- some with police work experience but no search and seizure law training, 55 law enforcement officer trainees from a third academy tested immediately after search and seizure training, 7 technical college students with no previous education or training on search and seizure law, and 27 university criminal justice course students, also with no search and seizure law education or training.
Curated
Processing and Outcome of Death Penalty Appeals After Furman v. Georgia, 1973-1995: [United States] (ICPSR 3468)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1973-01-01--1995-01-01
This data collection effort was undertaken to analyze the outcomes of capital appeals in the United States between 1973 and 1995 and as a means of assessing the reliability of death penalty verdicts (also referred to herein as "capital judgments" or "death penalty judgments") imposed under modern death-sentencing procedures. Those procedures have been adopted since the decision in Furman v. Georgia in 1972. The United States Supreme Court's ruling in that case invalidated all then-existing death penalty laws, determining that the death penalty was applied in an "arbitrary and capricious" manner and violated Eighth Amendment protections against cruel and unusual punishment. Data provided in this collection include state characteristics and the outcomes of review of death verdicts by state and year at the state direct appeal, state post-conviction, federal habeas corpus, and all three stages of review (Part 1). Data were compiled from published and unpublished official and archived sources. Also provided in this collection are state and county characteristics and the outcome of review of death verdicts by county, state, and year at the state direct appeal, state post-conviction, federal habeas corpus, and all three stages of review (Part 2). After designing a systematic method for identifying official court decisions in capital appeals and state and federal post-conviction proceedings (no official or unofficial lists of those decisions existed prior to this study), the authors created three databases original to this study using information reported in those decisions. The first of the three original databases assembled as part of this project was the Direct Appeal Database (DADB) (Part 3). This database contains information on the timing and outcome of decisions on state direct appeals of capital verdicts imposed in all years during the 1973-1995 study period in which the relevant state had a valid post-Furman capital statute. The appeals in this database include all those that were identified as having been finally decided during the 1973 to 1995 period (sometimes called "the study period"). The second original database, State Post-Conviction Database (SPCDB) (Part 4), contains a list of capital verdicts that were imposed during the years between 1973 and 2000 when the relevant state had a valid post-Furman capital statute and that were finally reversed on state post-conviction review between 1973 and April 2000. The third original database, Habeas Corpus Database (HCDB) (Part 5), contains information on all decisions of initial (non-successive) capital federal habeas corpus cases between 1973 and 1995 that finally reviewed capital verdicts imposed during the years 1973 to 1995 when the relevant state had a valid post-Furman capital statute. Part 1 variables include state and state population, population density, death sentence year, year the state enacted a valid post-Furman capital statute, total homicides, number of African-Americans in the state population, number of white and African-American homicide victims, number of prison inmates, number of FBI Index Crimes, number of civil, criminal, and felony court cases awaiting decision, number of death verdicts, number of Black defendants sentenced to death, rate of white victims of homicides for which defendants were sentenced to death per 100 white homicide victims, percentage of death row inmates sentenced to death for offenses against at least one white victim, number of death verdicts reviewed, awaiting review, and granted relief at all three states of review, number of welfare recipients and welfare expenditures, direct expenditures on the court system, party-adjusted judicial ideology index, political pressure index, and several other created variables. Part 2 provides this same state-level information and also provides similar variables at the county level. Court expenditure and welfare data are not provided in Part 2, however. Part 3 provides data on each capital direct appeal decision, including state, FIPS state and county code for trial court county, year of death verdict, year of decision, whether the verdict was affirmed or reversed, and year of first fully valid post-Furman statute. The date and citation for rehearing in the state system and on certiorari to the United States Supreme Court are provided in some cases. For reversals in Part 4 information was collected about state of death verdict, FIPS state and county code for trial court county, year of death verdict, date of relief, basis for reversal, stage of trial and aspect of verdict (guilty of aggravated capital murder, death sentence) affected by reversal, outcome on retrial, and citation. Part 5 variables include state, FIPS state and county codes for trial court county, year of death verdict, defendant's history of alcohol or drug abuse, whether the defendant was intoxicated at the time of the crime, whether the defense attorney was from in-state, whether the defendant was connected to the community where the crime occurred, whether the victim had a high standing in the community, sex of the victim, whether the defendant had a prior record, whether a state evidentiary hearing was held, number of claims for final federal decision, whether a majority of the judges voting to reverse were appointed by Republican presidents, aggravating and mitigating circumstances, whether habeas corpus relief was granted, what claims for habeas corpus relief were presented, and the outcome on each claim that was presented. Part 5 also includes citations to the direct appeal decision, the state post-conviction decision (last state decision on merits), the judicial decision at the pre-penultimate federal stage, the decision at the penultimate federal stage, and the final federal decision.
Curated
Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs), 1987-1990: [United States] (ICPSR 9485)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1970-01-01--1990-01-01
The objectives of this data collection were to capture the histories of complex, multiparty, political legal disputes, to measure political "chill," and to test a model of crossinstitutional disputing. A "Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation" (SLAPP) was defined as a lawsuit filed against citizens or groups exercising the right to petition the government. Each case violated the First Amendment right "to petition the government for a redress of grievances." The Petition Clause, as it is called, is a fundamental civil right, guaranteeing and encouraging citizen involvement in all aspects of American political decision-making and governance. The collection includes information on the petition action, political context, amount of award or settlement, specific damages requested (no money vs. a specified amount), attorney status, amount of court costs, attorney fees, interest, and number of individuals and organizations involved in the suit. Also included are several sociodemographic variables describing the parties to the litigation, such as marital status, employment, occupation, county and state of residence, political party orientation and membership, and interest group membership.