Showing 1 – 12 of 12 results.
Curated
Partially restricted
Evaluation of GPS Monitoring Technologies and Domestic Violence in the United States, 2001-2009 (ICPSR 33723)
Released/updated on: 2015-06-30
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2006-07-01--2008-07-01, 2001-10-01--2007-01-01, 2008-01-01--2009-01-01
This study examines the implementation and effectiveness of Global Positioning System (GPS) monitoring technology to enforce court mandated "no contact" orders in domestic violence (DV) cases, particularly those involving intimate partner violence (IPV). The project has two components: First, a national web-based survey of agencies providing pretrial supervision examined patterns of GPS usage among electronic monitoring (EM) programs for DV cases. Second, a quasi-experimental design study of three sites across the U.S. - referred to as Midwest, West, and South - examined the impact of GPS technology on DV defendants' program violations and rearrests during the pre-adjudication period (referred to as the "short term"), and during a one-year follow-up period after case disposition (referred to as the "long term").
Curated
Partially restricted
Improving the Accuracy and Fairness of Pretrial Release Decisions: A Multi-Site Study of Risk Assessments Implemented in Four Counties, Indiana, 2015-2018 (ICPSR 37829)
Released/updated on: 2021-02-25
Geographic coverage: Indiana, United States
Time period: 2015-01-01--2018-12-31
This study was a multi-site, quasi-experimental investigation of risk assessment-informed pretrial release decisions relative to decisions made without risk assessments. The study objectives were to investigate whether use of pretrial risk assessments: 1) improved risk management decisions relative to practice as usual; 2) improved the fairness of pretrial release decisions for racial minorities relative to practice as usual; and 3) revealed judge-level variation in pretrial release decisions. Secondary, administrative data were gathered from four counties in Indiana. Apart from risk assessment information, all data represent public records: court, jail and prison. Variables gathered from the data sources fall into three main categories: defendant variables, pretrial release decisions, and pretrial misconduct outcomes. Examples of specific variables include: booking and release dates, bond amounts, number and type of charges, and demographic information (age, sex and race).
Curated
Juvenile Defendants in Criminal Courts (JDCC): Survey of 40 Counties in the United States, 1998 (ICPSR 3750)
Released/updated on: 2003-09-25
Geographic coverage: United States
This is an independent sample of juvenile defendants drawn from the State Court Processing Statistics (SCPS) for 1998 (see ICPSR 2038). SCPS 1998 tracked felony cases filed in May 1998 until final disposition or until one year had elapsed from the date of filing. SCPS 1998 presents data on felony cases filed in approximately 40 of the nation's 75 most populous counties in 1998. These 75 counties account for more than a third of the United States population and approximately half of all reported crimes. The cases from these 40 jurisdictions were weighted to represent all felony filings during the month of May in the 75 most populous counties. Data were collected on arrest charges, demographic characteristics, criminal history, pretrial release and detention, adjudication, and sentencing. Within each sampled site, data were gathered on each juvenile felony case. Cases were tracked through adjudication or for up to one year. The source used to identify the upper age for juveniles and the filing mechanism appropriate to each state was the OJJDP publication, Trying Juveniles as Adults in Criminal Court: An Analysis of State Transfer Provisions (December 1998).
Curated
Restricted
National Evaluation of Operation Drug Test, 1998-1999 (ICPSR 3259)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-18
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1998-01-01--1999-01-01
This study is an evaluation of Operation Drug TEST (ODT), a pretrial intervention program that was implemented in fiscal year 1997 in 25 of the 94 federal judicial districts in the United States. The name of the program, "TEST," is both a reference to testing and an acronym representing the program's three objectives: (1) Testing to identify drug-involved defendants before their first court appearance, (2) Effective Sanctions when defendants on release were found to be using drugs, and (3) Treatment referrals for drug-using defendants, as needed. The program was based on the view that drug testing, when closely linked to sanctions and treatment placements in response to ongoing drug use, can reduce drug use among defendants on pretrial release. The overall goal of the program was to deter drug use and its adverse consequences among defendants on pretrial release. The purposes of the evaluation were to describe the process of program implementation and to document ODT's impact on sanctioning and treatment. Data for this evaluation were gathered from official records collected from the ODT database, which was maintained by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts (AOUSC). Parts 1 and 2 contain data from fiscal year 1998 for initial drug tests and subsequent drug tests, respectively. Data from fiscal year 1999 (Parts 3 and 4) were divided into two groups, depending on the model of ODT implementation and the stage at which initial drug testing took place. DOJ and AOUSC determined that districts could choose to implement the program under either of two models. Model 1 (Part 3) followed the original concept, namely, initial testing at the pre-bail stage. In Model 2 (Part 4), the initial test was to occur as soon as possible after the defendant's first court appearance, if he/she was being released, but before release into the community. Variables unique to Part 1 include date of birth, arrest date, initial hearing date, hearing date, decision date, and release date. Variables for all parts include the district name, its circuit and office, which model a defendant conformed to, current or prior drug charges, and drug history. Additional variables for all parts include whether the defendant tested positive for amphetamines, cocaine, cannabis, opiates, PCP, and other drugs, whether testing had increased, type of test administered, if treatment was added or had increased, whether a test was taken by pretrial services or by a contractor, and if by pretrial services, where it was taken, testing devices used, whether an outside laboratory was used, and if results were reported to the court.
Curated
Partially restricted
National Pretrial Reporting Program, 1988-1989 (ICPSR 9508)
Released/updated on: 2013-06-12
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1988-01-01--1989-01-01
This data collection effort was undertaken to determine whether accurate and comprehensive pretrial data can be collected at the local level and subsequently aggregated at the state and federal levels. The data contained in this collection provide a picture of felony defendants' movements through the criminal courts. Offenses were recoded into 14 broad categories that conform to the Bureau of Justice Statistics' crime definitions. Other variables include sex, race, age, prior record, relationship to criminal justice system at the time of the offense, pretrial release, detention decisions, court appearances, pretrial rearrest, adjudication, and sentencing. The unit of analysis is the defendant.
Curated
Partially restricted
National Pretrial Reporting Program, 1990-1991 (ICPSR 6136)
Released/updated on: 2011-04-20
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1990-01-01--1991-01-01
This data collection effort was undertaken to determine whether accurate and comprehensive pretrial data can be collected at the local level and subsequently aggregated at the state and federal levels. The data contained in this collection provide a picture of felony defendants' movements through the criminal courts. Offenses were recoded into 14 broad categories that conform to the Bureau of Justice Statistics' crime definitions. Other variables include sex, race, age, prior record, relationship to criminal justice system at the time of the offense, pretrial release, detention decisions, court appearances, pretrial rearrest, adjudication, and sentencing. The unit of analysis is the defendant.
Curated
Partially restricted
National Pretrial Reporting Program, 1992-1993 (ICPSR 6489)
Released/updated on: 2011-04-20
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1992-01-01--1993-01-01
This data collection effort was undertaken to determine whether accurate and comprehensive pretrial data can be collected at the local level and subsequently aggregated at the state and federal levels. The data contained in this collection provide a picture of felony defendants' movements through the criminal courts. The 1992-1993 National Pretrial Reporting Program database includes cases filed in May 1992 that were tracked through April 1993. Offenses were recoded into 15 broad categories that conformed to the Bureau of Justice Statistics' crime definitions. Other variables include sex, race, age, prior criminal record, relationship to the criminal justice system at the time of the offense, pretrial release, detention decisions, court appearances, pretrial rearrest, adjudication, and sentencing. The unit of analysis is the defendant.
Curated
Pretrial Release Data, 1969 (ICPSR 7538)
Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
This data collection contains information gathered about pretrial release policies, procedures, and outcomes in a 1969 survey of police chiefs, judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and bail project directors in 72 cities across the United States (with a higher proportion in Illinois). The research objectives included: (1) developing a model designed to determine the optimum percentage of defendants to hold prior to trial, (2) developing a model designed to make decisions on whether a defendant should be released or held in jail prior to trial, (3) comparing cities having bail reform projects with cities not having them, (4) comparing cities that required arrested persons to provide 10 percent of the bond with cities requiring 100 percent of the bond, and (5) determining the causes and effects of variations across cities in the percentage of defendants held in jail prior to trial. The survey focused on the processing of arrested persons prior to trial. Respondents answered questions about the organization and procedures in pretrial release, supplied approximate statistical data (e.g., percent of arraigned individuals who were released prior to their trial and failed to appear in court for their trial), estimated statistical trends in pretrial release during the previous five years, reported on attitudes in their communities toward administration of bail, rated the importance of several criteria when determining if a defendant was to be allowed pretrial release, and indicated whether their city had a bail reform program, and if so, its characteristics. Demographic data (ranging from population to income to crime rates) about the 72 cities represented in the survey are also included in the file.
Curated
Pretrial Release of Latino Defendants in the United States, 1990-2004 (ICPSR 25521)
Released/updated on: 2009-07-30
Geographic coverage: Indiana, United States, Tennessee, Alabama, Utah, Washington, Massachusetts, Missouri, Wisconsin, Arizona, New York, District of Columbia, Kentucky, Hawaii, California, Florida, New Jersey, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Texas, Connecticut, Ohio, Georgia, Virginia, Maryland
Time period: 1990-01-01--2004-01-01
The purpose of the study was to assess the impact of Latino ethnicity on pretrial release decisions in large urban counties. The study examined two questions:
- Are Latino defendants less likely to receive pretrial releases than non-Latino defendants?
- Are Latino defendants in counties where the Latino population is rapidly increasing less likely to receive pretrial releases than Latino defendants in counties where the Latino population is not rapidly increasing?
The study utilized the State Court Processing Statistics (SCPS) Database (see STATE COURT PROCESSING STATISTICS, 1990-2004: FELONY DEFENDANTS IN LARGE URBAN COUNTIES [ICPSR 2038]). The SCPS collects data on felony cases filed in state courts in 40 of the nation's 75 largest counties over selected sample dates in the month of May of every even numbered year, and tracks a representative sample of felony case defendants from arrest through sentencing. Data in the collection include 118,556 cases.
Researchers supplemented the SCPS with county-level information from several sources:
- Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reporting Program county-level data series of index crimes reported to the police for the years 1988-2004 (see UNIFORM CRIME REPORTS: COUNTY-LEVEL DETAILED ARREST AND OFFENSE DATA, 1998 [ICPSR 9335], UNIFORM CRIME REPORTING PROGRAM DATA [UNITED STATES]: COUNTY-LEVEL DETAILED ARREST AND OFFENSE DATA, 1990 [ICPSR 9785], 1992 [ICPSR 6316], 1994 [ICPSR 6669], 1996 [ICPSR 2389], 1998 [ICPSR 2910], 2000 [ICPRS 3451], 2002 [ICPSR 4009], and 2004 [ICPSR 4466]).
- Bureau of Justice Statistics Annual Survey of Jails, Jurisdiction-Level data series for the years 1988-2004 (see ANNUAL SURVEY OF JAILS: JURISDICTION-LEVEL DATA, 1990 [ICPSR 9569], 1992 [ICPSR 6395], 1994 [ICPSR 6538], 1996 [ICPSR 6856], 1998 [ICPSR 2682], 2000 [ICPSR 3882], 2002 [ICPSR 4428], and 2004 [ICPSR 20200]).
- Bureau of Justice Statistics National Prosecutors Survey/Census data series 1990-2005 (see NATIONAL PROSECUTORS SURVEY, 1990 [ICPSR 9579], 1992 [ICPSR 6273], 1994 [ICPSR 6785], 1996 [ICPSR 2433], 2001 census [ICPSR 3418], and 2005 [ICPSR 4600]).
- United States Census Bureau State and County Quickfacts.
- National Center for State Courts, State Court Organization reports, 1993 (see NCJ 148346), 1998 (see NCJ 178932), and 2004 (see NCJ 212351).
- Bureau of Justice Statistics Felony Defendants in Large Urban Counties reports, 1992 (see NCJ 148826), 1994 (see NCJ 164616), 1996 (see NCJ 176981), 1998 (see NJC 187232), 2000 (see NCJ 202021), and 2002 (see NJC 210818).
The data include defendant level variables such as most serious current offense charge, number of charges, prior felony convictions, prior misdemeanor convictions, prior incarcerations, criminal justice status at arrest, prior failure to appear, age, gender, ethnicity, and race. County level variables include region, crime rate, two year change in crime rate, caseload rate, jail capacity, two year change in jail capacity, judicial selection by election or appointment, prosecutor screens cases, and annual expenditure on prosecutor's office. Racial threat stimuli variables include natural log of the percentage of the county population that is Latino, natural log of the percentage of the county population that is African American, change in the percentage of the county population that is Latino over the last six years and change in the percentage of the county population that is African American over the last six years. Cross-level interaction variables include percentage minority (Latino/African American) population zero percent to 15 percent, percentage minority (Latino/African American) population 16 percent to 30 percent, and percentage minority (Latino/African American) population 31 percent or higher.
Curated
Pretrial Release Practices in the United States, 1976-1978 (ICPSR 7972)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1976-01-01--1978-01-01
Funded by the National Institute of Justice, this data collection represents Phase II of a larger project to evaluate pretrial release practices. The study focuses on four major topics: (1) release--rates and types of releases, defendant or case characteristics and their impact on the release decision, (2) court appearance --extent to which released defendants appear in court, factors associated with defendants' failure to appear in court, (3) pretrial criminality--number of rearrests during the pretrial period and the factors predicting rearrest, charges and rates of conviction for crimes committed during the pretrial period, and (4) impact of pretrial release programs--effect of programs on release decisions and on the behavior of defendants. The study is limited to adult defendants processed through state and local trial courts, and to pretrial release rather than pretrial intervention or diversion programs. Part 1 is an analysis of release practices and outcomes in eight jurisdictions (Baltimore City and Baltimore County, Maryland, Washington, DC, Dade County, Florida, Jefferson County, Kentucky, Pima County, Arizona, Santa Cruz County, California, and Santa Clara County, California). The pretrial release "delivery systems," that is, the major steps and individuals and organizations in the pretrial release process, were analyzed in each jurisdiction. Additionally, a sample of defendants from each site was studied from point of arrest to final case disposition and sentencing. Part 2 of this study examines the impact of the existence of pretrial release programs on release, court appearance, and pretrial release outcomes. An experimental design was used to compare a group of defendants who participated in a pretrial release program with a control group who did not. Experiments were conducted in Pima County (Tucson), Arizona, Baltimore City, Maryland, Lincoln, Nebraska, and Jefferson County (Beaumont-Port Arthur), Texas. In Tucson, separate experiments were conducted for felony and misdemeanor cases.
Curated
Partially restricted
State Court Processing Statistics, 1990-2009: Felony Defendants in Large Urban Counties (ICPSR 2038)
Released/updated on: 2014-06-24
Geographic coverage: United States
Originally known as the National Pretrial Reporting Program, the State Court Processing Statistics (SCPS) program tracks felony cases filed in May of a given year until final disposition or until one year has elapsed from the date of filing. This collection presents data on felony cases filed in approximately 40 of the nation's 75 most populous counties in even numbered years from 1990-2006 and 2009. These 75 counties account for more than a third of the United States population and approximately half of all reported crimes. The cases from these 40 jurisdictions are weighted to represent all felony filings during the month of May in the 75 most populous counties. Data were collected on arrest charges, demographic characteristics, criminal history, pretrial release and detention, adjudication, and sentencing.
Curated
Partially restricted
State Court Processing Statistics, 2002: Felony and Domestic Violence Defendants in Large Urban Counties (ICPSR 34892)
Released/updated on: 2019-03-28
Geographic coverage: United States
This study provides incident-based, case processing, and criminal history data on defendants charged in state courts during May 2002. The State Court Processing Statistics Program tracked the processing of about 15,000 felony defendants charged in 40 of the 75 largest counties during May 2002. The BJS study entitled Processing of Domestic Violence Cases in State Courts collected additional incident-based and case processing data on more than 5,000 felony and misdemeanor domestic violence defendants in 16 of the 40 counties.