Search results

Showing 1 – 50 of 251 results.
Curated

Alaska Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE) Data, 1996-2006 (ICPSR 28367)

Released/updated on: 2012-10-05
Geographic coverage: Fairbanks, Kotzebue, United States, Kodiak, Alaska, Anchorage, Homer, Soldotna, Bethel, Nome
Time period: 1996-01-01--2006-01-01
This project examined the characteristics of sexual assault victimizations in Alaska, as observed and recorded by sexual assault nurse examiners in Anchorage, Kodiak, Bethel, Soldotna, Nome, Fairbanks, Homer, and Kotzebue. The sample utilized for this study included all sexual assault nurse examinations conducted in Anchorage from 1996 to 2004, in Bethel and Fairbanks in 2005 and 2006, and in Homer, Kodiak, Kotzebue, Nome, and Soldotna in 2005. A total of 1,699 examinations were collected. More specifically, the information contains demographic characteristics of patients, pre-assault patient characteristics, assault characteristics, post assault characteristics, exam characteristics and findings, and suspect characteristics. Demographic characteristics of patients include gender, race / ethnicity, and age, whether the patient was disabled, and whether the patient reported being homeless. Pre-assault characteristics included whether the patient reported engaging in consensual sexual activity within three days prior to the assault and information on the location of the initial contact with the suspect. Assault characteristics included information on the location of the assault, methods employed by the suspect, the patients' condition at the time of the assault, the patients' use of drugs and alcohol, and a detailed description of the assault itself. This detailed description included the patient's position during the assault, whether condoms and lubricants had been used, whether ejaculation had occurred, and an inventory of 17 different sexual acts. Post-assault characteristics included information on post-assault actions taken by the patient, whether the patient engaged in consensual sexual activity between the time of the assault to the examination, and the time elapsed from the assault to the examination. Exam characteristics and findings included information on whether the exam was completed, the type of exam that was conducted, the patients' behavioral and emotional state during the exam, whether the patient required emergency medical care, whether the presence of sperm was documented, whether patients tested positive for sexually transmitted infections or other genital infections, whether the patient was pregnant, and whether injuries were documented. Injury characteristics included descriptions of both non-genital and genital injury. A total of 108 indicators of non-genital injury were captured. These included nine possible injuries (i.e., bruising, redness, abrasions, lacerations, swelling, fractures, bite marks, pain, and other) to 12 possible sites (i.e., head/face, mouth, neck, shoulders, arms, hands, chest, abdomen, back, buttocks/hips, legs, and feet). A total of 60 indicators of genital injury were also captured. These included four possible injuries (i.e., bruising, abrasions, lacerations, and tenderness) to 15 possible sites (i.e., mons pubis, labia majora, labia minora, labia majora / minora junction, clitoral hood, clitoris, periurethra, hymen, fossa navicularis, posterior fourchette, perineum, vaginal walls, cervix, anus, and rectum). Suspect characteristics included the number of suspects, whether the identity of the suspect was known, demographic characteristics (gender, race/ethnicity, and age), whether the suspect had used alcohol or drugs, and the relationship between the patient and the suspect. In addition to providing detailed information from sexual assault nurse examinations, the data also include three indicators of legal resolutions - whether cases were referred for prosecution, whether cases were accepted for prosecution, and whether cases resulted in a conviction. Data on legal resolutions are only available for 1,229 cases examined from 1999 to 2005.
Curated

Analysis of Arrests in Paris, June 1848 (ICPSR 49)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: France, Global, Paris
This data collection contains three files pertaining to the June 1848 insurrection in Paris and to people charged with or arrested for participation in the insurrection. The data files contain social, economic, and demographic information. Information is provided on the results of the judicial proceedings against the individual after arrest, as well as demographic characteristics of the individual, such as occupation, place of birth, sex, age, marital status, number of children, and place of residence (Part 1), the number of inhabitants arrested in connection with the rebellion, the labor force, and social characteristics of the 12 zones (arrondisements) (Part 2), and demographic and arrest information with a focus on the furnished apartments, clubs, and popular societies within the 48 quartiers (districts) existing in Paris in 1848 (Part 3).
Curated

The Anatomy of Discretion: An Analysis of Prosecutorial Decision-making for Cases Processed by Offices in One Northern County and One Southern County, 2007-2010 (ICPSR 32542)

Released/updated on: 2016-04-21
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2009-01-01--2011-06-01, 2007-01-01--2009-07-01, 2010-10-01--2011-03-01

Prosecuting attorneys enjoy broad discretion in making decisions that influence criminal case outcomes. This study examines the impact of legal, quasi-legal, and extra-legal factors on case outcomes throughout the prosecutorial process. It then examines how prosecutors weigh these factors in their decision making and explores the formal and informal mechanisms that constrain or regulate prosecutors' decision-making.

The study examines case screening decisions, charging decisions, plea offers, sentence recommendations, and dismissals in two moderately large county prosecutors' offices. It includes statistical analyses of actual case outcomes, responses to a standardized set of hypothetical cases, and responses to a survey of prosecutors' opinions and priorities, as well as qualitative analyses of two waves of individual interviews and focus groups. It addresses the following questions:

  1. How did prosecutors define and apply the concepts of justice and fairness?
  2. What factors were associated with prosecutorial outcomes at each stage?
  3. How did prosecutors interpret and weigh different case-specific factors in making decisions at each stage?
  4. How did contextual factors constrain or regulate prosecutorial decision making?
  5. How consistent were prosecutors' decisions across similar cases? What case-level and contextual factors influenced the degree of consistency?
Curated

Anti-LGBTQ Hate Crimes in Miami-Dade County, Florida, 2005-2019 (ICPSR 37933)

Released/updated on: 2022-02-28
Geographic coverage: United States, Florida, Miami
Time period: 2005-06-01--2019-07-01
The goal of this study is to enhance public safety and community well-being through effective identification, investigation, and prosecution of anti-LGBTQ hate crimes in Miami. The investigators examined victimization experiences, victim and offender characteristics, crime reporting outcomes, victimization consequences, case processing, as well as the criminal justice system's challenges and opportunities for reform. The project focuses on the hate crime victimization within Miami's Latine community.
Curated

Case Outcomes Following Investigative Interviews of Suspected Victims of Child Sexual Abuse in Salt Lake City and County, Utah, 1994-2000 (ICPSR 27721)

Released/updated on: 2010-08-10
Geographic coverage: United States, Salt Lake City, Utah
Time period: 1994-01-01--2000-01-01
The purpose of this study was to examine whether the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Investigative Interview Protocol impacted child sexual abuse case outcomes within the justice system. The researchers coded information from child protection and police reports, Children's Justice Center (CJC) intake forms, and the CJC electronic database to create a dataset on 1,280 alleged child sexual abuse cases involving children interviewed in Salt Lake County, Utah, between 1994 and 2000. Specifically, the research team gathered case characteristics and case outcomes data on 551 alleged child sexual abuse cases in which investigative interviews were conducted from 1994 to mid-September 1997 before the NICHD protocol was implemented, and 729 alleged child sexual abuse cases in which investigative interviews were conducted from mid-September 1997 to 2000 after the implementation of the NICHD protocol, so that pre-NICHD protocol and NICHD protocol interview case outcomes could be compared. The same police detectives conducted both the pre-NICHD protocol interviews and the NICHD protocol interviews. The dataset contains a total of 116 variables pertaining to cases of suspected child abuse. The major categories of variables include demographic data on the suspected child victim and on the suspected perpetrator, on case characteristics, on case outcomes, and on time delays.
Curated
Restricted

Case Processing in the New York County District Attorney's Office, New York City, 2010-2011 (ICPSR 34681)

Released/updated on: 2020-09-22
Geographic coverage: New York City, New York County, New York (state), Manhattan (New York City)
Time period: 2010-01-01--2011-01-01, 2012-08-13--2012-08-22

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 project sought to study the District Attorney of New York's (DANY) current practices by addressing the complex relationship between prosecutorial decision making and racial and ethnic justice in felony and misdemeanor cases closed in New York County in 2010-2011. Using a mixed-methods approach, administrative records from the DANY case-management systems and prosecutorial interviews were examined to study case acceptance for prosecution, pretrial detention and bail determination, case dismissal, plea offers, and sentencing. Researchers developed five hypotheses for the data collected:

  1. Blacks and Latinos are more likely to have their cases accepted for prosecution than similarly situated white defendants.
  2. Blacks and Latinos are more likely to be held in pretrial detention and less likely to be released on bail.
  3. Blacks and Latinos are less likely to have cases dismissed.
  4. Blacks and Latinos are less likely to receive a plea offer to a lesser charge and more likely to receive custodial sentence offers.
  5. Blacks and Latinos are more likely to be sentenced to custodial punishments.

All criminal activity of the defendant was examined, as well as their demographics and prior history, the location of the crime. Information on the Assistant District Attorney (ADA) was examined as well, including their demographics and caseload in order to more thoroughly understand the catalysts and trends in decision making.

Curated

Children's Allegations of Sexual Abuse in Criminal Trials: Assessing Defense Attacks on Credibility and Identifying Effective Prosecution Methods, Maricopa County, Arizona, 2005-2015 (ICPSR 37465)

Released/updated on: 2020-11-30
Geographic coverage: Arizona
Time period: 2005-01-01--2015-12-31
Child maltreatment is widely recognized as a severe crisis in the United States (Norman, Byambaa, Butchart, Scott, & Vos, 2012), incurring costs of $124 billion annually (Fang, Brown, Florence, & Mercy, 2012). Accordingly, children in the United States are frequently called to testify in criminal proceedings about their allegations (Hamblen & Levine, 1997). To effectively develop procedures that better distinguish true from false allegations, one must be equally concerned about false convictions and false acquittals; assessing best practices that minimize children's vulnerabilities and maximize competencies. To do so, the justice system must assess whether children are credible. As such, is necessary for the prosecutor to establish children's credibility, particularly by preempting or rebuffing concerns from the defense. Further, it is necessary for the defense to evaluate whether children's allegations are honest or suggestively influenced, productive, consistent and plausible. However, it is undetermined how to do this effectively. The purpose of the present investigation is to assess how children's credibility is established and questioned in courtroom investigations of sexual abuse allegations, with a particular focus on how children respond. It is expected that: 1) defense attorneys will use likely use subtle means to attack children's honesty and suggestibility, whereas prosecutors will ask overtly about such topics, 2) children will exhibit productivity differences depending on the questioner, 3) defense attorneys will frequently ask children specific questions about prior inconsistencies, 4) prosecutors will infrequently establish the plausibility of abuse, 5) prosecutors will infrequently preempt defense attorneys' concerns of credibility, and will only sometimes rebuff their attacks during re-direct examination, 6) both prosecutors and defense attorneys may ask developmentally inappropriate questions, and that 7) case characteristics will be related to questioning patterns. The proposed investigation will: develop an understanding of current prosecution and defense methods in cases involving allegations of child sexual abuse, contribute to prosecutors' abilities to effectively try such cases, providing concrete recommendations for defense attorneys when assessing children's credibility, and facilitate better decision making in cases of alleged child sexual abuse.
Curated

Criminal Justice Outcomes of Male Offenders in 14 Jurisdictions in the United States, 1985-1988 (ICPSR 9671)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1985-01-01--1988-01-01
This data collection provides information on multiple prosecutions for individual offenders. The data are intended for use in the exploration and description of relationships among the various elements of the adjudication process (characteristics of the offender and offense and decisions made by various actors in the prosecution and sentencing of the offenders). The sampled incidents were drawn from two types of offenses: residential burglary and armed robbery. The collection includes only those incidents involving male offenders who were previously unknown to their victims and who were facing adjudication in adult court. The data collection instrument probed five areas for each offender and incident sampled: A. Related Incidents (information to identify all other incidents for which processing overlapped that of the sampled incident), B. Incident Description (information about the criminal incident itself, such as date and location of the incident, date of arrest, victims, weapons, accomplices, witnesses, and evidence), C. Adjudication Process (information such as bond amount, legal representation, adjudication events and outcomes, date of sentencing, and type and length of incarceration), D. Defendant (information about the defendant himself, including date of birth, race/descent, and employment status), and E. Prior Record (information about the defendant's record, such as his age at first arrest and first incarceration, the number of times he was incarcerated, and history of drug and/or alcohol abuse).
Curated

Criminal Justice Response to Victim Harm in the United States, 1981 (ICPSR 8249)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States
This data collection examines the ways in which victim harm affects decisions regarding arrest, prosecution, and sentencing, and the impact of these decisions on the victim's perception of the criminal justice system. Five types of offenses were studied: homicide, sexual assault, burglary, robbery, and aggravated assault. The victim file contains information on personal characteristics, results of victimization, involvement in case processing, use of victim assistance service, satisfaction with case outcomes, and opinions about the court system. The police file and the prosecutor file variables cover personal background, screening decisions on scenario cases, communication with victims, and opinions about the role of victims in the criminal justice system. The prosecutor file also includes sentencing recommendations on the scenarios. Data in the judge file cover personal background, sentencing recommendations on the scenario cases, communications with victims, sources of information regarding victim harm, and opinions about the role of victims in the criminal justice system.
Curated

Cuyahoga County, Ohio, Heroin and Crime Initiative: Informing the Investigation and Prosecution of Heroin-Related Overdose, 2012-2021 (ICPSR 38295)

Released/updated on: 2023-09-27
Geographic coverage: United States, Ohio
Time period: 2012-01-01--2020-01-01, 2014-01-01--2019-01-01, 2018-04-01--2021-09-30

In 2013, the Cuyahoga County (Ohio) Medical Examiner's Office (CCMEO) and the Regional Forensic Science Laboratory developed the Heroin Involved Death Investigation (HIDI) alert system and protocol in response to a substantial increase in opioid-related overdose fatalities. The HIDI protocol is designed to support a safe, coordinated, and rapid response to an active, suspected opioid-overdose death scene, or suspected opioid-overdose deaths occurring at hospitals that are not considered active scenes, by alerting investigators to potential dangers and facilitating the timely protection of scene integrity and evidence collection in order to successfully investigate and prosecute drug traffickers.

The primary goals of the project were to:

  1. Complete extended coding of local medical examiner decedent data--investigative reports and toxicology to identify demographic or geographic trends or patterns of overdose deaths, as well as paraphernalia and evidence present at death scenes that may be useful to prosecutions;
  2. Examine the efficiency of how cases flow through the investigative and prosecutorial stages and how these could be improved;
  3. Identify key variables that may contribute to the successful indictment of traffickers connected to fatal and non-fatal overdose cases; and
  4. Evaluate the implementation and perceived effectiveness of the Cuyahoga County HIDI protocol.

This multi-method project involved three phases of data collection and analysis. First, a forensic epidemiologist coded and analyzed existing CCMEO records for decedent toxicology and death scene characteristics, focusing on drug-related fatalities. Second, county and federal cases prosecuted for drug trafficking, especially those linked to deaths, were systematically reviewed to determine what evidence was deemed important for successful indictment. Third, interviews and focus groups were conducted with key stakeholders from local and federal law enforcement, intelligence analysts, public health officials, and local and federal prosecutors to learn about the HIDI protocol.

Data and documentation for interviews and focus groups will be made available in a future update.

Curated

Early Identification of the Serious Habitual Juvenile Offender Using a Birth Cohort in Philadelphia, 1958-1984 (ICPSR 2312)

Released/updated on: 2008-04-04
Geographic coverage: United States, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Time period: 1958-01-01--1984-01-01
Beginning in the mid-1980s, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) funded the creation of Habitual Offender Units (HOUs) in 13 cities. HOUs were created to prosecute habitual juvenile offenders by deploying the most experienced attorneys to handle these cases from start to finish. By targeting the earliest points in the career sequence of the juvenile offenders, the greatest number of serious offenses can potentially be averted. Selection criteria to qualify for priority prosecution by an HOU usually encompassed one or more generic components relating to aspects of a juvenile's present and prior offense record. In Philadelphia, to be designated a serious habitual offender and to qualify for priority prosecution by the HOU, a youth had to have two or more prior adjudications or open cases for specific felonies, as well as a current arrest for a specified felony. The first three police contacts in a Philadelphia juvenile offender's record were of special interest because they included the earliest point (i.e., the third contact) at which a youth could be prosecuted in the Philadelphia HOU, under their selection criteria. The main objectives of this study were to determine how well the selection criteria identified serious habitual offenders and which variables, reflecting HOU selection criteria, criminal histories, and personal characteristics, were most strongly and consistently related to the frequency and seriousness of future juvenile and young adult offending. To accomplish this, an assessment was conducted using a group of juveniles born in 1958 whose criminal career outcomes were already known. Applying the HOU selection criteria to this group made it possible to determine the extent to which the criteria identified future habitual offending. Data for the analyses were obtained from a birth cohort of Black and white males born in 1958 who resided in Philadelphia from their 10th through their 18th birthdays. Criminal careers represent police contacts for the juvenile years and arrests for the young adult years, for which police contacts and arrests are synonymous. The 40 dependent variables were computed using 5 different criminal career aspects for 4 crime type groups for 2 age intervals. The data also contain various dummy variables related to prior offenses, including type of offense, number of prior offenses, disposition of the offenses, age at first prior offense, seriousness of first prior offense, weapon used, and whether it was a gang-related offense. Dummy variables pertaining to the current offenses include type of offense, number of crime categories, number of charges, number of offenders, gender, race, and age of offenders, type of intimidation used, weapons used, number of crime victims, gender, race, and age of victims, type of injury to victim, type of victimization, characteristics of offense site, type of complainant, and police response. Percentile of the offender's socioeconomic status is also provided. Continuous variables include age at first prior offense, age at most recent prior offense, age at current offense, and average age of victims.
Curated

Evaluating Anti-Gang Legislation and Gang Prosecution Units in Clark and Washoe Counties, Nevada, 1989-1995 (ICPSR 2753)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Time period: 1989-01-01--1995-01-01
In response to several high profile, violent crimes by minority males, which were reported by law enforcement officials as being gang-related, Nevada lawmakers enacted an array of anti-gang legislation, much of it drafted by law enforcement personnel. This study attempted to provide answers to the following research questions: (1) How often and under what specific conditions were the various anti-gang statutes used in the prosecution of gang members? (2) How had the passage of anti-gang statutes and the development of the gang prosecution units influenced the use of more conventional charging practices related to gang cases? and (3) Did specialized gang prosecution produce higher rates of convictions, more prison sentences, and longer prison terms for gang offenders? Court monitoring data were collected from both Clark and Washoe counties to document the actual extent and nature of gang crime in both jurisdictions over several years. Variables include the year of the court case, whether the defendant was a gang member, total number of initial charges, whether all charges were dismissed before trial, whether the defendant was convicted of any charge, the length of the prison sentence imposed, whether the defendant was charged with a gang enhancement statute, and whether the defendant was charged with murder, sexual assault, robbery, kidnapping, burglary, auto theft, larceny, a drug offense, a weapon offense, or assault. Demographic variables include the race, sex, and age of the defendant.
Curated

Evaluation of Minnesota's Felony Sentencing Guidelines, 1978-1984 (ICPSR 9235)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States, Minnesota
This data collection gauges the effects of the Minnesota felony sentencing guidelines on prosecutional charging practices, plea negotiations, and sentencing decisions. The collection provides primary sources for evaluating the statewide changes in the determinants of charging and sentencing decisions after the sentencing guidelines were enacted. The statewide defendants file (Part 2) contains information on the offender's demographic characteristics (age, sex, race, and marital and employment status), year of disposition, descriptions of the convicted offense, criminal history score, type of sentence imposed, the presumptive disposition and duration of confinement, dispositional location in the sentencing grid of the guidelines, and types of dispositional departure from presumptive sentences. Variables in the eight-county sample data (Part 1) are similar to those available in the statewide data. However, the county sample data contain additional information on characteristics of cases and case processing variables such as whether the defendant was convicted of multiple behavioral incidents and various types of plea bargaining.
Curated

Evaluation of No-Drop Policies for Domestic Violence Cases in San Diego, California, Omaha, Nebraska, Klamath Falls, Oregon, and Everett, Washington, 1996-2000 (ICPSR 3319)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: Oregon, Omaha, Klameth Falls, San Diego, United States, Everett, California, Washington, Nebraska
Time period: 1996-01-01--2000-01-01
This study sought to examine the effects of no-drop policies on court outcomes, victim satisfaction with the justice system, and feelings of safety. Moreover, researchers wanted to determine whether (1) prosecution without the victim's cooperation was feasible with appropriate increases in resources, (2) implementing a no-drop policy resulted in increased convictions and fewer dismissals, (3) the number of trials would increase in jurisdictions where no-drop was adopted as a result of the prosecutor's demand for a plea in cases in which victims were uncooperative or unavailable, and (4) prosecutors would have to downgrade sentence demands to persuade defense attorneys to negotiate pleas in the new context of a no-drop policy. Statutes implemented in San Diego, California, were designed to make it easier to admit certain types of evidence and thereby to increase the prosecutor's chances of succeeding in trials without victim cooperation. To assess the impact of these statutes, researchers collected official records data on a sample of domestic violence cases in which disposition occurred between 1996 and 2000 and resulted in no trial (Part 1), and cases in which disposition occurred between 1996 and 1999, and resulted in a trial (Part 2). In Everett, Washington (Part 3), Klamath Falls, Oregon (Part 4), and Omaha, Nebraska (Part 5), researchers collected data on all domestic violence cases in which disposition occurred between 1996 and 1999 and resulted in a trial. Researchers also conducted telephone interviews in the four sites with domestic violence victims whose cases resolved under the no-drop policy (Part 6) in the four sites. Variables for Part 1 include defendant's gender, court outcome, whether the defendant was sentenced to probation, jail, or counseling, and whether the counseling was for batterer, drug, or anger management. Criminal history, other domestic violence charges, and the relationship between the victim and defendant are also included. Variables for Part 2 include length of trial and outcome, witnesses for the prosecution, defendant's statements to the police, whether there were photos of the victim's injury, the scene, or the weapon, and whether medical experts testified. Criminal history and whether the defendant underwent psychological evaluation or counseling are also included. Variables for Parts 3-5 include the gender of the victim and defendant, relationship between victim and defendant, top charges and outcomes, whether the victim had to be subpoenaed, types of witnesses, if there was medical evidence, type of weapon used, if any, whether the defendant confessed, any indications that the prosecutor talked to the victim, if the victim was in court on the disposition date, the defendant's sentence, and whether the sentence included electronic surveillance, public service, substance abuse counseling, or other general counseling. Variables for Part 6 include relationship between victim and defendant, whether the victim wanted the defendant to be arrested, whether the defendant received treatment for alcohol, drugs, or domestic violence, if the court ordered the defendant to stay away from the victim, and if the victim spoke to anyone in the court system, such as the prosecutor, detective, victim advocate, defense attorney, judge, or a probation officer. The victim's satisfaction with the police, judge, prosecutor, and the justice system, and whether the defendant had continued to threaten, damage property, or abuse the victim verbally or physically are also included. Demographic variables on the victim include race, income, and level of education.
Curated
Partially restricted

Evaluation of Special Session Domestic Violence Court Processing in Connecticut, 1999-2000 (ICPSR 3603)

Released/updated on: 2003-10-30
Geographic coverage: United States, Connecticut
Time period: 1999-01-01--2000-01-01
This study documented women's experience of enhanced services and advocacy in the context of the three special session domestic violence courts in Connecticut. The study conducted 60 in-depth interviews with women whose current or former partners were arrested for domestic violence and who appeared in one of the three special session courts. The questions were designed to elicit information from women about the meaning and context of intimate violence in their lives generally, their assessments of the risks and options available to them and their children from family, friends, and other institutions, their strategies for maximizing safety for themselves and their children, the meaning of the arrest incident in their overall experience of their relationship with their abusive partner, and the impact of the court experience on their plans, sense of options, and understanding of the abuse they had experienced.
Curated

Evaluation of the Enhanced Collaborative Model to Combat Human Trafficking, United States, 2015-2020 (ICPSR 37988)

Released/updated on: 2025-09-10
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2015-01-01--2020-01-01

The National Institute of Justice funded the Urban Institute to conduct this multi-site, mixed-methods evaluation of the impact of the U.S. DOJ-funded Enhanced Collaborative Model (ECM) task forces on addressing human trafficking. Specifically, this study sought to (1) understand the impact of the ECM task forces in identifying and assisting human trafficking survivors and investigating and prosecuting human trafficking, and (2) analyze differences in various task force implementation models (e.g., structure and organization) to understand which task force models and features contribute to prosecutions. In addition, this research sought to understand the investigative, prosecutorial, and victim services practices among ECM task forces; challenges and barriers task forces face in combating human trafficking; and synthesize best practices and recommendations for developing and implementing successful task forces.

This data collection includes three datasets compiled from law enforcement closed case files and organized for analysis by case, victim(s), and suspect(s). The collection also includes a README file describing qualitative data consisting of transcripts from interviews with law enforcement officers and other stakeholders involved with ECM task forces.

Curated
Partially restricted

Evaluation of Victim Advocacy Services for Battered Women in Detroit, 1998-1999 (ICPSR 3017)

Released/updated on: 2012-08-22
Geographic coverage: Detroit, United States, Michigan
Time period: 1998-01-01--1999-01-01
This study evaluated advocacy services offered to battered women in Detroit, Michigan, and examined other aspects of coordinated community responses to domestic violence by focusing on women named as victims in police reports. Advocacy was defined as those services provided to support victims during the legal process or to enhance their safety. For the Preliminary Complaint Reports Data (Part 1), a random sample of preliminary complaint reports (PCRs), completed by police officers after they responded to domestic violence calls, were gathered, resulting in a sample of 1,057 incidents and victims. For Victim Advocacy Contact Data (Part 2), researchers obtained data from advocates' files about the services they provided to the 1,057 victims. For Case Disposition Data (Part 3), researchers conducted a computer search to determine the outcomes of the cases. They looked up each perpetrator from the list of 1,057 incidents, and determined whether there was a warrant for the focal incident, whether it turned into a prosecution, and the outcome. The Initial Victim Interview (Part 4) and Follow-Up Victim Interview Data (Part 5) were conducted from April 1998 to July 1999. During the same period that researchers were completing the second interviews, they also interviewed 23 women (Victim Comparison Group Interview Data, Part 6) from the list of 1,057 whom they had been unable to reach during the first interviews. They compared these 23 women to the 63 who had second interviews to determine if there were any differences in use of services, or views toward or participation in prosecution. Variables in Part 1 focus on whether alcohol and abuse were involved, previous incidents, the suspect's psychological aggressions and physical assaults, if a weapon was used, if the victim was hurt, if property was damaged, if the victim sought medical attention, and the severity of physical abuse or injury. Variables in Part 2 provide information on the role of the advocate, methods of contact, types of referrals made, and services provided. Variables in Part 3 include the type of charge, outcome of resolved case, why the case was dismissed, if applicable, and if the suspect was sentenced to probation, costs, confinement, no contact with the victim, a batterer program, or community service. The initial, follow-up, and comparison group interviews (Parts 4-6) all collected similar information. Variables about the incident include how well the respondent remembered the incident, if police arrived promptly, if the respondent was advised to file charges, if police told the respondent that a counselor was available, and if the respondent's partner had been in jail since the incident. Variables concerning advocacy include whether the victim contacted advocates, and if advocates provided legal help and referrals. Legal system variables include whether the respondent felt pressured by anyone to drop charges or pursue charges, if the respondent received help for preliminary examination or trial, and if contact with the legal system helped the respondent. Variables about services include whether the respondent received assistance in temporary shelter, food/money resources, child care, employment, education, a lawyer for divorce/custody, support or self-help group, or a substance abuse treatment program. Variables concerning what happened in the previous six months cover the number of times the respondent had called police because of danger, left home because of a violent incident, partner had been arrested because of violence, and partner physically abused respondent. Variables about events that occurred while the respondent and abuser were separated include how often the partner harassed the respondent on the phone, wrote threatening letters, violated legal restrictions, refused to leave the respondent's home, failed to pay child support, and threatened to take the children. Demographic variables include respondent's race or ethnic background, education, marital status, number of children, number of children who lived with respondent, and employment status and income at the time of the interviews.
Curated

Evaluation of Waiver Effects in Maryland, 1998-2000 (ICPSR 4077)

Released/updated on: 2005-03-04
Geographic coverage: Maryland
Time period: 1998-01-01--2000-01-01
The purpose of this research was to assist policymakers in determining if the targeted youths affected by the waiver laws passed by the Maryland legislature in 1994 and 1998 were being processed as intended. The waiver laws were enacted to ensure that a youth who was unwilling to comply with treatment and/or committed a serious offense would have a serious consequence to his/her action and, therefore, would be processed in the adult system. As a result of the legislation, four pathways of court processing emerged which created four groups of youths to study: at-risk of waiver (not waived), waiver, legislative waiver, and reverse waver. A variety of data sources in both the juvenile and adult systems were triangulated to obtain the necessary information to accurately describe the youths involved. The triangulation of data from multiple file sources happened in a variety of formats (automated, hardcopy, and electronic files) from a variety of agencies to compare and contrast youths processed in the juvenile and adult systems. The five legislative criteria (age, mental and physical condition, amenability to treatment, crime seriousness, and public safety) plus extra-legal data were used as a framework to profile the youths in this study. Many of the variables chosen to explore each domain were included in previous studies. Other variables, such as those designed to operationalize mental health issues (not defined by the legislation) were chosen to extend the literature and to generate the most complete profile of youths processed in each system. The study includes variables pertinent to the five legislative criteria in addition to demographic and family information variables such as gender, race, and socioeconomic status, information on school expulsions, school suspensions, gang involvement, drug history, health, and hospitalization.
Curated

Examining Prosecutorial Decision-Making Across Federal District Courts, 2000-2009 [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 34513)

Released/updated on: 2016-09-22
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2000-01-01--2009-01-01

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 utilized data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics on federal criminal case processing to study jurisdictional variations in prosecutorial decision-making outcomes. It linked information across multiple federal agencies in order to track individual offenders across the various stages of the federal justice system. Specifically, it combined arrest information from the United States Marshall's Service with charging information from the Executive and Administrative Offices of the United States Attorney and with sentencing information from the United States Sentencing Commission. These individual data were subsequently augmented with additional information on federal courts to examine contextual variations in charging decisions across federal jurisdictions.

There are three data files. Dataset 1 (Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) and United States Marshals Service (USMS) Data) contains 88 variables and 284,869 cases. Dataset 2 (Administrative Office of the United States Courts (AOUSC) and United States Sentencing Commission (USSC) Data) contains 717 variables and 256,598 cases. Dataset 3 (United States District Court Characteristics Data) contains 6 variables and 89 cases.

Only Dataset 3 is being released as part of the available study materials. Datasets 1 and 2 can be re-created using the syntax files which are included in the study materials.

Curated
Restricted

Examining Prosecutorial Discretion in Federal Criminal Cases, [United States], 2002-2010 (ICPSR 36989)

Released/updated on: 2018-05-14
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2002-01-01--2010-01-01

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 directly examined the nature and characteristics of cases prosecuted in the federal courts by analyzing prosecutorial decisions to proceed with charges (or not) once an arrest is initiated, and to investigate any adjustment from the arresting offense to the charging offense. These decisions were analyzed to document their correlates and identify variation across case type.

The collection contains 1 SPSS data file (2002-10-Arrest-cases--FINAL-ANALYSIS.sav (n=794,807; 43 variables)) and 1 SPSS syntax file.

Curated
Restricted

Exploring the Reach of Evidence Outside the Jury Box [United States], 2005-2011 (ICPSR 34679)

Released/updated on: 2016-05-20
Geographic coverage: United States, New York (state)
Time period: 2010-01-01--2011-01-01, 2005-01-01--2006-01-01

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they there received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except of the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompany readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collections and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

The purpose of the study was to compare how the quantity versus the quality of evidence influences the likelihood of trial convictions and plea decisions and examine whether evidence has differential impacts on the perceived likelihood of trial convictions and plea values. In Phase I (Phase I Data, n=2,593) defense attorneys, prosecutors, and judges, representing all 50 states and the District of Columbia, completed an online survey of a hypothetical legal case in which the presence of three types of evidence (confession, eyewitness, and DNA) and length of defendant criminal history were manipulated. In Phase II (Phase II Data, n=502), researchers worked with two District Attorneys' offices in New York state to code the contents of case files. Researchers coded 502 closed cases from 2005 and 2006, all of which originated as felony arrests. Researchers also obtained criminal history record information on the defendants involved in the cases.

Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 1994 [United States] (ICPSR 23744)

Released/updated on: 2011-03-08
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1993-10-01--1994-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 1994. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 1995 [United States] (ICPSR 24009)

Released/updated on: 2011-03-08
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1994-10-01--1995-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 1995. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 1996 [United States] (ICPSR 24028)

Released/updated on: 2011-03-08
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1995-10-01--1996-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 1996. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 1997 [United States] (ICPSR 24047)

Released/updated on: 2011-03-08
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1996-10-01--1997-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 1997. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 1998 [United States] (ICPSR 24066)

Released/updated on: 2011-03-08
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1997-10-01--1998-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 1998. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 1999 [United States] (ICPSR 24085)

Released/updated on: 2011-03-08
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1998-10-01--1999-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 1999. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 2000 [United States] (ICPSR 24104)

Released/updated on: 2011-03-08
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1999-10-01--2000-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2000. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 2001 [United States] (ICPSR 24123)

Released/updated on: 2011-03-08
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2000-10-01--2001-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2001. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 2002 [United States] (ICPSR 24142)

Released/updated on: 2011-03-08
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2001-10-01--2002-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2002. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 2003 [United States] (ICPSR 24161)

Released/updated on: 2011-03-08
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2002-10-01--2003-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2003. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 2004 [United States] (ICPSR 24178)

Released/updated on: 2011-03-08
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2003-10-01--2004-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2004. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 2005 [United States] (ICPSR 24196)

Released/updated on: 2011-03-08
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2004-10-01--2005-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2005. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 2006 [United States] (ICPSR 24213)

Released/updated on: 2011-03-08
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2005-10-01--2006-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2006. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 2007 [United States] (ICPSR 24228)

Released/updated on: 2011-03-08
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2006-10-01--2007-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2007. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 2008 [United States] (ICPSR 29421)

Released/updated on: 2011-03-08
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2007-10-01--2008-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2008. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 2009 (ICPSR 30788)

Released/updated on: 2011-06-03
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2008-10-01--2009-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2009. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 2010 (ICPSR 34330)

Released/updated on: 2013-01-07
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2009-10-01--2010-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2010. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 2011 (ICPSR 35047)

Released/updated on: 2014-06-16
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2010-10-01--2011-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2011. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 2012 (ICPSR 35496)

Released/updated on: 2015-02-04
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2011-10-01--2012-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2012. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 2013 (ICPSR 36331)

Released/updated on: 2016-02-19
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2012-10-01--2013-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2013. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by Abt and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by Abt.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 2014 (ICPSR 36707)

Released/updated on: 2017-03-22
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2013-10-01--2014-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2014. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by Abt and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by Abt.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 2015 (ICPSR 37385)

Released/updated on: 2019-09-25
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2014-10-01--2015-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2015. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were either removed, coarsened, or blanked in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by Abt and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by Abt.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 2016 (ICPSR 37413)

Released/updated on: 2019-12-18
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2015-10-01--2016-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2016. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were either removed, coarsened, or blanked in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by Abt and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by Abt.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 2017 (ICPSR 38217)

Released/updated on: 2022-04-28
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2016-10-01--2017-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2017. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were either removed, coarsened, or blanked in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by Abt and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by Abt.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 2018 (ICPSR 38237)

Released/updated on: 2025-12-09
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2017-10-01--2018-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2018. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were either removed, coarsened, or blanked in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by Abt and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by Abt.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 2019 (ICPSR 38515)

Released/updated on: 2025-12-09
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2018-10-01--2019-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2019. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were either removed, coarsened, or blanked in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by Abt Associates and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by Abt Associates.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 2020 (ICPSR 38618)

Released/updated on: 2025-12-09
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2019-10-01--2020-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2020. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were either removed, coarsened, or blanked in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by Abt Associates and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by Abt Associates.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 2021 (ICPSR 38635)

Released/updated on: 2025-12-09
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2020-10-01--2021-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2021. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were either removed, coarsened, or blanked in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by Abt Associates and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by Abt Associates.
Curated

Federal Justice Statistics Program: Charges Filed Against Defendants in Criminal Cases in District Court, 2022 (ICPSR 38985)

Released/updated on: 2025-12-09
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2021-10-01--2022-09-30
The data contain records of charges filed against defendants whose cases were filed by United States attorneys in United States district court during fiscal year 2022. The data are charge-level records, and more than one charge may be filed against a single defendant. The data were constructed from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) Central Charge file. The charge-level data may be linked to defendant-level data (extracted from the EOUSA Central System file) through the CS_SEQ variable, and it should be noted that some defendants may not have any charges other than the lead charge appearing on the defendant-level record. The Central Charge and Central System data contain variables from the original EOUSA files as well as additional analysis variables. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security Number) were either removed, coarsened, or blanked in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by Abt Associates and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by Abt Associates.